On Mon, 12 May 2008 03:32:34 +0100, alias007
<alias007.39a00b@no-mx.forums.vistaheads.com> wrote:

>
>There are much nicer ways to reply to a person's posts. Please don't be
>rude.

I really don't understand why you think my reply was "rude". It was
right to the point, and corrected your misconceptions. IF I felt like
being "rude", I would have used much stronger language. Don't believe
me? Read some of my other thousands of replies in varios Newsgroups
and Forums. You haven't seen "rude" yet.

Anyway, I do apologize for what you thought was "rudeness". Of
course, I have no control over your thoughts and feelings, do I?

IF you want to keep using the Usenet, you are going to have to grow a
thicker skin, friend. I'm usually a nice person, and do have the
user's best interests at heart. Many others don't.

>I didn't mean to imply that this was a common problem. However, many
>people are having issues with their sound card. Microsoft totally
>revamped the audio layer of their software and so that's why
>manufacturers are struggling to get revision after revision of drivers
>out for their audio cards.

The fact is, these OEMs have had over a YEAR and a half to produce
drivers for their cards which work well in Vista. They either don't
want to spend the money it takes to develop for Vista, or they are not
technically capable of doing so. Talk to them, not Microsoft.

>So far, the latest drivers for mine don't
>seem to work. However, the same card works in XP. My card is labeled
>"Vista compatible" (not capable) so I'm hopeful that in time a new
>revision of their driver will be what I'm waiting on.

IN the mean time, please do not blame Microsoft for the manufacturer's
obvious lack of care for their customers.

Just spend the $49 for a decent card for Vista, and you won't have any
more problems (at tleast in this area).

>
>As for activation records, I've already activated windows. So I'm not
>getting any nuisance screens.
>
>>What does a "virtual drive" have to do with a faulty audio card?
>
>It's not faulty. It works in another machine. I only mention adding
>and then removing a virtual drive to force Vista to go back through the
>hardware list and possibly find the audio card.
>
>>Why use "software workarounds" in the first place?
>
>Because I'm waiting until either the drivers catch up to Vista or
>Microsoft releases a patch that gets these audio cards working.

Sorry, friend, but if you are waiting for Microsoft, you are going to
have to wait a long, long time, since Microsoft simply doesn't do
that, it being the OEM's responsibility, not Microsoft's.

>That
>being said, I still catch myself doing a google search for audio cards
>that are Vista compatible *and* have good reviews. If I find one, I'll
>buy it.
>
>> There are a plethora of Vista-compatible sound cards...
>
>I have no trouble spending $100 on a card if it'll work. But I'm not
>seeing enough reviews out there or at least the cards that do have
>reviews say that they're not compatible with Vista as advertised. This
>is not the 'compatible vs capable' issue, by the way. That being said,
>please prove me wrong. Point a card out to me that totally proves me
>wrong and I WILL buy it.

Well, the sound circuity on my motherboard works perfectly. Not a
problem seen yet.

>
>I'd like an example on the duct tape analogy. This is just a refresh
>of devices. As long as it works once, it should work again. I don't
>see how this could not be the case, but I'm open-minded. I may have 15
>years experience but I'd be a fool to think I've seen it all.
>
>Granted, the workaround I suggested isn't the optimal solution. The
>optimal solution would be for Microsoft to keep devices from being
>dropped after standby/reboot.

This is just not possible IF the driver (NOT WRITTEN by MICROSOFT, by
the way) is faulty. Again, it is NOT Microsoft's responsibility to
make sure EVERY DRIVER in the world works as it should: It is the
OEM's.

>But I'm basing my suggestion on the hope
>that Microsoft will issue a windows update that will fix this or if it
>is in fact the fault of the driver,

Microsoft NEVER supplies such "updates" for OEM devices, unless they
work with Microsoft to issue a newer driver.

>that the manufacturer will offer a
>revision that works. All I wanted was to offer the original poster a
>backup plan. So that no matter what, there's at least 1 possibility.
>Untested in all it's theoretical (and smelly) glory.

Actually, these "workarounds" have been tried before, with better or
worse results. The BEST "workaround" is to make sure your ENTIRE
computer is capable of using your Microsoft OS correctly BEFORE buying
it.

BTW, you can hardly ever go wrong by buying motherboards, etc from
Intel. I've never had problems with Intel motherboards and the
devices attached to them.

Via, yes. Intel, never.


>
>To get back to the main topic. The original poster had a drive that
>was showing up in device manager in Vista but eventually was perpetually
>dropped. I'm having the same issue with a totally different device that
>is handled through a different section of code in the OS. This leads me
>to believe that it's not a driver issue and since my card works in XP
>and his device worked before he upgraded to Vista and both worked at
>least once in Vista that the issue isn't the device, but Vista.

Keep on assuming that it is Microsoft's fault. See where that gets
anyone.

The fact is, Microsoft CHANGED the Driver frameworks for printers,
video, and audio devices. That the OEM's failed to change their OWN
drivers is THEIR fault, not Microsoft's. As I said, they've had over
a year and a half to fix their devices and drivers. They have NO ONE
to blame but themselves. By the way, releasing a driver "fix" for a
device which is not really capable of being used productively in Vista
is idiotic, and "cheap", and only shows their obvious non-concern for
their customers.

>Assuming that this could possibly happen with any device, some of which
>would be to expensive to just replace (Bluray rewriteable - just off the
>top of my head), I decided to offer my workaround as a suggestion. It
>might not even work! But at least I tried.
>
>And if it does work, it's at least something to hold you over until the
>core issue is resolved.

I just can't believe this: We spend thousands of dollars to buy our
machines, then blame Microsoft when one of the $50 devices the
manufacturers put in them is useless in Vista.

>No more anologies please. They hurt my head. :-)

I can see why, friend.
I will try to stay away from "anologies" (Sic) with you from now on.


Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the correct thread and article.
================================================