 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, so my shiny new PC has /finally/ been set up in my bedroom, rather
than on the kitchen table. That means that at last I can plug in all my
stuff.
Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult. You would /think/
I could just go to the HP website and download the necessary driver
software. And you would be wrong. HP insists "you do not need a driver
for this device; Windows already has one". So I have to manually run the
printer wizard, and hunt through a list of several thousand printers,
only to confirm that no, my printer is /not/ in the list. So then I have
to click the Windows Update button, and wait 35 minutes for Windows to
download a complete list of every printer ever manufactured by any
company rich enough to pay Microsoft to host their driver. And /then/ I
have to hunt through an even bigger driver list to find my printer.
(Even though Windows has successfully detected the make and model of the
printer already.)
...or HP could have just given me the right ****ing driver. :-P
On top of that, once I've managed to guess which "port" the printer is
on, and configured it, now the printer shows up twice. The new printer I
just configured shows up as working, but the original "unknown device"
still shows up. In the end, I had to delete the printer I just created,
unplug the USB cable, and plug it back in again. Because the
corresponding driver is now installed, the printer is auto-configured.
Sheesh! God knows how I'd have managed to get all that to work if I
didn't know anything about computers...
But that's nothing compared to what happened when I tried to get my
expensive outboard sound card to work. Because you know what? It turns
out that this premium-grade pro-audio device DOES NOT HAVE 64BIT DRIVERS
AVAILABLE. Yes, you read that correctly. It's 2012, the device is still
in production, and the makers haven't bothered to write the necessary
drivers yet. There isn't even any indication that they /intend/ to write
such drivers. WTF?
After hours of Google searching, it appears that 80% of posters just
/never/ got their device to work in any way, shape, or form, and another
20% claim that the 32-bit drivers work perfectly. On my system, I've
tried installing every version of the drivers that I can find, and under
no circumstances can I make the device function.
If you buy some cheapo laptop USB soundcard, you could maybe understand
the no-name manufacturers not bothering to provide modern drivers. But
we're talking about a supposedly "pro audio" device from a big-name
brand. You would think that for the exorbitant price I paid, it would
damn well work. But, apparently, you would be wrong...
I am really quite shocked that in the 21st century, running a 64bit OS
is all it takes to completely disable a piece of hardware. WTF?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 22/02/2012 10:18, Invisible a écrit :
> But that's nothing compared to what happened when I tried to get my
> expensive outboard sound card to work. Because you know what? It turns
> out that this premium-grade pro-audio device DOES NOT HAVE 64BIT DRIVERS
> AVAILABLE. Yes, you read that correctly. It's 2012, the device is still
> in production, and the makers haven't bothered to write the necessary
> drivers yet. There isn't even any indication that they /intend/ to write
> such drivers. WTF?
Consider the producer point of view: the premium-grade pro-audio is made
in China, at low cost, since the design has been made in some marketing
office with a quick validation. The 32 bits driver came from a long line
of evolving model (hint: now it's the hardware which customised to map
to the previous model emulation). In fact, the driver might be claiming
compatibility with (aka knowledge of) 2000 & XP (they are not aware of
the internal change in Vista & 7, but that's not important as long as
the OS does the adaptation to use an XP driver).
Providing a 64 bits driver, even just copying actual functionality of
the 32 bits one, would mean investing in a new development and no
warranty of success (some API changed so well in 2008/Vista/7, it might
be more complex to be as safe as expected by the new OS... ).
Icing on the cake, delivering a 64 bits driver for Window make it
mandatory (unless the user are happy booting with F8 to disable driver
authentication) to provide a signed installation set of files (the
catalog file(s) must be signed, and this prohibit any update to the dll
as well as the inf file). Self-signing is no go. It must be delivered by
a CA trusted by MS. And that costs money (at least about $1000 per year).
Cherry on the top of the cake, the installation directories on 64 bits
windows are named with strange concept in mind (C:\Windows\system and
C:\windows\system32 are not containing what you might expect for a 64
bits system...)
So, from a seller point of view: market is gamers and alike, 99% of the
game are 32 bits (maybe 100% ?), so market is 32 bits. And that come at
no extra cost. Developing 64 bits would cost edge-competence, initial
money and recurring money, and is not required by market share (less
than 1% ? 64 bits people are not in gaming, so no need for a sound card).
Choice was:
* invest nothing, gains 1
* invest a lot, gains 1.01
Your bet ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/02/2012 10:25 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> So, from a seller point of view: market is gamers and alike
No, it isn't.
This is a specialist audio interface for music production. It features
special low-latency ASIO drivers (something that games don't give a fig
about).
It actually performs quite poorly as a general-purpose sound card. When
you start playing a sound, the first half-second gets cut off -
presumably because that's how long it takes for the sound hardware to
switch on. But for proper music production, it works much better; with
the motherboard's sound card, there's far too much delay between
pressing a key and hearing a note.
