Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Does the Windows Logo Mean Anything?

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the certify-this dept.

Microsoft 175

Dan writes "The Windows Logo Program was supposed to be Microsoft's key to ensuring that all hardware devices work well with the Windows operating system. It worked in Windows XP, it would be expected to work just as well in Windows Vista. Unfortunately, there are obvious signs that the Windows Logo Program is no longer a trustworthy standard. Recently, even graphics cards are getting certified without working drivers. The article digs into the 321-page Microsoft Windows Logo Program 3.0 document to find out what the Windows logo is supposed to mean in Vista."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Isn't it obvious? (4, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648381)

> The article digs into the 321-page Microsoft Windows Logo Program 3.0 document to find
> out what the Windows logo is supposed to mean in Vista.

I thought it meant that the manufacturer had paid a fee to Microsoft.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (3, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648427)

Kind of like the "E-SECURE" tag you find on sites supposedly establishing that they are trustworthy and yadda yadda. All it really means is that they've paid the $25,000 licensing fee to include it.

Who really paid attention to the window logo program anyway?

Re:Isn't it obvious? (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648467)

That's the gist of it. You pass their tests, certify that you are who you say you are, and 2 weeks later you've got the logo. They determine whether to revoke the logo by the number of customer complaints that arise after the fact.

Charles Simonyi would be rolling over in his grave if he saw what Microsoft was doing with the logo program. Just kidding, of course. He's not dead. He's not riding the Shuttle today.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648537)

That's the gist of it. You pass their tests, certify that you are who you say you are, and 2 weeks later you've got the logo. They determine whether to revoke the logo by the number of customer complaints that arise after the fact.
Almost sounds like a US patent.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Funny)

Chmcginn (201645) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648545)

Well, we thought the program worked like so:

1.)Pay Microsoft Fee.

2.)Driver gets made.

3.)Profit!

However, it appears somebody removed step 2.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Funny)

Ltar (1010889) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649911)

So now it's just:

1- Pay Microsoft fee

2- ???

3- Profit!

looks like an improvement to me. Maybe I have steps 2 and 3 swapped.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Funny)

Smidge204 (605297) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648621)

I thought it was more like a warning label of sorts.

"Poison" - Do not eat or drink
"Flammable" - Keep away from flames and hot surfaces
"Windows" - Do not waste your money on this item

=Smidge=

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Funny)

Afecks (899057) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648961)

Warning: You just bought Hot Pockets!

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

UGAVI (1083821) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648759)

What the Windows logo means is that there is a Windows logo on the hardware, nothing more. Really can't see that it means anything more than that.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (-1, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648811)

What the Windows logo means is that there is a Windows logo on the hardware, nothing more. Really can't see that it means anything more than that.

I don't mean to be insulting, but are you ovine? If you can't see that a logo certified product means anything more than "a sticker is on the box", then I'm surprised you're smart enough to use a computer, much less bathe yourself.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (3, Interesting)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648775)

they've tried this in so many forms. Recall that Microsoft update was, in it's original incarnation, meant to be *the* portal for drivers/hardware utilities from hardware manufacturers, update to windows itself was an aspect, but not the only one.
I wish I could find the article I read at the time. Probably its in waybackmachine somewhere, I can't be the only one who saw this.

That's why so many things installed into windows xp by users produce the 'this driver has not been signed by Microsoft/may harm your system' stuff. That's a hangover from the expectation that manufacturers would allow Microsoft to manage their drivers for them and verify their correctness. I suspect this was an attempt, at least at first, to ensure that people didn't produce drivers that might break windows itself.

It was rejected on the very sound grounds that this would give Microsoft far too much control over the software of these other companies. After all, if Microsoft controlled the only place to get verified drivers, then that meant they could just as easily decide to halt supply of a driver if a company failed to play ball. I don't think it was meant to involve a fee.

They're trying it again in Vista, albeit in slightly different form.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

tajmorton (806296) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649279)

Recall that Microsoft update was, in it's original incarnation, meant to be *the* portal for drivers/hardware utilities from hardware manufacturers
Just like Linux? (For a kernel module to actually work, it's got to be part of the kernel tree).
Or like the centralized repository method that distros use?

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

fuzzix (700457) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649783)

For a kernel module to actually work, it's got to be part of the kernel tree

Could I have some of your crack, please?

I have at least three kernel modules working on this system which were not part of the original source tree.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2, Funny)

jcgf (688310) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649853)

Are you sure you want some of his crack?

