Two different software compatibility lists? huh??

[johnm]

I see (via a WinInfo newsletter) that Microsoft is releasing TWO
Vista-Compatible Logo Lists (for software compatibility)
(http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933305)

Oh OK, I get it now. There's the "Certified for Windows Vista" List, then
there's the "Works with Windows Vista" List.

<slapping my forehead> But of course!!
The first one pretty much guarantees it will work in Vista, while the second
only IMPLIES it will.

Hats off to the boys in marketing.
That oughta clear things up for consumers.

 

[Richard Urban]

Hold hammer in hand. Then slap forehead.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Jonathan Yaniv]

Hello,

You can try this list:
http://www.iexbeta.com/wiki/index.php?title=Windows_Vista_RTM_Software_Compatibility_List

--
Please comment about my performance about helping and/or resolving your
issue to Brian
Boston by emailing (e-mail address removed). If you could please nominate me
for Windows Vista MVP it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Jonathan Yaniv
Windows Live Butterfly Expert

 

[Mike Brannigan]

I see (via a WinInfo newsletter) that Microsoft is releasing TWO
Vista-Compatible Logo Lists (for software compatibility)
(http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933305)

Oh OK, I get it now. There's the "Certified for Windows Vista" List, then
there's the "Works with Windows Vista" List.

<slapping my forehead> But of course!!
The first one pretty much guarantees it will work in Vista, while the
second only IMPLIES it will.

Hats off to the boys in marketing.
That oughta clear things up for consumers.

I assume you did actually read the article where the distinction between
the two levels is stated.

The "Certified for Windows Vista" logo is a compatibility designation for
applications and devices that have passed a rigorous testing program on
computers that are running Windows Vista. The technical requirements for
this designation target four core areas: reliability, security,
compatibility with Windows Vista and future operating systems, and
installation and removal.

The "Works with Windows Vista" logo is a compatibility designation that is
designed to encourage Windows Vista compatibility for the current generation
of Windows-based applications. To receive this designation, software
companies test their applications to make sure that the applications meet
the program's guidelines.

So what is your actual problem with the differentiator between the two ??

 

[Richard Urban]

Jonathan,

You don't ask to be nominated as an MVP. After putting in your years of
helping others (you have been around for about 2 weeks), you may be noticed
and nominated. You strive to help others because you have the talent and
like doing so - for a long period of time. The recognition is for what you
have done in the "past" year, not the past weeks.

Keep coming back and assisting as you can.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Adam Albright]

I see (via a WinInfo newsletter) that Microsoft is releasing TWO
Vista-Compatible Logo Lists (for software compatibility)
(http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933305)

Oh OK, I get it now. There's the "Certified for Windows Vista" List, then
there's the "Works with Windows Vista" List.

Yep and believe it or not there is also a Vista compatible sticker, if
or not Microsoft has a list for that don't know. LOL!

1. Certified for Windows... my brand new high cost MB said so and it
won't do SATA in Vista unless I cripple the drives and have them
run as IDE drives.

2. Works with Windows Vista, so claimed by Nivida card, but still
don't have fully working drivers capable of supporting all the
3D and special effects features.

3. Vista compatible, well sort of, ut Easy Creator 9 causes a
driver incompatible error message every time you boot.

Got to love those clever marketing guys at Microsoft.

 

[Mikeb]

The big question is - is Vista Certified to work yet......

 

[johnm]

I assume you did actually read the article where the distinction between
the two levels is stated.

uhm....., yes I did. I could explain what my -actual- point was but I fear
it would get lost .. again.

The "Certified for Windows Vista" logo is a compatibility designation for
applications and devices that have passed a rigorous testing program on
computers that are running Windows Vista. The technical requirements for
this designation target four core areas: reliability, security,
compatibility with Windows Vista and future operating systems, and
installation and removal.

That last part has been a personal favorite of mine, and afaik been included
in every certification requirement since Win95.

The part about <drumroll> "....installation and removal.... "

Back in 95 this was explained to us that in order to become "certified" an
application had to, among other things, come with a proper, and WORKING
uninstall routine.

As anyone who has ever attempted to UNINSTALL a Windows application knows,
most leave behind garbage trails a mile wide - leftover files, entire
folders of now useless crap, spread across multiple locations, and let's not
forget the hundreds of lines of clutter that will forever bloat your
registry.

I even recall as a beta tester back then bringing this up to MS, and how it
seemed THEY were in fact the biggest offenders here. MS apps NEVER cleanly
uninstalled.
Even then it was a simple experiment that anyone could do, even without
registry knowledge.
Create a registry backup. Install Office. Uninstall Office. Make another
registry backup. Compare before & after. ...Oh my.

If MS doesn't follow their own criteria for certification, why should anyone
else, and in fact, do they? probably not.
Sorta raises a credibility question about the whole process don't ya think?
some rigorous testing program.

iow, Just more fodder from marketing - with no real world value.

 

[Richard Urban]

Works With Windows Vista = The application developer does the testing
himself. Now, seeing all the people who post here who think nothing of
cheating and stealing, I don't think it a stretch to believe that the apps
developer may just fudge a bit also to increase sales. He can worry about
any consequences at a later date after he has your money.

Certified For Windows Vista = The last step is that the application
developer must pick one of the authorized testing services recommended by
Microsoft, send them the application and have the application be certified.
Likely to be a true picture as to whether, or not, the application will fly
with Vista.

That's a hell of a difference between the two Logo's.

And, with either of the methods above, you will still have problems using
different hardware combinations. They can't test them all.


Read about them here!

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/InnovateOnWindowsVista/Default.aspx?LangType=4105



--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[johnm]

I assume you did actually read the article where the distinction between
the two levels is stated.

uhm....., yes I did. I could explain what my -actual- point was but I fear
it would get lost .. again.

The "Certified for Windows Vista" logo is a compatibility designation for
applications and devices that have passed a rigorous testing program on
computers that are running Windows Vista. The technical requirements for
this designation target four core areas: reliability, security,
compatibility with Windows Vista and future operating systems, and
installation and removal.

That last part has been a personal favorite of mine, and afaik been included
in every certification requirement since Win95.

The part about <drumroll> "....installation and removal.... "

Back in 95 this was explained to us that in order to become "certified" an
application had to, among other things, come with a proper, and WORKING
uninstall routine.

As anyone who has ever attempted to UNINSTALL a Windows application knows,
most leave behind garbage trails a mile wide - leftover files, entire
folders of now useless crap, spread across multiple locations, and let's not
forget the hundreds of lines of clutter that will forever bloat your
registry.

I even recall as a beta tester back then bringing this up to MS, and how it
seemed THEY were in fact the biggest offenders here. MS apps NEVER cleanly
uninstalled.
Even then it was a simple experiment that anyone could do, even without
registry knowledge.
Create a registry backup. Install Office. Uninstall Office. Make another
registry backup. Compare before & after. ...Oh my.

If MS doesn't follow their own criteria for certification, why should anyone
else, and in fact, do they? probably not.
Sorta raises a credibility question about the whole process don't ya think?
some rigorous testing program.

iow, Just more fodder from marketing - with no real world value.