RSSMicrosoft: 1 in 10 Vista printer driver installations fail
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published November 10, 2008, 3:56 PM
At a WinHEC session in Los Angeles last week, bloggers report, just during last September, of the driver installations for Windows Vista automatically reported back to Microsoft, over 11% of install attempts for printer drivers failed.
Although no video was produced for this specific WinHEC session last Wednesday, Angus Kidman of APC and John Lister of Blorge both report that a table presented by Microsoft Senior Program Manager Chris Matichuk showed that 11.24% of all Vista-based printer driver installations automatically reported back to Microsoft, were failures.
As BetaNews has experienced first-hand -- along with many of you -- bad Vista printer driver installs are often repeated, multiple times. A working printer driver only has to be installed right once; depending on the patience of the user or administrator, a failing driver may chalk up a dozen or more tries a day.
According to Matichuk's chart, modems constituted the second most often failed category of Vista driver installation attempts with 8.64%, followed by hard drives and storage devices (6.89%), sound cards (5.74%), "Other Hardware" (4.4%) and then, surprisingly, video cards (4.0%). Network cards only constituted just less than 2% of failures.
APC quotes Matichuk as having freely admitted, "Typically, anything above 3% is not good."
One week prior to the release of these numbers, BetaNews sat down with Microsoft Corporate VP for Design and Development Mike Nash at PDC 2008, and we asked him about the perennial problem Vista has had with device drivers and other annoyances. We asked Nash, are these problems that are solving themselves as time goes on?
He responded that device driver compatibility has been one of six tracks of consistent improvement that Microsoft has recognized: "I think in six dimensions on app compatibility, device compatibility, reliability, performance, battery life, and security," Nash said. "I think in all these things, they're a journey. I think that there are key milestones along that journey; I think that Windows Vista Service Pack 1 was a milestone, both in terms of the code that SP1 represented, but also the progress the ecosystem made in the meantime. Boot times this Christmas, the average boot time of a PC in Christmas 2008 is faster than the average boot time in Christmas 2007. That's a combination of Windows getting better, processors getting faster, and our partners spending more times tuning their systems to be [better] performers. I think there will be other milestones between here and Windows 7, but Windows 7's going to be a very important milestone."
But later, Nash related a story about the rapidly declining prices in the PC market, particularly among retailers that continue to present consumer-grade buildouts in a Radio Shack-like "Good/Better/Best" scenario. Whereas "Best" at the time of Vista's premiere was a $1,200 notebook with 2 GB of RAM and dual-core, today, that same machine might not even qualify as "Good."
Why is that important in this context? Because as retailers' requirements evolved, and "Better" grew to become a 3 GB machine, "Best" naturally expanded to 4 GB. With 4 GB extending beyond the capabilities of traditional 32-bit operating systems, retailers were compelled to pre-install 64-bit Vista to manage the jump. "Our numbers say that something like 20% of the run rate in US retail of PCs in September were 64-bit," Nash told BetaNews.
And therein lay the problem, quite possibly: Device manufacturers have had difficulty adapting to the requirements of 64-bit support, especially printer manufacturers for whom the whole idea of bit width hasn't typically mattered very much. That 64-bit support will be necessary for Microsoft to bestow its coveted Windows 7 support logo on third-party hardware. So for now -- perhaps three years later than originally planned -- manufacturers are finding themselves at the 32-bit dead end. They'll need to U-turn and support 64-bit Win7, or face obscurity in the consumer market.
This could be that it was a issue in Sept..we should be looking at the current month. If you read through the user messages, we see that users are happy to get drivers from microsoft. They install and have no issues.
This could be a one of case for that particular month and has been rectified. Not a big deal though now.I bet you can check for yourself install the printer drivers.
It's the partner who should be aware of what they submit to Microsoft. This should not be a big issue for the external world and printer drivers works absolutely fine on Vista. Just forget about the reporting it might not be that relavant at the moment :)
Score: 0
|"Microsoft Senior Program Manager Chris Matichuk showed that 11.24% of all Vista-based printer driver installations automatically reported back to Microsoft, were failures."
That means that it automatically reported all driver installations. Why are they reporting instrallations anyway. I could understand unsuccessfull (to fix what's wrong), but successfull?