I've tried many drugs in my days and one thing I've found is that giving you delusions isn't necessarily an indicator of quality.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

tajmorton (806296) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650167)

I have at least three kernel modules working on this system which were not part of the original source tree.

That's not my point. My point is that it's usually very difficult to use drivers that aren't part of the tree. For example, I've yet to get the vmware guest system drivers working without hacking the code (because of changes in some structs and functions in kernel in version 2.6.19, IIRC).

I also was never able to get the some Atmel WLAN drivers working [sourceforge.net] in 2.6 because they're now unmaintained, and the 2.6 kernel has changed to much.

Also, I relied on Win4Lin 9x for a while to run Windows 98 on my Linux box. This required that I compile some kernel modules. However, Win4Lin as dropped support for the "9x" version, and so I can no longer make Win4Lin work on my modern systems because of the unstable nature of the Linux kernel (only on 2.4 and on <2.6.9)

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650029)

absolutely, indeed just like gentoo does.

It wasn't the idea so much as the single point of control that was objected to, or more exactly, who would hold that control.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

@madeus (24818) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650653)

How are you suggesting Gentoo is somehow unique from other Linux distributions to be specifically worth mentioning?

From what you've said I gather it's something relating to 'decentralised control', but I can't think of any way in which it's unique in that regard (compared to say Debian, Slackware, Fedora, etc.), either in terms of kernel/module management or wider package management.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

robogun (466062) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650261)

Microsoft update was, in it's original incarnation, meant to be *the* portal for drivers/hardware utilities from hardware manufacturers

Maybe not Microsoft Update, but if you try to install mystery hardware invoking the Add New Hardware wizard, one of the options, beside Insert cd or Browse to location of .inf file) is to connect with Windows Update to look for the driver, which usually works if the hardware isn't cutting edge. I don't have WGA & it still works.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648801)

Back in the Win2K days, it meant a whole lot more than that. I worked for a company that made server grade FibreChannel HBAs, and getting through the WHQL tests for logo was a major achievement.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (3, Insightful)

Ben Hutchings (4651) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650537)

WHQL still is a pretty tough standard. But since manufacturers run the test suite on their own hardware there's nothing to stop them turning off unstable performance hacks to pass WHQL then turning them on in the shipped installer (using registry settings rather than rebuilding the driver). Based on past behaviour I can certainly imagine graphics card vendors doing that.

To paraphrase Tommy Boy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648383)

I can stick a Windows Logo on a box full of crap, or you can take my word for it when I say it's quality after sticking my head up Microsoft's ass.

It's scary! (0)

orkysoft (93727) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648431)

But only if you're a laser printer...

What's the fuzz about? (0)

prionic6 (858109) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648455)

It clearly states "Certified for Windows Vista"... No word about working condition.

Re:What's the fuzz about? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648531)

What the hell does "certified for Windows Vista" mean other than works with Windows Vista? You have to be completely daft to claim this is not false advertising to place such a certification on a product and not have that product work with Windows Vista.

Re:What's the fuzz about? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648881)

False? How is saying crap is certified with crap false?

Re:What's the fuzz about? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649137)

I know this may break your bleeding heart, but you might want to go back and read the whole comment you are responding to.

Re:What's the fuzz about? (4, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648819)

Many years ago (ouch, forty maybe?) I remember Ralph Nader making a cameo appearance on Rowan and Martin's Laugh In. He said, "I understand that General Motors has a new guarantee on their tires ... you're guaranteed four of them."

Absolutely (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648457)

"Stay Away!!!"

Re:Absolutely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649941)

I was going for "AVOID".

Who cares? (4, Funny)

Technician (215283) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648461)

This is slashdot.

I want to know if it is Linux compatible..

Ducks ;-)

10 years ago, that would have been true (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649215)

Not anymore. Now I would say that /. is split amongst the OSs. If you make a disparaging remark about Windows, even when true, you will get modded down in a BIG way. Near as I can tell, it is not just the fanboys doing this. I suspect that MS has paid FUDers here to try and keep things in check. Finally, I have noticed that the tech. level of /. has decreased significantly over the last decade. That says a lot.

Re:10 years ago, that would have been true (5, Interesting)

Technician (215283) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649973)

If you make a disparaging remark about Windows, even when true, you will get modded down in a BIG way.

Please read the comment again. I didn't say anything bad about Microsoft or Windows. I did say, that I was interested if the hardware does support Linux. I am very happy to report that the number of products reporting Linux compatibility is growing very quickly.

