Microsoft, what a bunch of tossers.
-
sounds to me like its a red herring, my guess is that something is going titsup and not being caught and bounces up the stack until its caught by the catch with that error I had this when it turned out the installation couldn't cope with a certain piece of hardware (in that case it was a USB controller that had been changed on later motherboards that wasn't mentioned in the spec) completely MS fault they should prevent any hardware changes as Apple does but that was just that time so don't think I am saying that's the cause in your case
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Could be, but the big clue is that when the coinstaller is not on the system, it installs OK, so its as iff the existence of a coinstaller is automatically seen as a UI component and blocked. Of course the driver itself could read and write the registry settings, its trivial enough, but the 1st rule of kernel coding is put as much in user mode as you can because its cheaper, so that's where I put it. Of course the client could just run 'devcon upgrade nnn.inf VID_xxx' every thime it fucks up, but its not very user friendly. (Or the app could do it if the COM port wasn't there). Anyway, best if NCR find out what it is, their is the only machine this happens on, after 10 plus years of general usage.
-
You are the tosser. You should use Linux where everything is throughly documented. :rolleyes:
Yeah, it reminds me why I switched to Linux kernel programming, you really can do anything you like. Windows is such a black box, and MSFT such a crap company to deal with.
-
Yeah, it reminds me why I switched to Linux kernel programming, you really can do anything you like. Windows is such a black box, and MSFT such a crap company to deal with.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yeah, it reminds me why I switched to Linux kernel programming, you really can do anything you like.
Then why do you use MSFT?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Windows is such a black box, and MSFT such a crap company to deal with.
I must ask again why do you use MSFT? X|
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yeah, it reminds me why I switched to Linux kernel programming, you really can do anything you like.
Then why do you use MSFT?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Windows is such a black box, and MSFT such a crap company to deal with.
I must ask again why do you use MSFT? X|
Mathew Fatman wrote:
Then why do you use MSFT?
Its not me, its the client, they are using XP as their OS.
Mathew Fatman wrote:
I must ask again why do you use MSFT?
For kernel engineering it also pays very well. :)
-
Mathew Fatman wrote:
Then why do you use MSFT?
Its not me, its the client, they are using XP as their OS.
Mathew Fatman wrote:
I must ask again why do you use MSFT?
For kernel engineering it also pays very well. :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Mathew Fatman wrote:
I must ask again why do you use MSFT?
For kernel engineering it also pays very well.
If you sell out you don't get to complain. :doh:
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Mathew Fatman wrote:
I must ask again why do you use MSFT?
For kernel engineering it also pays very well.
If you sell out you don't get to complain. :doh:
Mathew Fatman wrote:
If you sell out you don't get to complain
Bollocks. :)
-
Mathew Fatman wrote:
If you sell out you don't get to complain
Bollocks. :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Mathew Fatman wrote:
If you sell out you don't get to complain
Bollocks. :)
Complain all you want but you don't have any credibility when you're a sellout. :laugh:
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Mathew Fatman wrote:
If you sell out you don't get to complain
Bollocks. :)
Complain all you want but you don't have any credibility when you're a sellout. :laugh:
Nah, you have it wrong, I am just a cynic, not a sell out. And a realist.
-
Nah, you have it wrong, I am just a cynic, not a sell out. And a realist.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Nah, you have it wrong, I am just a cynic, not a sell out. And a realist.
Not to be too cynical but you sound just like the people you criticized in the past for working with MSFT. :laugh: Funny how we become defensive when we sell out for a pay check.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Nah, you have it wrong, I am just a cynic, not a sell out. And a realist.
Not to be too cynical but you sound just like the people you criticized in the past for working with MSFT. :laugh: Funny how we become defensive when we sell out for a pay check.
Mathew Fatman wrote:
you sound just like the people you criticized in the past for working with MSFT
Except that I act professionally, always providing information when needed, helping out, trying my best to make the product work.
-
Mathew Fatman wrote:
you sound just like the people you criticized in the past for working with MSFT
Except that I act professionally, always providing information when needed, helping out, trying my best to make the product work.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
I act professionally, always providing information when needed, helping out, trying my best to make the product work.
:zzz:
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
I act professionally, always providing information when needed, helping out, trying my best to make the product work.
:zzz:
Unlike MSFT who arrogantly sling out crap and couldn't care less how well it works.
-
Unlike MSFT who arrogantly sling out crap and couldn't care less how well it works.
You really are boring. You think they give a toss what you think? Or for that matter do I?
-
You really are boring. You think they give a toss what you think? Or for that matter do I?
Look pal whats your fucking problem? Nothing but personal attacks this thread. Got something to say to me or are you always like this?
-
Look pal whats your fucking problem? Nothing but personal attacks this thread. Got something to say to me or are you always like this?
You really think you have pals? Then again in your delusions your a hero in your own mind.
-
You really think you have pals? Then again in your delusions your a hero in your own mind.
Yeah, a jerk, as I thought.
-
Yeah, a jerk, as I thought.
Just a script out of the fat boyz play book.