Score: 0
|Why should it be reporting at all. If Vista reports driver installations to MS, don't you think that is it reporting much more too?
Score: 0
|I have a MacBook Pro and 100% of the printers I've tried just worked ;-), but really, 90% for Vista is an achievement!
my comments at http://www.commentino.com/orim
Score: 0
|well yeah 1 out of 1 printers is 100%. Try and install mine, the drivers that came with it only support < 0S X 10.4. Supports Vista though. O_o
How did Apple even come into this article, when it wasn't even mentioned? lol? I mean, I might as well start talking about the great new gloves I bought for winter and start talking about how great *they* are.
Score: 0
|Well, I use Vista Ultimate x64 and I have a Canon MP600 Printer and they do have 64 bit drivers that work flawlessly and not to mention they update their software fairly frequently. So it really all depends on the company and printer you buy. A little research before buying equipment like that will ensure compatibility. Enough Said....
Score: 0
|WOW 1 out 1 printer worked properly on your crappy MacBook Pro. That's cool. That's the greatest achievenment by rotten Apple. Let me guess that printer must have been made by Apple and it's name is probably iPrinter, right? LOL I have 3 different printers in my home and they work w/o any problem with Vista x64 but won't with OS XXX. LOL
Score: 0
|Can you feel the love here? lol
Score: 0
|Google the error reporting service and find out.
Sheesh...
Paranoid much?
Score: 0
|Not sure why they put the word "Printer" in the headline!
Score: 0
|Any of you who know driver development. What is the main difficulty to write a 64 bits driver? In particular, is it extremely difficult?
Score: 0
|In the Windows world?
Its called "demand"...
Score: 0
|Vista x64 won't allow unsigned drivers to be installed and uses a new driver model from that of XP. That's probably the main reason many have had problems installing drivers for Vista.
Score: 0
|No problems with Brother printers. Worked fine.
Score: 0
|It's the manufacturer's fault not Microsoft. Microsoft rules! Apple sucks!
Score: 0
|Your ignorance belies your stupidity..hahahaha
Score: 0
|You complete lack of anything intelligent, relevant, or useful to post belies your ignorance.
Score: 0
|LOL. Before insulting someone else about their "ignorance" you might want to do a little grammar check before posting.
Score: 0
|Still upset that Prop. 8 passed huh? You and your male lover will get over it.
Score: 0
|Sorry that's not what I meant PC_Tool, I meant to say that am a gay and use Mac for no reason. Apple sucks!! :)
Your's truly
Steve Jobs' gay partner
Score: 0
|*laughing*
The king of the bunch has nothing better to offer but flawed grammar advice.
Who would have guessed?
Score: 0
|Like I said, can you feel the love here?
Score: 0
|what else is new!
Score: 0
|Hmmm... 11.24% is more like 1 in 9 Vista printer driver installations fail.
Score: 0
|Heh. Good spot.
Score: 0
|One word. OS X. When you've got the best, fo'get about the rest!
Score: 0
|OS X my @ss. OSuk X! forget the rest and wait for the best--Windows 7
Score: 0
|Make that Windows 7
Score: 0
|Windows X 10.5.6
Score: 0
|You mean Windows Vista Version 2...lol
Score: 0
|First learn to count words. Then we talk printer support on Apple systems.
Score: 0
|Windows my @ss...
Sorry, couldn't resist... ;-)
Score: 0
|Like Mac OS X 10.5.3?
...lol
Score: 0
|OS X is the best? LOL What a joke. Mac OS X is for ignorant f**gots like you and my gay partner internetworld7 (my duplicate)
Score: 0
|My 6.5y/o Brother MFC-4800 installed and runs a treat using XP Pro x64 bit driver on my Vista x64 installation (found the tip on the Brother Forum).
Score: 0
|When you buy a Vista computer, they almost always come with a matched printer. If you upgraded XP to Vista, you are screwed.
Besides, you can get a great printer for under $100 bucks. Just toss the old one and get something that works. Cheap bas****s.
Score: 0
|If you upgraded XP to Vista, you are screwed.
BS.
Nice generalization.
Score: 0
|Windows Vista: Pay more for less!
I like it!