I needed a presentation pointer (Power Point remote) 2 weeks ago. Visiting Office Depot, I found a set of remotes. Many listed software requirements and Windows versions it was compatible with. The one I picked up is the one simply listed as "No Drivers Required" Plug and play compatible with Windows, Macintosh, and Linux. The package was right. The remote simply was a remote page up page down and enter USB keyboard.

Many items which list Windows compatiblility have the listing only for the included software. I picked up a Logitech wireless keyboard and mouse and assumed that I would only get basic 102 key functionality without installing the Windows software.

Woo! Hoo!.. All the buttons I tested worked. The volume, mute, play, internet, email... all worked on Dapper Drake. I wish they had noted that on the outside of the box.

Most hardware comes with the assumption of Windows or Macintosh compatibility.

Now not bashing Windows... What I want to know is Is it Linux compatible? Lots of stuff is, but they don't mention it on the box.

Since I am transitioning away from Windows.. I don't care much if it is Windows compatible.

Re:10 years ago, that would have been true (1)

khedron the jester (888418) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650911)

I think most such keymaps are not produced by the companies themselves, but by the OS community.

So the companies would not be able to guarantee Linux compatibility.

Re:Who cares? (1)

MadJo (674225) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649269)

Ducks
quack quack!

Re:Who cares? (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650201)

Works for me! (Kubuntu 6.06 Dapper Drake....FTW!)

The insistance of the Windows logo only means (to me)that they have not yet figured out burning a *nix distro .iso to disc and rebooting the PC.

"When you can pluck the *nix distro .so from the net, burn it to disc and install, you will be on the way to freedom...outside of the Gates,Bill...remember this, Grasshopper. Only when you can pass through the Gates,Bill and piss on Steve Balmer's chairleg will you be truly free to practise your 133t skilz"

Re:Who cares? (1)

Virgil Tibbs (999791) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649347)

What isn't linux compatible?
Christ linux can even run on my IPOD.
That's one thing windows can't do.

Re:Who cares? (1)

void_bips(brain) (929252) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649859)

This is slashdot.
I want to know if it is Linux compatible..

Big round of applause in support
late in ducking... hit straiight on eye window

Linux compatible (1)

Cope57 (752357) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650249)

Actually, Slashdot is hosted on a Linux server, so yes, it is Linux compatible. But of course so is the majority of the Internet... http://news.netcraft.com/ [netcraft.com]

It's a relative thing (2, Insightful)

shadowspar (59136) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648489)

The hardware manufacturers look at all the other things that run in a broken, half-assed way on Windows and think "Hell, our stuff works at least as well as all that junk; there's no reason we shouldn't be able to put the Windows logo on it as well."

You mean the SATAN LOGO PROGRAM! (5, Funny)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648491)

321-page Microsoft Windows Logo Program 3.0
3+2+1 = 6

3.0 times = 6 6 6

SATAN LOGO PROGRAM!

Re:You mean the SATAN LOGO PROGRAM! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649109)

> SATAN LOGO PROGRAM!
  No, the mark of the beast.

Get out, Satan! (1)

Erris (531066) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650023)

It means, "Your computer will need an exorcist." And that was before Vista.

Isn't it a warning sign (5, Funny)

www.sorehands.com (142825) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648495)

Isn't Windows Approved a warning message?

Re:Isn't it a warning sign (1)

WinterSolstice (223271) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648541)

lol - yeah, reminds me of how some groups think that the "K" for Kosher on some products means that they're in some vast secret Jewish conspiracy.

Well (1, Funny)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648501)

It looks pretty cool...

VISTA READY! (2, Insightful)

DarkLegacy (1027316) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648507)

My monitor came with a "VISTA READY!" sticker on it. But what if I wanted to use my monitor with another operating system? Would it not be "Windows XP ready"? Would my monitor refuse to display anything if I suddenly used it with any other operating system? These "certified by Windows" logo (WHQL) things are total buckwheat. They are absolutely worthless.

Re:VISTA READY! (5, Funny)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648555)

Think of VISTA READY as HDTV-READY.

When you buy an HDTV-READY television, that doesn't mean it will handle HDTV. You still have to buy more hardware to convert the signal. So by VISTA READY, I think one can construe that you still need to buy additional RAM, among other things. :)

I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX product (4, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648543)

You know as in winmodem or winprinter, a device that has taken much of the logic from the device were it belongs and onto the cpu were it will cause slowdown and despite the fact that software should be easier to update this only means the device will ship with buggy logic wich will never actually get updated.

