Why Windows 7 may still fail

I went through this a year ago with Windows XP home. I rented a villa that came with an HP printer. I connected it to Windows XP, had to search the web for a driver package and downloaded about 38MB, much of which was HP crap that tried to find and manage all of my photos. It took over thirty minutes to delete all the HP crapware. I then plugged the printer into my Mac. Without my hitting a keystroke, the Mac came back and said a new printer was online and available. RCharles

Not only cost... In proper way of using system resources. See windows vista... even if we have 3gb of ram, core2 duo processor is not enough for windows vista... Hope Microsoft will rectify this problem other wise no use of windows seven also.

You wrote an article on how the entire Window 7 operating system could fail because you couldn't get your printer to install? You're Fired. - Your Boss.

Interesting that you chose to blame Microsoft for this rather than HP. Surely you know that MS doesn't write any drivers for HP products, and that the only drivers in the base OS or on Microsoft Update are those provided by the hardware manufacturers? IMO this is a not-so-subtle hint from HP that you should replace your printer - I'd bet money they have awesome Win7 drivers available for every currently shipping product. Based on my results for my own HP printers, I'd say they're going to provide minimal Win7 support for Vista-era and earlier products. Sad, but hardly anything to criticize Microsoft for. I'd like to vote with my dollars, but unfortunately I don't think the other manufacturers are any better in this regard than HP.

I'm confused.

You took a product made by Microsoft and then proceeded to install a product made by HP. You found that the HP drivers were not available via the MS download option. You then blame Microsoft for this issue.

After finding out this information, you proceed to HP's site and download the drivers there which work. Probably took you 10 minutes total. You then proceed to write an entire article on this bashing Microsoft.

I think your expectations are out of line. I cannot agree with your reasoning here...and did you follow up with HP to ask them why their drivers were not online at the MS site? Nope...just diarrhea journalism. No research whatsoever. Must have taken you 30 minutes tops to write this article.

By the title I was expecting some big news on Windows 7. This weak article only exposes the weakness of HP and questions why they didn't submit the driver to be included. I really get tired of those that bash Microsoft because someone else's driver isn't included. That is hardly Microsoft's fault. I have often run into drivers that aren't included and you have to register on their website (with a valid E-mail address)and download a bunch of crap you don't want to get the driver. Sorry, but this isn't a Microsoft issue.

RCK is complaining Windows 7 couldn't find the HP printer driver... Big deal! So I persume XP, Vista and even Snow Leopard would be any better finding driver for him? (ya good luck!) Granted, HP's website is terrible for finding drivers and so on, but blaming Microsoft for HP didn't submit the updated driver to Windows Update? Wow that's the new low.

Wow, I think this guy gets paid to do nothing all day. MS covers a lot of drivers. Everything I have MS has there are reason why they don't have may HP drivers. mainly why I don't own many HP but out of all my hardware I think I went to the site like 10 times. As for you complaining about the huge install, you know you can just get the drives and not do the install, Right? Because I never install HP software I just extract the driver part.

I'm not sure it's MS's problem (for a change), nor is it really HP's problem. Of course HP would like you to buy a new printer, but I still can get information for some really old HP printers from their website, e.g., my old HP DeskWriter circa 1990. And there was a recent update to the Mac OS X driver of my old LaserJet 6 MP. HP is way ahead of Epson here.
You can't expect everything in one package, if only because things change and hopefully improve. HP products tend to have greater longevity, utility and support than Microsoft's products, to be quite honest, although their scanning components could do with some improvement. If you are going to produce products that last, as HP traditionally did, you need to provide driver support in a rapidly changing environment. It would seem to be more in HP's interest than MS's to do this for HP products.

There are two issues regarding Windows 7 that I don't think have been addressed. Vista was such a disaster that consumers have learned that newer is not always better. Consumers are asking if they can get Windows XP on computers before they buy them, even today. The consumer resistance to Windows 7 will not be small. Sure, the guys who have to be first, who've already installed the RC, will buy it, but how many of those are there? You can see this in Mac sales. What used to be reserved for desktop publishing and artists is now considered a "kewl" alternative for anyone. That's the damage that Vista did to Microsoft's reputation in the marketplace. Even if Windows 7 delivers on the hype, the alternatives (Linux and Macs, primarily) will not decline. Consumers have learned that Windows is not the only viable choice. The second issue is software compatibility. There are legacy programs out there that simply will not work with the Vista graphics model. I doubt that Win 7 has addressed those issues.

I'm surprised you would even attempt to use an HP printer with all the bloatware they attach to their printer drivers. Give Win 7 a couple of months and you will find a compatable driver without the crap attached. In the meantime, buy a Canon.

This is definitely a HP issue not a windows issue. Even on Win XP installing a HP driver installs all sort of other rubbish which added 2 minutes to my PC's startup time if the printer wasn't switched on as every PC startup had it searching for the printer. Then when you went to print if the printer was not on at startup it couldn't find it so you had to restart the computer. After this experience I will never buy HP again.

Like some of the other other commenters though I have to wonder what the hell Randall does all day if all he seems to do is produce a couple of paragraphs of poorly researched crap every few days. He gets an A+ though for his constant baiting titles. If infoworld put the writers name with the headline I would never click through.