Score: 0
|I don't know one person who upgraded from XP to Vista that doesn't have mega problems. Everyone I know with computers that came with Vista OEM and were designed to tun Vista have no problems.
Go figure.
Score: 0
|We've upgraded hundreds of Dells here. Not a single glitch.
Of course, by "Upgrade", I do mean a clean install, but I assume that is also what you meant, seeing as I don't recall you being a complete retard. ;)
Meaningful stuff, eh? You had one's that didn't work, we've had many that did. Useful info, right?
Perhaps the systems you were "upgrading" to Vista were below the realistic requirements?
Score: 0
|XP to Vista is a downgrade regardless of what MS tries to tell us.
Score: 0
|*yawn*
Seems to work just fine for me.
Score: 0
|old HP printers are decent. Newer models, especially the networkable inkjets, have horrible software/drivers. I bet if MS released data HP would be #1 in failures.
Score: 0
|HP sells more printers than anyone else, of course the driver failure rate would be higher. As much as I support HP (Mainly Printers), one thing that does bother me is maybe the reason for that failure is because HP uses the same driver and software package for several different printers. I would guess this is done to save money and increase profit. All I can say is "Way To Go HP"
Score: 0
|How can you support HP printers...I hate HP because they force you to use their crappy software to use your printer. What ever happened to the days of just installing the driver for the printer, and the option of NOT installing third-party software
Score: 0
|"I hate HP because they force you to use their crappy software to use your printer"
That's strange...all the printers at my company are HP, and we don't use any of their software other then drivers...
Score: 0
|I can and will continue to suppport HP Printers. The days of "installing Just the Drivers" as you put it went out with the onset of the All in One printer. But it seems to me that XP, will install that printer and scanner drivers for most of the HP Printers.
Score: 0
|Bravo Niro, it's all in the knowing,lol
Score: 0
|Ironic timing. Just today my HP C3180 all-in-one completely failed to install on Vista SP1 32-bit when I downloaded the smaller 50MB "bare bones" print/scan driver package. I had to use the super bloated 159MB version with all of the programs to get the printer and scanner to work. Thanks, HP!
Score: 0
|I find it ironic that you would complain about the larger printer driver size and totally ignore the fact that you are using an OS with a higher amount of bloat :)
Score: 0
|Oh please, is that all you've got? :/
Score: 0
|It's nice that Vista automatically reports to Microsoft about the hardware you're installing.
Score: 0
|I wonder what else it reports to Microsoft???
Score: 0
|Yes, it is nice. Learn how Error Reporting or Problem Reports and Solutions work (especially Advanced settings) and don't troll.
Score: 0
|It would be really interesting to see the equivalent statistics for OS X and Linux? I bet most of the printers that failed are old and dated and could probably be replaced by a budget printer that doesn't cost much more than it would cost to replace the ink cartridges for the old ones...
Score: 0
|Maybe they should buy new printers. [rollseyes]
Score: 0
|Or just not buy Vista - but gee, many have already figured that out!
Score: 0
|my printer was an HP Deskjet D1360, year 2007 and failed. had to look for a fix somewhere in the net.
Score: 0
|Do you understand sarcasm? BTW, my Epson C42UX worked just under Vista when I had used it before. The only thing I had real trouble with in that area was with the new VX-3000 Microsoft Webcam. My problems with Vista was elsewhere in it.
Score: 0
|My HP laserjet 1100, which I have had since 1998, works great since day 1 with Vista on a LPT port :)
Score: 0
|SO?
I guess that means that all others do?
LOL!
Score: 0
|Of course we won't see this type of comment from you towards mjm below, making the same kind of anecdotal statement.
Funny how your flames only seem to target anecdotal posts that fly in the face of your own personal bias...
...and you're still putting words in people's mouths....(shocking, isn't it?) Where did he say that because *his* worked, everyone else's must?
Score: 0
|Yes, this is true but many of the computers today are so called "Vista Only Computers". Try with ease to source XP drivers on a Vista to XP upgrade (Intended). I got a great deal on HP dv6606cta laptop. The only problem is that it had Vista on it.
I first checked with HP on the availability of XP drivers for this machine. Once I source what HP said were the drivers, I formatted and did an XP build. To my dismay, many of the drivers that HP said would work were not even close.