Windows "ready" meant stay the fuck away. This is crap only a windows user would fall for.

After all, what device does NOT work with windows? For all its craptastic nature the windows OS widely supported and you would be very hard pressed to go into an average store (look, the apple store does not count alright) selling computer components and come out with a device that does not have windows drivers.

The windows logo therefore means absolutely nothing. Never has, never will. It can't, ms can't even certify its own stuff. Let alone others. When MS stuff works with MS stuff, then and only then can they start commenting on others people hardware.

Re:I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX prod (2, Interesting)

rockrat (104803) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648641)

Given that new Macs run Windows (and Apple's BootCamp includes windows drivers for much of the Apple-specific hardware), and that most of Apple's (or other vendor's) peripherals also work with Windows (it's all USB now, anyways), I'd be surprised if you could walk into an Apple store and find much that didn't work with Windows.

Re:I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX prod (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648829)

What the hell are you trying to say. While I hate winmodem as much as anyone, the first part of you posts makes no sense.

And what if windows OS is "widely supported". Does it means that the OS is "craptasic" in nature? You make it sounds as if "widely supported" = bad thing.

These are engineered trade off. If you want to use an absolutely stable OS with (relatively) little hardware support, use BSD. Windows are designed so that it can be extended easily. Yes it creates misery among ITs professionals, but from the consumers' point of view, they like it. This is why you don't see BSD/Linux overtaking Windows. Consumers _like_ simplicity. They don't want to use ndiswrapper. They don't want to configure their x windows. They only want the damn hardware work as soon as they plug it in. Can you do it with other OSes?

Gosh I can't believe I am defending Windows.

Re:I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX prod (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650159)

Consumers _like_ simplicity. They don't want to use ndiswrapper. They don't want to configure their x windows. They only want the damn hardware work as soon as they plug it in. Can you do it with other OSes?

I agree with the general idea of simplicity. However, as a Linux user since 1999, I sure as hell don't want to use ndiswrapper or some such dirty hacks. In many ways Linux is simpler than Windows, it doesn't get in my way, which is why I like to use it. And I'm not sure where you get the idea that anything works in Windows without installing drivers.

Re:I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX prod (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648861)

After all, what device does NOT work with windows?

Define work.

Re:I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX prod (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649237)

Yes, if normal work is that windows finds hardware and you can have drivers for it. hardware is 100% supported. If "work" means that there is no problems with drivers on normal use and hardware always works how it is suppost to work. then it might be about 90% at most. I had 4 TV cards... 2 Digital and 2 Analog... none of them worked on windows, on linux, two of them worked. Just i needed them to windows box and even tryed them on 3 windows mahines... No help for drivers on CD, updated drivers or even beta drivers... and all was desing for XP. Same thing happened even with MS keyboard, it pressed buttons by self and not always responded to buttons. 2 times i went to change keyboard for new one and always it did have problem... But, not with linux, but on that, those super "fancy" multimediabuttons didnt work out-of-box. So i buyed logitech. RAID PCI cards... i have two samekind and both work great on linux but windows did loose other drive sometimes. And again, Design for XP..... Oh well... i got Vista Beta1 - RC2 versions to test and it was last windows what i have used... now only SUSE is up and running and hardware works great on that, no failures, no error messages... just working like hardware should work on PC. And those aren't even desing to work with linux. And this is even posted with MacOSX what is much better than windows XP or MUCH better than Vista.

My experience (5, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648547)

Windows are something a burglar crawls throough and something that you jump out of when there is a fire.

Re:My experience (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649733)

Windows ... something that you jump out of when there is a fire.

Or when your Vista box just lost your tax records for the past ten years and the IRS just decided to audit you.

It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (1, Funny)

gelfling (6534) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648563)

I can't wait for the fanboys to creep out and tell us that not every device in the world works with Linux.

Re:It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18650299)

too bad you got modded control and this place is just one big 'circle jerkoff fest', where they are surrounded by their ass kissers who constantly agree that Microsoft is failing and that everything works perfectly on Linux.

I thought Microsoft was supposed to be bankrupt by now according to post 5 years ago; things never seem to change around here and the Linux people are still a very small minority while Windows dominates the world by usuable software.

Linux sucks for using on the desktop in todays tehcnology and the people who develop for it usually run very old hardware so they have no incentive to develop for newer technologies.

Yah come on open source freaks you can dish it out to MS but you don't like to have it served up to you.