FORECAST FOR WINDOWS-- PARTLY CLOUDY

Microsoft-- eerily enough-- is edging toward the cloud in support of its operating system.

Advantages for Redmond? Microsoft still has the keys to the gate, and plans to charge admission to this circus.

Kennedy is right about one Achilles heel to Windows 7-- convenient, reliable web access. This only proves the aphorism about always needing a Windows computer to fix another Windows computer.

And coupled with more fuss about drivers, this will rob Windows of its relative superiority with hardware supporf.

Rivals are waiting to exploit the prospective weakness of Windows, among them the better-crafted versions of Linux.

As well as the OS that inspired Windows, the Apple GUI.

Apple, we must note, has not gone out of its way to offend prospective buyers with steep price tags and/or heavier hardware requirements. Apple charges as little as $29 to add the latest Apple OS, "Snow Leopard", with the purchase of an Apple system.

Is this a great country, or what?

One should remember that Microsoft has had a close relationship with Compaq, and now HP, for the longest time. Almost every picture of an MS office I have ever seen had a Compaq (and now an HP) on the desk. So one might logically expect MS to have HP drivers on its site. No matter how you feel about MS.

Here's where knowledge and contradiction meet. "I consider myself to be a fairly savvy user. I've worked with Windows in various forms since the early 1980s, beginning with version 1.03." So as many of the users have already stated, since windows didn't pickup your HP device, your "savvy"-ness instinctively decided that it was an MS issue because MS didn't provide a driver? Is that what I'm reading? So i'm guessing that if I buy a new device I shouldn't worry about the vendor providing a driver for it, because I can take your example and gripe to MS for not already having written drivers for it. Better yet with your example I can complain to any an all OS's for not writing drivers to support my device needs.

Wow. Slow news day. As others have stated, your article confuses me. You state - "I was forced to waste valuable time scouring HP's Web site looking for what turned out to be an oversized installation package (40MB for a printer driver?) that took forever to install and added even more crapware to my already sluggish netbook." Interesting - you had to go to hp.com, click on download software and drivers, enter your printer model, select your OS, Download the driver. Wow, that is complex! You also selected the full install package rather than just the driver? This confuses me because you also state - "I consider myself to be a fairly savvy user. I've worked with Windows in various forms since the early 1980s, beginning with version 1.03. Downloading and installing a cumbersome printer driver package isn't a big deal for me." So which is it? Did you really scour the HP site? Or, are you really a savy user? The HP printer installation routines I have run have allways allowed you to only install the driver. Further more there are also driver only downloads on the same page you got your full install from. Read much?

Title: Why Windows 7 May Still Fail "valuable time scouring HP's Web site looking for what turned out to be an oversized installation package (40MB for a printer driver?) that took forever to install and added even more crapware" Really? Is this why Windows 7 may still fail? Well, I better look at a Mac or PC with Linux. That will be way better. I actually find the HP site very easy to navigate and find the drivers not found in Windows Update. It probably wasn't there because HP chose not to provide an updated driver for Vista or Windows 7. The crpaware you are referring to is HP crapware that you got because you chose the wrong installation package. Even if choosing the right package from HP is not intuitive, it is still no short coming of Windows 7, Windows Update or MS.

Quote from Shamunda - As for OS X sure it's viable to go that route, but I don't pay into the hype about it's "better" etc..etc.. "Better" is a subjective term. Rubbish Shamunda! "Better" can be quantitatively measured with something like an Operating Systems, where you can run quantitative tests, with numbers and output. "Better" may be subjective when you're rating a person's looks, but not an OS.

And I'll tell you why Mac OS X is generally better than Windows...because of it's foundation building blocks...UNIX. I'm an IT professional whose worked on multi-million dollar projects for a decade, around the world and nothing comes close to the robust, secure and stable inner workings of UNIX and all its derivatives, including Mac OS X.

Huge to small companies rely on the up-time of the UNIX OS and it's pure performance and stability. Serious companies know what technology their platforms need to run on. The code is clean and smart. You get what you pay for. People are still using their Mac G4's till this day, that's the quality you get from Apple. I bought my Mac Book Pro in 2007 and have not re-imaged it yet. It runs almost like the day I bought it. I don't think I'll need to re-image this for another year or so.

Having said all that, Windows still has a place, we do need competition. But what we don't need is the ruthless attitude and tactics of MS to still create a monopoly...it's disgusting. Oh, and don't relay on your 'MSCE' (or whatever) qualifications for ever...in a few years you may need to know UNIX ;-).

Well you could have always extracted the drivers from the exe. If you're a fairly savvy user you should know how to do that. For those that don't. In 80% of all cases you can use a program called 7z(7zip) to 'extract to a destination' then get the 2-6mb drivers out of it, leaving the crapware behind. In the case where it's in a compressed exe you may need to type something like this in the runbox "drive:\path\name.exe /e(or/x): drive:\extractpath\" it varies, find out what installer it is and google it.

I don't even understand this article. How is this any different than when my Snow Leopard install can't find a driver? Or my Red Hat server? I'm serious. I don't understand this post at all. Could you respond please?