Several hours of research and commmunicating with HP, I finally sourced 99% of the XP Drivers needed. That last driver which was for the Conexant HD Sound Card. Although HP said their driver will work, it didn't but I was able to source a working driver through Microsoft Updates.
unfortunetly, this driver does not provide for Advanced Support as mostly all other sound drivers and even thought I can play music and talk at the same time in a music room, the missing advanced feature in this case is the mic boost and without it, with mix selected, it cuts the sound level to the mic about 70%.
I have also found other problems doing an XP build on a Vista machine so I guess when this crashes again, I'm gonna have to dive deep into that Microsoft Hole and install Vista on here seeing I got HP to send me the recovery disc under warranty. The only thing I would need then is a ladder...Cheers all......
Score: 0
|Why do you keep saying "source" instead of "find"?
Score: 0
|You're reminding me of my kook of a sister again.
Score: 0
|Sounds like the functionality most experienced with the MS change in the Gold Code - the printers advnaced features failed to function.
What you have may be a product that is functioning as it was available with the release of XP!
That's not a bug, that's an undocumented feature! Ain't the Windows world fun?
You'll pardon me, as I am still marveling over the MS "Mojave experiment" commercial where the girl realizes that you can take it with you as she becomes aware that there are such products as portable laptop computers! Now THAT is an expert I want touting the marvels of Windows Vista! Nothing like starting with IT experts! LOL!
Score: 0
|Sorry, I'm straight.
And I have this funny hangup about not dating family members.
But I wish you luck in your quest...
Score: 0
|it's become almost impossible for me to discern between sarcasm and retarded comentaries anymore.
So i just give my truth.
Score: 0
|Wasn't it the IT Experts who told Microsoft not to release it. I too marvel at the commercial of so called "Non Actors". I'm sure the actors guild would love to have a go at Microsoft over that one.......
Score: 0
|Easy Morris, because I'm a professional.... And you?
Score: 0
|Too Funny!
Score: 0
|I can give you a good example to back what you said PC_Tool. I was discussing my situation (stated above), with another tech today. We found out that we both have the same mainboards, Chipsets, etc as each other in our laptops. The feature that I need for my Conexant HD Audio was in his updated driver. I installed this driver only to find out that The Mic Boost still was not present in my advanced options. Same MB, same Chipset, Same HD Audio, his worked, mine didn't, I rest your case.....lol
Score: 0
|Saying "source" instead of "find" does not make you a professional. And yes, I am a professional as well as an expert.
Score: 0
|You seem to lean more towards crooked. And you wouldn't marry the member of any family? Good to know that you will always be single.
Score: 0
|Maybe It's the 5 years I spent In New Zealand where they called it source. Same meaning, different word.....Cheers
Score: 0
|Okay, now that's different. Used to live in Texas, myself.
Score: 0
|Perhaps this will make the Hardware vendors take notice to how important it is to SUPPORT their devices and write better drivers. It's not Rocket Science and it's not that difficult.
Score: 0
|AND for MS NOT to change the code after it goes 'gold' as they did in XP and thus break the vendor's drivers that they had already spent the money to develop and test.
Oops! ...them damned vendors.
Score: 0
|Well, yes that goes without saying, but still many vendors to this day have never bothered to update the drivers. Many have just abandoned the particular devices and gone one to all new ones with no support at all. I understand that some were at end of cycle, but companies should still support their equipment
Score: 0
|ain't that the truth.
vendors make money when they can sell a new product but they cannot make any money if they provide a free patch.
further, they will loose money for the cost of developing driver updates.
Score: 0
|It may go without saying, but unfortunately it did not go without doing!
One might think that MS would follow their own procedures they demand others follow. But they would be wrong.
So, after violating their own rules, just who should assume responsibility for and subsequently pay for the additional development costs?
Score: 0
|I can see the point though.
If you make hardware, then you write the driver for it whilst the hardware is in pre-production.
By the time the device hits the shops, the production run might have ended, as ocean-based shipping takes quite a while.
By the time the last hardware is being sold at bargain prices, this could be two years after the driver was written.
What is in it for the OEM to write a new driver?
Nothing.
Possibly less, because they will have new sexy hardware they want you to buy... with current drivers!
Score: 0
|...and go out of business if they don't.