Re:It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (4, Interesting)

Stormx2 (1003260) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650493)

I'll take the bait. I don't like replying to cowards but I will anyway

I dual boot WinXP and Ubuntu. When people are wondering whether or not to switch, I always ask them what they use their computer for. Hardware is always a second consideration. The whole operating systems wars isn't as black and white as you think. For some, FOSS suits their needs best. For others, windows does. There is a lot more too it than that, but as soon as you dogmatically say that Windows is better that Linux, or indeed vice-versa, you're trying to make both operating systems into some sort of solve-all-your-problems ...thing... that just isn't possible

My second argument is supply and demand. If people didn't actively want an alternative to their old operating system, why would there be one available? You can't develop something with the expectation that no people will use it.

Re:It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18650789)

Quite correct.

We are not all academics!

Ok how about this, fanboy (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650891)

Let the Monks on Mt. Redmond PUBLISH a compendium of all the devices that are logo'd and Redmond will refund your money if they are wrong. And let the hippies in Commune Linux publish a list of all their supported devices too and let the pimp hand of Libertarian Commerce decide. MS shouldn't get a pass for lying, no matter how much they tell you sucking their dick is a virtue.

Not for a home user (1, Interesting)

AmIAnAi (975049) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648569)

If I buy a piece of hardware and it doesn't have certified drivers, so what. Once I've bought it, I'm not going to take it back to the store because of the drivers.


In the past the biggest problem I've had with drivers are those for NVIDIA video cards.

It would be interesting to know if someone doing a big system roll-out for 100+ users takes more note of driver certification.

Re:Not for a home user (1)

FLEB (312391) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649209)

Once I've bought it, I'm not going to take it back to the store because of the drivers.

If the drivers don't drive 'er, I certainly would.

Speaking of logos... (3, Funny)

Sneakernets (1026296) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648571)

Remember when MS Changed the logo?

My Dad's boss thought that the old keyboards with the pre-xp logo they had wouldn't work with the new XP computers they had just received,so instead of arguing with him, They ended up ordering 200+ new "XP" Keyboards.


The funny thing is, even those had the old windows logos on the keys.

Vista PC's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648645)

So... When will your dad's boss throw out computers that weren't certified as Vista capable?

Link is to a rather hostile page (5, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648579)

The page being linked to has so much advertising-related dreck that it uses 8-12% of the CPU just sitting there. Much more if you move the mouse over it. And that's with popup blocking. There's ad-related Javascript on that page for at least five different ad systems: "Rojackpot", "Google Syndication", "PriceGrabber", "Extreme-DM.com", and "AdSolution". Plus attempts to get the article onto Digg and Reddit.

The article content sucks, too. They don't understand the WHQL process, and don't give any real insight into whether it is broken. It's just a page of junk content intended to fool blogs like Slashdot into feeding them traffic. And Slashdot's "editors" fell for it.

Re:Link is to a rather hostile page (2, Informative)

arth1 (260657) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648797)

There's ad-related Javascript on that page for at least five different ad systems: "Rojackpot", "Google Syndication", "PriceGrabber", "Extreme-DM.com", and "AdSolution".

"Rojakpot" (no c) is the old name of the site, not an ad system. Adrian's Rojakpot is a tech blog that has been around for ages, and only recently changed its name to Tech ARP (guess what ARP stands for).
    Yeah, the site is quite heavy on the ads, much like Sharky Extreme and other tech blogs run by individuals. I recommend Adblock Plus, if the ads bother you. Remember that the ads aren't pushed, it's your browser that requests them. The best way to avoid them is to not ask for them.

Welcome to the Internet, have a nice day.

--
*Art

Re:Link is to a rather hostile page (1)

Technician (215283) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650217)

The page being linked to has so much advertising-related dreck that it uses 8-12% of the CPU just sitting there.

Do a Google search for a good hosts file.

1 It is Windows compatible
2 It is Linux compatible
3 It is Macintosh compatible

If the page is still covered in advertisements, you might be providing them localy. Time for an AV spyware/adware sweep.

Re:Link is to a rather hostile page (1)

Silverlancer (786390) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649613)

What is this advertising you speak of? I see none of it. *Note: Above post may be the result of Adblock Plus. ;)

Not bad! (1)

Erris (531066) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650145)

The page being linked to has so much advertising-related dreck that it uses 8-12% of the CPU just sitting there.

Not bad for IE, are you using that on top of Vista or XP?

