Re: 64-bit os

From: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP\) (user_at_#notme.com)
Date: 11/08/04 

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:51:24 -0800

You're reply makes no sense and does nothing to bolster your argument. 

-- 
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
"Jason" <Jason@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:AFFE3A9A-273D-4C3F-9B8A-A1AB48122DE1@microsoft.com...
> "Jason" wrote:
>
>> No No No!! The sole fact that "Microsoft operating Systems come with a 
>> full
>> compliment of drivers for the most commonly used hardware" leads you to 
>> know
>> that they do this because they should not because that or great friendly 
>> free
>> giving INN. Over $65 billion Dollars tells us that. how would buy an OS 
>> that
>> you could not use a Network, not use the internet, not use a floppy or 
>> CD-Rom, not use graphics cards, hard drives, sound
>> not use a DVD or CDRW, Not Print, Fax, scaner or save on removable media 
>> (know body I
>> know)and not me. That is why MS should make an OS that works with the 
>> working
>> Hardware Drivers and not make Hardware CO. make new drive that work with 
>> an
>> OS!!
>>
>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP)" wrote:
>>
>> > First, all Microsoft operating Systems come with a full compliment of
>> > drivers for the most commonly used hardware.  Those drivers, while 
>> > often
>> > developed in cooperation with Microsoft are supplied for the operating
>> > system by the device manufacturer.  Every attempt is made during the
>> > development and the beta testing period to make the operating system as
>> > compatible as possible with the widest possible variations of hardware 
>> > and
>> > it should be noted, that many such systems not only have different 
>> > hardware,
>> > some of which may be non-standard but also have a wide range of 
>> > software
>> > that might interfere with the function of various devices and cause 
>> > problems
>> > for their drivers.
>> >
>> > Second, XP, for example, does offer a wide range of options but often,
>> > hardware to take advantage of those options are only in development or 
>> > have
>> > not yet reached market at the time operating system goes to market.
>> >
>> > Third, it would be wholly impossible for Microsoft to continue to 
>> > develop,
>> > supply and otherwise write drivers for all hardware that comes out or 
>> > is
>> > updated with new versions throughout the life of the operating system.
>> > Also, many devices take advantage of the system to perform various 
>> > functions
>> > well beyond the basic function as envisioned when the OS released. 
>> > Many
>> > scanners, for example, have function buttons to allow users single 
>> > button
>> > access to various functions.  The system, usually can handle the 
>> > scanning
>> > function from within but it's up to the manufacturer to supply the 
>> > drivers
>> > that enable the single button functionality.
>> >
>> > Fourth, the OP was talking specifically about Windows 64-bit and the
>> > specific question in his post was when will Microsoft come out with a
>> > computer that fully supports 64-bit will all necessary drivers.  Aside 
>> > from
>> > the incorrect assumption that Microsoft manufactures or otherwise 
>> > designs
>> > computers, with regard to 64-bit, very few manufacturers have 64-bit
>> > compatible devices yet available to the public.  That was even more the 
>> > case
>> > throughout most of the XP-64-bit development period wherein the OS was
>> > created in what was largely a vacuum with regard to 64-bit devices 
>> > because,
>> > beyond the processor, there were none or very few such devices.  Hence, 
>> > the
>> > OS was largely developed with compatibility with the processor and 
>> > 64-bit
>> > compatible applications in mind because most of the other hardware 
>> > didn't
>> > exist.  That's one of the reasons why user options with regard to 
>> > hardware
>> > for the 64-bit OS are rather narrow.
>> >
>> > Again, if for no other reason and I've cited many other reasons, given 
>> > the
>> > fact there were so few devices available for even testing purposes for 
>> > the
>> > 64-bit OS be it the Opteron or the Intel 64-bit processor, what you 
>> > suggest
>> > was and is impossible and also further points up the reason why device
>> > drivers are the responsibility of the device manufacturer not 
>> > Microsoft.
>> > Microsoft make DDKs, Driver Development Kits available to the 
>> > developers and
>> > fully supports developers and manufacturers in their efforts to develop 
>> > and
>> > create devices and the appropriate drivers for their OSs as that is its
>> > responsibility if it wishes to maintain widespread compatibility as 
>> > well as
>> > acceptance from the consumer.  But beyond that, while Microsoft offers 
>> > an OS
>> > that creates an environment in which those devices can function, the
>> > responsibility to develop, create and supply the drivers falls to the 
>> > device
>> > manufacturer.
>> >
>> > You might be interested to know that even the drivers that come through
>> > Windows Update are supplied by the device manufacturer and are only 
>> > offered
>> > through WU because they've gone through Microsoft's testing and
>> > certification.  Further, even at Windows Update, there is usually a
>> > notification that the drivers being supplied are for basic device 
>> > functions
>> > and taking advantage of broader functions beyond that basic 
>> > functionality
>> > will often require getting drivers directly from the manufacturer.
>> >
>> >
>> > -- 
>> > Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> > Windows Shell/User
>> > Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> > DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>> >
>> > "Jason" <Jason@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:D94ABC27-4DFE-4E09-A946-4EFE36236E80@microsoft.com...
>> > >I disagree, If I pay for Win OS then it is in part "if not hole" MS
>> > > responsibility to offer an OS the can work with devices that are 
>> > > NEEDED to
>> > > do
>> > > what MS claims it can do!!
>> > >
>> > > "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP)" wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I would just point out, device drivers, including those for 64-bit
>> > >> systems
>> > >> are the responsibility of the device manufacturers.
>> > >>
>> > >> Also, there's an implication in your post that Microsoft 
>> > >> manufactures
>> > >> computers, it is not in that business.  You need to check with the
>> > >> manufacturers for computers, devices and drivers that are 64-bit
>> > >> compatible.
>> > >>
>> > >> -- 
>> > >> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> > >> Windows Shell/User
>> > >> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> > >> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>> > >>
>> > >> "Jason" <Jason@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> news:B4753911-7937-4843-9F11-335AAB2D4094@microsoft.com...
>> > >> > has MS came out will a good full PC for a 64-bit chip?
>> > >> > Like
>> > >> > Intel has advantages as a company, and Itanium has some good,
>> > >> > demonstrated
>> > >> > performance benefits. But the Opteron's compatibility with 32-bit
>> > >> > Windows
>> > >> > binaries at full speed rather than having to recompile new 
>> > >> > versions of
>> > >> > all
>> > >> > your applications is attractive,
>> > >> >
>> > >> > There's still the issue of making today's PC hardware 64-bit 
>> > >> > ready.
>> > >> > "The
>> > >> > biggest challenge is going to be the device drivers in 64-bit 
>> > >> > mode,"
>> > >> > You
>> > >> > need
>> > >> > all new drivers for all of your key components [graphics cards, 
>> > >> > hard
>> > >> > drives,
>> > >> > and the like]--all the stuff that the operating system needs to 
>> > >> > work
>> > >> > well.
>> > >> > If
>> > >> > you want 64 bits because you want performance, you can't have a 
>> > >> > bunch
>> > >> > of
>> > >> > 32-bit drivers mucking things up.
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
Loading