Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:56:30 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
<veldy71 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:

>It seems that the Windows Vista Ultimate x64 does NOT allow unsigned drivers,
>no way, no how.
>
>ColorVision has yet to release signed drivers, so I seem to be SOL on using my
>Spyder 2 with Windows Vista x64. Has anybody managed to find a work around
>for this? I note that there used to be a workaround with bcedit or some odd
>utility, but it was removed for RTM.

Dual boot with XP.

--
Arnold Schwarzenegger was at
the Golden Globes Monday to
give away the award for Best
Motion Picture Drama. He's no
newcomer to the winner's circle
himself. The Consumer Electronics
Show in Las Vegas once voted him
most lifelike over Al Gore.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:

> It seems that the Windows Vista Ultimate x64 does NOT allow unsigned
> drivers, no way, no how.
>
> ColorVision has yet to release signed drivers, so I seem to be SOL on
> using my Spyder 2 with Windows Vista x64. Has anybody managed to find
> a work around for this? I note that there used to be a workaround
> with bcedit or some odd utility, but it was removed for RTM.

Thanks for posting this. I don't have an answer but your experience will
influence me. I have a Spyder2 also, a Wacom tablet, flim and flat bed
scanners, a Canopus ADVC-300, etc. I've been thinking about moving to
Vista Ultimate x64 when it's available at retail but I've been concerned
about compatibility issues. It sounds like I have good reason to be
concerned if unsigned drivers are completely disallowed. I would think
that is really going to hurt some of the old peripherals or else slow the
move to x64. I wonder if Vista Ultimate x32 also takes this approach?
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:21:32 GMT, Mardon <mgb72mgb RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> It seems that the Windows Vista Ultimate x64 does NOT allow unsigned
>> drivers, no way, no how.
>>
>> ColorVision has yet to release signed drivers, so I seem to be SOL on
>> using my Spyder 2 with Windows Vista x64. Has anybody managed to find
>> a work around for this? I note that there used to be a workaround
>> with bcedit or some odd utility, but it was removed for RTM.
>
>Thanks for posting this. I don't have an answer but your experience will
>influence me. I have a Spyder2 also, a Wacom tablet, flim and flat bed
>scanners, a Canopus ADVC-300, etc. I've been thinking about moving to
>Vista Ultimate x64 when it's available at retail but I've been concerned
>about compatibility issues. It sounds like I have good reason to be
>concerned if unsigned drivers are completely disallowed. I would think
>that is really going to hurt some of the old peripherals or else slow the
>move to x64. I wonder if Vista Ultimate x32 also takes this approach?

I don't see where unsigned drivers being disallowed is necessarily
that much of a problem--for the most part 32-bit drivers won't work
anyway and one would hope that the developers of the 64-bit drivers
grasp the concept that the drivers have to be signed to be
installable.

Might also discourage the morons who implement part of their
applications as device drivers despite there being no devices in
sight.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

You are never, repeat never, going to see 64 bit Vista drivers for products
like the Spyder. There is no real world advantage to using a 64 bit OS as
all that seen extra memory is not used efficiently. Then there are the
problems with antivirus protection, lack of CD/DVD authoring programs, etc.
Vista 64 is an office server OS and not a very stable one, just like Win64.
As of now it is not clear when or if there will be 32 bit Vista drivers for
existing peripherals.
As it is presently constituted there is no advantage for anyone to use 32
bit Vista: it is slower at nearly all tasks than an equivalent XP system,
even with fast hardware. When computer magazines describe their use of Vista
it is all smoke and mirrors: since there are few Vista drivers for common
hardware nobody outside of Microsoft has actual real world experience with
the OS for everyday tasks.
I have used the betas and release candidates as much as possible: Photoshop
will run but I cannot calibrate the monitor, use scanners or fully use
printers (drivers are only partly functional). Two week prior to wide
release Epson has yet to release a Vista compatible driver.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

gowanoh wrote:
> Vista 64 is an office server OS and not a very stable one,

Prove it.

> As of now it is not clear when or if there will be 32 bit Vista drivers for
> existing peripherals.

Prove it.

Everything on my system is running A-OK with the final release.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

Mardon <mgb72mgb.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting this. I don't have an answer but your experience will
> influence me. I have a Spyder2 also, a Wacom tablet, flim and flat bed
> scanners, a Canopus ADVC-300, etc. I've been thinking about moving to
> Vista Ultimate x64 when it's available at retail but I've been concerned
> about compatibility issues. It sounds like I have good reason to be
> concerned if unsigned drivers are completely disallowed. I would think
> that is really going to hurt some of the old peripherals or else slow the
> move to x64. I wonder if Vista Ultimate x32 also takes this approach?

I believe x32 allows one to override the policy and install unsigned drivers.
Microsoft seems to have forced the x64 folks to bite the bullet. I could
install x32, but then I would lose 0.8GB down to 3.2GB (and only if I
reconfigured the BIOS which prevents dual-boot to x64).

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
>
> I don't see where unsigned drivers being disallowed is necessarily
> that much of a problem--for the most part 32-bit drivers won't work
> anyway and one would hope that the developers of the 64-bit drivers
> grasp the concept that the drivers have to be signed to be
> installable.
>

ColorVision released 64-bit drivers in August for the Spyder 2 ... but they
still haven't signed them. It is a simple matter of getting a $500 cert and
authority to sign them.