Kidding aside, the page is nasty but not so bad as the average MSNBC or CNN monster. For my dinky 1GHz PIII, Konqueror sports between 0.3 and 20% CPU with that and about 50 other pages open. Closing that one page puts it to less than 2%. Neither case has any effect on overall speed and responsiveness of my system. I use it a lot to look at my thesis work, which is why I have so many browser windows and tabs open. The average MSNBC page will actually stall my browser, peg CPU use and mess with my window manager. The article was worth looking at and now it is gone, which is not something I can say for the average MSNBC page.

Re:Not bad! (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650813)

Not bad for IE, are you using that on top of Vista or XP?

Firefox 2 on Windows 2000, actually.

Re:Link is to a rather hostile page (1)

Door in Cart (940474) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650191)

Hmm, my CPU usage is hovering around 1.5%. Sounds like you could use NoScript [mozilla.org] , Adblock [mozilla.org] , Adblock Filterset.G Updater [mozilla.org] , and Flashblock [mozilla.org] . If that sounds like bloat to you, you can lower your CPU usage to ~0 with Lynx [browser.org] , w3m [sourceforge.net] , or Links [sourceforge.net] . If that's still too much overhead for you, give LineMode [w3.org] a try.

What it means to me. (3, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648701)

When I see that logo, it means "Hey, the cost of this laptop includes that of a Windows license that you're not going to use." (I just install Linux.)

That is, when I see the logo I get reminded of the Windows tax that I'm about to pay, and get more annoyed with both M$ and the manufacturer.

Re:What it means to me. (1)

CrackedButter (646746) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649009)

So go on Ebay and buy a second hand one. Even the latest in laptop technology can be found there so you're not going to miss out on certain features.

Windows Tax? (2, Interesting)

MarkByers (770551) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649353)

Tax? Microsoft is no longer the monopoly it once was. It's now easy to avoid paying for Windows, so calling it a tax is unfair.

If you buy from a reputable manufacturer such as Dell, it is easy to get your money back. Just make sure that the disc is still in its packaging and send it back, and you should have your refund within a few days. There are also many manufacturers that sell laptops with an alternative OS installed (or completely blank if you would rather install an OS yourself).

Re:Windows Tax? (2, Insightful)

mackyrae (999347) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650589)

Dell's the only big manufacturer willing to give refunds on Windows. If you want to buy a Linux-pre-installed computer, it is doable, yes, but you have to buy online. You can't walk into a store and see if the trackpad on a laptop is rough or too slippery to be usable, if the buttons for that trackpad are oddly sized/shaped so as to be ungainly, how the keyboard feels, how the screen is, etc. With a desktop, I don't suppose it matters much, though if you like to mess with the inside of the computer, you may be interested in how much space is inside and being able to check and see if the case has sufficient airflow, etc.

Means I Have to Debug Friends Problems (2, Interesting)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648721)

I have run out of time in solving Windows problems, no matter what flavor. There is simply too much to put up with and guard against, and the average user doesn't understand and won't study up and remember. It is too time consuming for them and me.

I've just told friends to stop the B.S. & buy a MacMini. $599 and you don't have to worry about BSOD, missing DLLs, hardware that doesn't mount/recognize, etc. They have the screen & mouse and at most need a Mac keyboard. Enough older smaller LCDs are around that you can get them for next to nothing. Plus, if they actually do need to run Win XP, they can do it in Parallels and EASILY BACK IT UP AND RESTORE IT ANY TIME IT IS REQUIRED.

Geesh.

Re:Means I Have to Debug Friends Problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18648951)

With Windows XP, the BSOD or dll problems are very very rare, and if you get one it is because you have done something shoddy. I would rather have the choice of buying crappy hardware or "certified" hardware than have no choice and also pay over the odds for the mac equivalent.

Re:Means I Have to Debug Friends Problems (3, Interesting)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650763)

Indeed I shortened my list of problems, where malware dumped on the PC from various web based exploits seem to be at the root of lots of problems, some of which then cause various malfunctions (possibly because of badly written malware).

When the computer gets scrambled up, then the time spent extracting various data files before wiping the HD comes in as another time waster.

I am into "Use What Works Easiest".

At least if Win XP Pro on Parallels in a MacMini goes wonko, replacement of the virtual HD file is as simple as can be. Plus, if you want to extract files from a corrupted PC file, you can just save the file somewhere else to work on it.

Works for Me (5, Funny)

SloWave (52801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648727)

All the toilets and urinals that I've relocated "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" stickers onto seem to work fine. Just have use a drop of superglue under them to make sure they stay put.