Non-functional hardware isn't going to make them a dime...
Score: 0
|"By lazarus98 edited Nov 10, 2008 - 5:22 PM
Perhaps this will make the Hardware vendors take notice to how important it is to SUPPORT their devices and write better drivers. It's not Rocket Science and it's not that difficult"
Did you ever stop and think just when these manufactuers figured out all the answers that Microsoft changed all the Questions!!!
Come on guys, Microsoft created this mess, not the individual manufactuers. XP was the most stable O/S that MS has had for years and instead of trying to improve it, they created that mess called Vista.
And now they are venturing onto Window 9. Could it be MS realizes that Vista was mistake?
Score: 0
|It's Windows 7, not Windows 9. Get it right. And you seem to be unaware of the security issues of XP and older versions where software and drivers tried to run with admin rights even when they didn't need them. One of the main reasons for Vista was to correct that situation, since the programmers and manufacturers would not have done the right thing on their own.
XP was great and mostly stable. However, it certainly had issues.
Score: 0
|Yes, I was already corrected as I posed a question to the issue of name. Yes, I'm am most certainly aware of the security issue surrounding XP as I am fully aware of the security issues surrounding every OS that Microsoft produced. All I said is XP was the most stable OS to date and I will stand by that.
Score: 0
|Here! Here!
I will not buy D-Link products because I discovered how crappy their support was when they utterly refused to support Vista and 64-bit OSes for so long. Maybe they finally support them now, but I can't rely on them for support when new OSes come out and since as an IT person I always try to stay one-step ahead in technology, I need drivers to work for my products very quickley after a new OS comes out.
Score: 0
|My point exactly.
Score: 0
|Just last Friday I tried to upgrade my Vista 32 Xerox Universal print driver and it failed. this was without UAC running and the previous version installed and running already.
The driver installed fine under XP (using XP drivers, of course.)
Score: 0
|I hope Windows 7 includes a broader range of support, even re-supporting things that worked in XP but not in Vista.
Sounds like Microsoft might finally be ready to put this Vista disaster behind them...
Score: 0
|No disaster (or problems) on my 2 Vista machines.
Score: 0
|Its the same driver model, dumba**. And its the hardware vendors fault, not Microsofts.
Score: 0
|Actually, no it's NOT the same.
And, you could be a bit less hostile.
MS altered the Graphics infrastructure and the Audio infrastructure big-time in Vista vs XP, and they may well end up including support for many more legacy devices than Vista.
Certainly, printer support and scanner support should be improved.
And if you have read other stories covering Windows 7 and Vista, MS admits they did a very bad job of working with hardware vendors to get their products the tools they need to ensure compatibility.
Have a nice day, even if you are kind of mean... :)
Score: 0
|You are correct of course, but MS and the Vendors have dropped the ball badly. Nothing like quitting the game before it's over. Leaves everyone that buys with a really bad vibe. Then MS wonders why everyone is pissy about Vista.
Score: 0
|Windows 7 will use the same driver model as Vista. That's what I was on about...
FFS.
Score: 0
|OK, I need a clearification. I was watching a news clip and the VP of development for Microsoft kept refering to the new Windows as Windows 9. Yet on a few occasions here I see people refering to it as Windows 7.....Which is it and did the VP make a freudian slip of the tongue???
Score: 0
|Did you lay hands on them and pray?
Score: 0
|The next release of Windows will be named "Windows 7", but will report (winver) Windows version 6.1.
The product name was used to distance itself from the "V" word, and the version number was used to maintain compatibility with the "V" word OS.
I have *never* heard it referred to as Windows 9. Got a link to those clips?
Score: 0
|Sorry no, this was a while back. I figured too many people were calling it Windows 7 for what I heard to be correct, that why I asked the question. thank you for the info though.
Windows 7 sounds so bland. Why don't they just call it Windows 2009 or 2010..... What do I know,lol
Score: 0
|Heh..
The year thing has proven problematic for them in the past...
And wouldn't it suck to be using Windows 2007 in 2009?
Score: 0
|Look how many years we used W2K and believe it or not, it is running on thousands of machines. I still think they need to get a bit more classy with the name.
Score: 0
|Okay if I disagree? ;)
Score: 0
|