rodney_ws :
Nor is it the fault of the hardware manufacturers that Microsoft changed its driver model so completely with the introduction of Vista.
rodney, I agree with you for the most part in all your comments but here I have to disagree. Partially because I see this statement all to often and it bugs me. Bear with me for a second.
You know, even in the early days of Linux I remember everyone (technical enough) oohing and ahing about how it was a system written the right way, etc. Which I can't dispute. It was also super slow at anything graphical, 'cause Unix was never designed to handle GUI. Over time, of course, it evolved, to what it is today, but still less than perfect from the standardization perspective (actually, compiling the system and configuring it custom for users is counter-standardization in the sentiment, really).
Windows has always taken a different approach - they gave you the low level access to the hardware you will never have in a proper Unix clone, and that gave us performance at the cost of proper system design.
Now that we have evolved to where you can add a level of abstraction between the driver and hardware and still get decent performance, the complaints that driver crashes should not crash the system became very addressable, and, frankly, should have been addressed. Which MS did. And I, personally, applaud them for it. I have always said that Vista is a much more soundly designed OS, as far as OS design theory is concerned (if only we could get multiple file system support, it'd practically be a sound Unix alternative). So for that matter everyone who says that Vista is no different than XP is very wrong. Under the hood it is way ahead.
So humor me this. How is it that the same people that for years screamed about the inadequacies of Windows as an OS - first it was coop multitasking which is not truly multitasking (improved in XP and even more in Vista), security (greatly improved with Vista to where the kernel finally runs on a separate higher privilege level), better file systems (NTFS is at least somewhat feature-rich), etc., and now finally a driver model that does not crash the system in the event of the driver failure - are now complaining that these changes have been made? It is really weird to me.
Now, about the driver model. I am fairly confident that partners were involved in the design of the driver model, as well. At the very least, they knew about it way before the system went gold, and so it is difficult for me to assign blame to anyone but the IHVs.
And it is, at the very least, difficult to blame MS for doing the right thing. It wasn’t change for no other purpose other than change, it was actually good.
Anyway...