Re:Works for Me (5, Funny)

louzerr (97449) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649465)

When I liberated the PC to SuSE 10.2, I put my windows sticker on my garbage can.

A few days later, the lid came crashing off the garbage can when I stepped on the foot switch.

Probably just a strange coincidence ...

Re:Works for Me (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650195)

So does my vacuum cleaner embraced and extended by one of those XP sticker...

It is and has always been a marketing gimmick (4, Insightful)

Dracos (107777) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648809)

The Windows logo program worked for XP because MS management seems to have been more competent with XP than they have been with Vista. Is this because of top level personnel changes, MS being spooked by increasingly visible competition (regardless of actual threat level to MS) since 2001, or both?

It was never meant to actually certify anything, only give the appearance of such. The fact that it worked for XP is icing on the cake, but the slapdash hardware situation (insane system requirements, spotty device support) in Vista exposes the program for what it is: a way for hardware OEM's to ride MS's monopoly coattails.

Re:It is and has always been a marketing gimmick (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650307)

Is this the XP where slipstreaming with .sif editing (or a smart 3rd party tool do it all) is the only realistic way to install some RAID drivers? You know, like that obscure manufacturer nVidia, with logo and all? It doesn't work for XP without tinkering. That's not the only thing. If we really look at what the specs should require, like proper hibernation, it's obvious that there are loads of supposedly "fine" XP hardware + drivers that don't really make it, and in that area XP (and drivers) have really matured since the fun days of XP vanilla (bitmap cache for GUI trashed at every hibernation with my ATI mobile chipset, the 3com bluetooth card would bluescreen on every restart from standby/hibernate, both of course logoed).

Yes. (1)

Shuh (13578) | more than 7 years ago | (#18648971)



It means pain!

Means MS got their cut (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649021)

So that when you buy it, MS gets some of that cash. Doesn't really mean anything else to me.

Sure it does (1)

Nybble's Byte (321886) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649049)

It means J00 4R3 0WN3D

I thought it was pretty obvious (1)

Pluvius (734915) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649087)

It's a window (reflecting the name and style of the OS) that's flying (because "flying" means "awesome" over at Microsoft, I guess) and each of its four panes are in one of the primary colors (RGB in additive color, Y in subtractive) to represent how bright and beautiful Windows supposedly is.

That is what you were talking about, right?

Rob

Re:I thought it was pretty obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649925)

I thought it was designed to look like a flag, as if to say "This spot has been conquered. We are king, and the people salute us. Everyone is our slave, and submit to the whip of infinite BSODs. Speak nothing of this underground 'LINUX' resistance. The king is dealing with them promptly with his new Vista-premium ready footsoldiers, with all-new bitlocker armour and Aero longswords. Anyone caught as part of this resistance will be tortured for info on new features to steal, and promptly hung in the city square where the fanboys jeer and taunt."

My God. I think i've just described hell!

Re:I thought it was pretty obvious (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650657)

The old logo had the whole thing disintegrating as it moved off to the side - at least that's how I saw it.

yes actually (2)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649315)

A vista certified webcam means it is a satnadard video usb video class cam (like the xbox live camera) and will always work perfectly out of the box with OSX and linux.

To the submitter (1)

Plutonite (999141) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649335)

Does the Windows logo mean anything?
You must be new here.

Also, please see icon to the right of your summary for clarification.

And people say linux is hard to work with.... (5, Insightful)

WhiteWolf666 (145211) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649473)

Look at one of the references in the linked article: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=393& pgno=1 [techarp.com]

A "Vista Certified" device that:

A)Is incredibly difficult to get to install, and
B)Results in repeatable on-boot BSODs, and
C)Is incredibly difficult to get to uninstall, *and*
D)Leaves packages on your HD after uninstall that cause repeatable on-boot BSODs.

Either the Vista (display) driver development process is as much of an after-thought as Linux driver development, or Vista's "NEW AND INNOVATIVE" hardware environment is so incredibly buggy that wrestling with all the necessary work arounds is a very difficult task.

My guess? The new Vista driver model is so overly complex that developers will have a hard time working with it indefinitely. Either development budgets will have to go up (unlikely, for ATI and Nvidia, at least), or hardware release cycles will have to slow. Given that Vista has been in *public* development for such a long time (Betas & Release candidates), I'm guessing there is a systematic problem to driver development that most hardware companies cannot adapt to.

