Re: Simtec v Castle USB

In article <9b2fd3d84d.steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
> On 13 Dec, greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote in message
> <MPG.1e08252648784b649896ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > In article <0777d3d74d.steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
> >
> > > Hardware developers will test their products on the versions of
> > > Windows that they target. If said hardware fails to work, it will be
> > > modified until it does.
> >
> > Try here http://tinyurl.com/9neq5 and work through. Given the time lag
> > from when the first USB device classes and interface guidelines were
> > drawn up, you would have thought that we should have got it right by
> > now.
>
> Who says that all USB devices follow the guidelines?

Who says that they haven't?

> > > The same manufacturers will not test on RISC OS (for obvious reasons).
> > > If there are any discrepancies between the USB implementations on
> > > Windows and RISC OS (whether RISC OS or Windows is at fault), the
> > > hardware may not work on RISC OS.
> >
> > If the standards have been followed since 1998 and new USB2 devices can
> > work on an 'old' Win OS, what is the problem with the RISC OS USB
> > interfaces?
>
> Who says the standards have been followed? USB device manufacturers need
> their products to work on Windows. If they don't, the devices are fixed
> so that they do.

There may well have been a few rogue manufacturers but all responsible
ones will wish to use the USB logos to further their company standing.
Therefore they will have been compliance tested. Perhaps this is what
Castle and Simtec should have done.

If you have evidence that Microsoft has in any way flouted it's position
within the USBIF by altering their code then you could always drop a
line to admin@xxxxxxx .

> Or, to put it another way: if you were releasing a piece of USB hardware,
> would you do so knowing it didn't work with Windows?

If I were releasing USB hardware I would make sure it complied with the
USB spec to increase my sales potential. ;-)

--
Greg Harris (Norwich)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Guillermitos Particles
    ... > lose access to the hardware. ... you could do this yourself in dos. ... You said it was a USB device, ... I have a strong aversion to booting to Windows ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Unknown USB Device
    ... I have a Gateway 710X running Windows XP Home Edition which has been ... The drive had been connected to the USB port for a long time without ... Found New Hardware: Unknown Device ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Unknown USB Device
    ... I have a Gateway 710X running Windows XP Home Edition which has been ... The drive had been connected to the USB port for a long time without ... Found New Hardware: Unknown Device ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: CE Development Time
    ... hardware, it will take months to generate one yourself. ... interrupts doesn't interfere with the display or logging operations. ... Then comes the effort to get the data from your USB device. ... you'll have to find or write a driver for it that Windows CE can use. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsce.platbuilder)
  • Re: USB-2, NTFS, Audio, Reliability
    ... I've worked for several years as a Windows server tech, and routinely use NTFS on USB storage devices. ... I do generally have a pretty good opinion of NTFS for robustness, but I don't believe it checksums the contents of the file, so I guess a problem down at the level of USB block transfer could go undetected. ... Another thing would be to make checksums of the file before they were copied onto the USB device, giving you the ability to prove that a particular file is not being written or read from storage as it should be. ...
    (rec.audio.pro)