> Choice was:
> * invest nothing, gains 1
> * invest a lot, gains 1.01
>
> Your bet ?
I wouldn't mind, but some of the /other/ models from the same
manufacturer /do/ have 64-bit drivers. Just not /my/ model. >_<
Well, if the manufacturer can't be bothered to support the hardware that
I've purchased, I guess that means it's time to take my money elsewhere...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
What do you need a printer for?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 22.02.2012 10:18, schrieb Invisible:
> If you buy some cheapo laptop USB soundcard, you could maybe understand
> the no-name manufacturers not bothering to provide modern drivers. But
> we're talking about a supposedly "pro audio" device from a big-name
> brand. You would think that for the exorbitant price I paid, it would
> damn well work. But, apparently, you would be wrong...
Yes. It's pro equipment, i.e. something for people who know well enough
to not change a running production system.
For such customers, upgrading often means buying a brand new system,
comprised of new computer hardware, new audio hardware, new OS, and new
production software, in a combo that is reputed to work, from some
people who give them a guarantee that the combo will work.
Such customers may also do partial upgrades, but in that case they'll
also by that upgrade from - and have it installed by - people who give
them a guarantee for the fitness of the resulting combo.
As a result, there is obviously less pressre on pro-equipment
manufacturers to make their equipment more-or-less compatible with each
and every OS version, hard- and software imaginable; a beneficial side
effect is that they can concentrate on making it fully compatible and
well-tested with a selection of reference systems.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/22/2012 2:18 AM, Invisible wrote:
> OK, so my shiny new PC has /finally/ been set up in my bedroom, rather
> than on the kitchen table. That means that at last I can plug in all my
> stuff.
>
> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult. You would /think/
> I could just go to the HP website and download the necessary driver
> software. And you would be wrong. HP insists "you do not need a driver
> for this device; Windows already has one". So I have to manually run the
> printer wizard, and hunt through a list of several thousand printers,
> only to confirm that no, my printer is /not/ in the list. So then I have
> to click the Windows Update button, and wait 35 minutes for Windows to
> download a complete list of every printer ever manufactured by any
> company rich enough to pay Microsoft to host their driver. And /then/ I
> have to hunt through an even bigger driver list to find my printer.
> (Even though Windows has successfully detected the make and model of the
> printer already.)
>
> ...or HP could have just given me the right ****ing driver. :-P
>
> On top of that, once I've managed to guess which "port" the printer is
> on, and configured it, now the printer shows up twice. The new printer I
> just configured shows up as working, but the original "unknown device"
> still shows up. In the end, I had to delete the printer I just created,
> unplug the USB cable, and plug it back in again. Because the
> corresponding driver is now installed, the printer is auto-configured.
> Sheesh! God knows how I'd have managed to get all that to work if I
> didn't know anything about computers...
>
Snort. Got a similar problem. The "scanner" software for something Win7
detected shows two versions. One doesn't work, and the other crashes,
but *only* when using the companies own on-scanner button configuration
thing, which Windows couldn't auto-install. Using someone else's
application, and picking the correctly installed "version" of the device
lets me copy direct to printer, but only at low resolutions. I haven't
bothered to even try to fix the problem... Bloody stupid OS.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
>
> What do you need a printer for?
For... *gasp*... printing things?
Seriously. I actually use my printer for printing stuff. Unconventional,
I know. But it's true.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/02/2012 11:17 PM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Snort. Got a similar problem. The "scanner" software for something Win7
> detected shows two versions. One doesn't work, and the other crashes,
> but *only* when using the companies own on-scanner button configuration
> thing, which Windows couldn't auto-install. Using someone else's
> application, and picking the correctly installed "version" of the device
> lets me copy direct to printer, but only at low resolutions. I haven't
> bothered to even try to fix the problem... Bloody stupid OS.
If a 3rd party driver won't install, I'm not so sure that's a problem
with the OS.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 23.02.2012 10:08, schrieb Invisible:
> On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
>> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
>>
>> What do you need a printer for?
>
> For... *gasp*... printing things?
>
> Seriously. I actually use my printer for printing stuff. Unconventional,
> I know. But it's true.
I guess that was an instance of Warp's Infamous Instant Humor(TM) - you
know, the one that's so dry you need to add water (or an emoticon)
before consumption.
Then again, you never know - the Finnish are a strange folk; maybe now,
with the widespread use of flat displays, they prefer to copy their
stuff right from the screen using tracing paper and pencil.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Disclaimer:
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
> > Invisible<voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
> >
> > What do you need a printer for?
> For... *gasp*... printing things?
Well, that's obvious, but not what I was asking.
Your answer is like "do you have the time?" "yes".
I don't see what someone would use a printer for. It just sounds so
obsolete nowadays, in the same way as floppy disks or RS-232 ports.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