Take a look at this: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=357 [pcper.com]
"Finally, the complexity of these drivers is simply astounding. Diercks claimed that each of the six drivers that NVIDIA has to develop for Windows Vista is roughly 20 million lines of code long; about as much code as Windows NT 4! While I am sure there is some significant driver overlap between the six separate modules and the 20 million lines on each, projects of that magnitude are something most normal people couldnt even begin to wrap their heads around. "

Consider that Vista contains approximately 50 million lines of code, and took 5+ years to develop. Consider that Linux Kernel 2.6.0 was 6 million lines of code, and contains *thousands* of drivers.

Now, does this mean that Vista driver programmers are simply going to give up, Vista will collapse, and we'll all switch to another OS? Of course not; these companies *will* manage to overcome the overly complex development environment, and will create working drivers. In Time.

What we may see, however, is that Linux drivers will start improving faster than Windows drivers; and I can even potentially forsee a day when the Linux binary video drivers beat Vista drivers to the punch, in terms of properly supporting newer hardware. Architectural problems don't necessarily cause development to fail, but serious organizational difficulties impact release cycle, and result in more annoyance and security bugs.

The pawns are not impressed. (1)

Erris (531066) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650413)

Now, does this mean that Vista driver programmers are simply going to give up, Vista will collapse, and we'll all switch to another OS? Of course not; these companies *will* manage to overcome the overly complex development environment, and will create working drivers. In Time.

Why would anyone waste time on an OS only one in ten people want [slashdot.org] ? Especially when it's expensive and owned by a company that considers them pawns to be lied to and fucked over [slashdot.org] ? It's not in their best interst now and may never be.

An expensive revenue stream for MS (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18649497)

All it is, is a very expensive bribe to Microsoft that basically forces companies to pay a large fee to have their product "approved". I've gone through the approval process at my last 2 jobs about 4 times for different products -- and it is a total joke. The "test" (if you can even call it that) process is not efficient and is mostly just approved if you have the $$$ cash $$$ to pay up.

This forces out smaller companies of many markets, since the majority of Windows home and even business users are ignorant to the actual process (with good reason of course, they don't know any better). If you're trying to market a product to Windows users, if they don't see that magic "compliant (approved, bought out, bribed, etc..)" logo on the product, it's a lost sale.

The program is a total joke.

No Digging Required (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649703)

It means: Buy Vista Now, and Give Us More Money. What's so hard to understand about that?

Yes It Does (2, Funny)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649929)

Does the Windows logo mean anything?

Yes, it means you picked up the wrong damned box again.

Does the logo mean anything? (2, Interesting)

WheelDweller (108946) | more than 7 years ago | (#18649945)

Just try bootlegging it and see! :)

      Like that other poster, I just always assumed it meant they PAID Microsoft, not that it certified anything. I wasted THREE HOURS getting a simple Creative Webcam 3 working on Win98; I took the thing upstairs on a Linux box, and it had created the device, and was waiting on me to open the video! Sometimes they didn't get/keep all the .DLLs on those Compaqs...

Bad memory (2, Insightful)

anss123 (985305) | more than 7 years ago | (#18650501)

My god, Slashdot renders badly in IE5.0. Anyway, it is amazing how troublesome bad memory can be. I recently installed 'new' hardware in my box, and got the dreaded BSOD. At first I blamed the new hardware, but stumbling over a tip that bad memory could cause those things I ran memtest86+. Several red errors later I'm now running my memory _bellow_ specs, and all is fine and dandy. Sigh.

Point is, some hardware work together perfectly, some don't. I doubt Microsoft ever can be 100% certain your new and shiny graphic card, or mouse for that matter, will work with 100% of Windows systems.

Huh? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18650649)

From what I understand it was a way to test vendors applications to make sure that it doesn't cause any problems because because of bad programing by the vendor and to ensure reliablity of windows and other applications. The issue is not every software vendor out there has done this because of cost, time. etc. so unforunatally that's why there is a lot of issues from vendors trying to make a quick buck and not worrying about going through the effort of certifying the program. In my mind that's where a lot of the problems kick in with windows where as in the open source model there is a lot of people already making sure that everything is going to work and with apple they just don't let any vendor do whatever like microsoft has done. If it was used correctly, and every software company made sure they went though the effort and time to do this then that may make the windows world much more enjoyable. What I wonder though is how many people posting here have actually downloaded and looked at that document? I would suspect very little if any, so before you pass judgement make sure you understand the question. Its easy to startup a OS flame ware as we see that every other post anyway, but not so easy to use your brain.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?