Attestation signed driver installable on older Windows Versions? ( 7? )

NTDEV
21

You’re very argumentative, are you not, Mr. Rourke?

WHQL is a process to satisfy driver signing requirements.

Nope. WHQL is a process to increase overall system compatibility among individual hardware components and their drivers, and to ensure consistency of user experience. WHQL existed before KMCS existed.

Attestation adding 20 minutes to turning a driver build and you think that’s no big deal?

Yes, I think that’s no big deal. It added 20 minutes to the 6+ month process of bringing out a release of a complex product. I call that immeasurably small, and akin to whether or not I stopped to get coffee on my way back to my office from the lab.

Every driver signing topic that comes up that you waste time on pushes out every future product you will ever make.

Dude, you really need to relax more. That’s just plain silly, and you know it. I don’t answer questions on driver signing (or WDF Queues, or Message Signaled Interrupts for that matter) when I would otherwise be developing code. Right now, I’m eating breakfast and watching the sports wrap-up from the previous day (my teams all did well, so I’m happy enough to deal with your rant).

Driver signing can actually sink the development of a product at legitimate organizations

Puuuulllllleeeeeezzzz. If driver signing actually sinks the development of a product at a legit org, that org needs to go out of business, because their engineering and their management are too lame to exist. Darwin at work.

Our company has certainly been approached, dozens of times, by engineering teams that have been stressing out over Driver signing and been actively trying to figure it our for days or weeks. We can usually get them “fixed” in a few minutes, and they’re on their way… no cost to them, and we generate positive karma and some good will. 8 out of 10 of these can be “fixed” just be pointing them to my blog, which they should have been reading in any case :wink:

Again, the primary issue around singing… 90% of the issues that we encounter with clients and here on the Community… has to do with MSFT’s lack of communication. If somebody at MSFT would just maintain a series of blog posts on “driver signing this month” that explains what needs done, life would be easier for a lot more folks. Fortunately for our clients, tracking what’s up a MSFT is part of what we do, so we can provide that information for them.

I’m happy to continue the debate, Mr. Rourke, but would you please do me a favor and turn the volume down just a bit? We’re not discussing global warming or nuclear proliferation here, you know? Driver signing isn’t exactly the cataclysmic event threatening the existence of humanity that the tenor of your argument makes it to be.

Peter

22

Nope. WHQL is a process to increase overall system compatibility among individual hardware components and their drivers, and to ensure consistency of user experience. WHQL existed before KMCS existed.

Of course your statement is 100% true. But my statement is also 100% true: “WHQL is a process to satisfy driver signing requirements”. I don’t get why this statement is so controversial and objection worthy that you go off on some sort of mission statement. My statement is simply discussing a relevant aspect of WHQL and that should be clear enough to the reader without needing to jump up and down saying you disagree with everything I say.

If driver signing actually sinks the development of a product at a legit org, that org needs to go out of business
…Our company has certainly been approached, dozens of times

It is puzzling to hear you balk at this notion then go on to say you’ve already been approached dozens of times to save products stuck on signing issues. And you even acknowledge that all the great information on your forum and blogs (and I really do mean that and thank you for that) aren’t always enough. Other consultants have similar stories to tell of companies in trouble with signing and the numbers are sky high. And you say they can be spending days or weeks on it yet then insist time to market never suffers. It’s also important to understand someone in your position won’t as likely hear from the companies that failed and why. When you toss out a statement into the ether that they just deserve to go out of business it’s like just blaming the pilot without stepping back to understand how the design of the aircraft factored into an accident and how it could be improved.

I can’t see anything I have written that is controversial or incorrect. It seems to be you that gets touchy anytime someone is not cheering for decisions made in redmond and I don’t understand that. I bring a voice for the lowly end users and the small developers and I think these are both very important groups, especially the end user. The decisions redmond is making are often very painful to these groups and I think it is important to bring awareness to these issues.