> Might also discourage the morons who implement part of their
> applications as device drivers despite there being no devices in
> sight.

Cheap morons perhaps; it is still not a big or expensive deal to sign drivers.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

gowanoh <fac_187 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> You are never, repeat never, going to see 64 bit Vista drivers for products
> like the Spyder. There is no real world advantage to using a 64 bit OS as
> all that seen extra memory is not used efficiently. Then there are the

Hmm ... that is interesting, as the latest release [August] has 64-bit drivers
in it [for XP Pro x64], but they are simply not signed.

> problems with antivirus protection, lack of CD/DVD authoring programs, etc.
> Vista 64 is an office server OS and not a very stable one, just like Win64.
> As of now it is not clear when or if there will be 32 bit Vista drivers for
> existing peripherals.

Roxio works fine on Vista x64, so I have CD/DVD authoring. Antivirus works
from some vendors like Avast and a beta from Symantec which is suprisingly
non-invasive.

> As it is presently constituted there is no advantage for anyone to use 32
> bit Vista: it is slower at nearly all tasks than an equivalent XP system,

It is faster than XP for a number of reasons, one being the better way the
kernel assigns processes to CPUs/cores; it is MUCH more efficient. Also, if
you have more than 3GB of memory, 64-bit works well. I have 4GB memory and
only 3.2 will show in 32-bit Vista or XP Pro and then only if I change a
setting in the BIOS, otherwise only 3GB show.

> even with fast hardware. When computer magazines describe their use of Vista
> it is all smoke and mirrors: since there are few Vista drivers for common
> hardware nobody outside of Microsoft has actual real world experience with
> the OS for everyday tasks.

Absolutely incorrect. Things run VERY well on Vista in most cases. There are
still driver issues with many vendors that will eventually be worked out.
Some software incompatibility is a major fault of Vista that might affect
adoption rates, but that should be expected as the same issue existed in
particular when people moved from Win98/Me to 2000 or XP.

> I have used the betas and release candidates as much as possible: Photoshop
> will run but I cannot calibrate the monitor, use scanners or fully use
> printers (drivers are only partly functional). Two week prior to wide
> release Epson has yet to release a Vista compatible driver.

There were some significant changes between Beta/RC and RTM. Don't think that
your experience with those means you can make judgement about the release; it
very well might not be accurate any longer.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

Bill Funk <BigBill.TakeThisOut@there.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:56:30 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
> <veldy71.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>It seems that the Windows Vista Ultimate x64 does NOT allow unsigned drivers,
>>no way, no how.
>>
>>ColorVision has yet to release signed drivers, so I seem to be SOL on using my
>>Spyder 2 with Windows Vista x64. Has anybody managed to find a work around
>>for this? I note that there used to be a workaround with bcedit or some odd
>>utility, but it was removed for RTM.
>
> Dual boot with XP.
>

Yes, I know ... and I might. But, I HATE dual booting.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:28:00 -0500, Cynicor
<j...tru.p...in RemoveThis @speak.ea.sy.net> wrote:

>gowanoh wrote:
>> Vista 64 is an office server OS and not a very stable one,
>
>Prove it.
>
>> As of now it is not clear when or if there will be 32 bit Vista drivers for
>> existing peripherals.
>
>Prove it.

Prove what, that it's not clear?

>Everything on my system is running A-OK with the final release.

That's nice. Don't assume your system is typical. I had enough
trouble finding 2K drivers for some of the stuff I use.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:57:17 GMT, Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:


>Bill Funk <BigBill DeleteThis @there.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:56:30 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
>> <veldy71 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>It seems that the Windows Vista Ultimate x64 does NOT allow unsigned drivers,
>>>no way, no how.
>>>
>>>ColorVision has yet to release signed drivers, so I seem to be SOL on using my
>>>Spyder 2 with Windows Vista x64. Has anybody managed to find a work around
>>>for this? I note that there used to be a workaround with bcedit or some odd
>>>utility, but it was removed for RTM.
>>
>> Dual boot with XP.
>>

>Yes, I know ... and I might. But, I HATE dual booting.

Stick with XP. Vista offers nothing except for the ability to make screaming
fast harware run dog slow.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:28:00 -0500, Cynicor <j> wrote:


>gowanoh wrote:
>> Vista 64 is an office server OS and not a very stable one,

>Prove it.

>> As of now it is not clear when or if there will be 32 bit Vista drivers for
>> existing peripherals.

>Prove it.
Why bother? THe evidence is available for you to see at microsoft's site.
Their 64 bit OSs require 64 bit drivers.


>Everything on my system is running A-OK with the final release.
Irrelevent.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2 

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I could
> install x32, but then I would lose 0.8GB down to 3.2GB (and only if I
> reconfigured the BIOS which prevents dual-boot to x64).

I have 5GB installed and haven't made the switch yet to x64; still on XP
Pro x32. I figured Vista might be the time to do move to x64. I hate to
have unused memory. I think I'll do a through check of all my hardware to
see which items have 64 bit drivers available.
 >> Stay informed about: Windows Vista x64 & Spyder2