If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
pjp wrote:
I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
On 13/07/2018 07:48, VanguardLH wrote:
pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. I think Microsoft writes some drivers but not many. -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
Brian Gregory wrote:
On 13/07/2018 07:48, VanguardLH wrote: pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. I think Microsoft writes some drivers but not many. I suspect the only "drivers" that Microsoft writes are the INF files to define classes of generic devices (i.e., their miniport drivers). https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/win...d-driver-pairs This was the same idea as when Microsoft provided DirectX, so game authors would have a consistent interface to which they could code instead of each author having to design from scratch. In some cases, all that is needed is the INF "driver", like for mass storage devices (e.g., hard disks). There have been problems in the past with hardware vendors doling out a driver to Windows and then finding their driver has a flaw. I remember when Promise (probably for a SCSI controller) pushed out a driver to Microsoft, found it had a flaw that caused data loss, and tried to yank it within the same week; however, they couldn't get Microsoft to pull the driver for something like 3 months. For the corrected driver, you had to use the newest one at Promise's site. I've had Windows Update try to push a driver that was for a different model within the same family of products from a vendor. For example, a Winmodem had 3 different versions (A, B, C) for the same model and I needed the driver for the C model, not the earlier ones. But WU wanted to push a driver for the earlier versions. If I used the old drivers, most of the Winmodem would work but a couple features would've been lost. Although it was "just" a version change, the board vendor had changed which chip was on the PCB so a new driver was required to fully support it. I *never* get driver updates via Windows Update. Their detection scheme won't catch the problem with the wrong driver as mentioned above for the Winmodem and the hardware vendor might already have a newer, improved, or fixed version of their driver, so using an old one could result in loss of function, or worse loss of data. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
pjp wrote:
In article , says... Brian Gregory wrote: On 13/07/2018 07:48, VanguardLH wrote: pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. I think Microsoft writes some drivers but not many. I suspect the only "drivers" that Microsoft writes are the INF files to define classes of generic devices (i.e., their miniport drivers). https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/win...d-driver-pairs This was the same idea as when Microsoft provided DirectX, so game authors would have a consistent interface to which they could code instead of each author having to design from scratch. In some cases, all that is needed is the INF "driver", like for mass storage devices (e.g., hard disks). There have been problems in the past with hardware vendors doling out a driver to Windows and then finding their driver has a flaw. I remember when Promise (probably for a SCSI controller) pushed out a driver to Microsoft, found it had a flaw that caused data loss, and tried to yank it within the same week; however, they couldn't get Microsoft to pull the driver for something like 3 months. For the corrected driver, you had to use the newest one at Promise's site. I've had Windows Update try to push a driver that was for a different model within the same family of products from a vendor. For example, a When there is no other driver Windows is only option. The Webcam is that old Cameras are split into two groups. The older cameras didn't follow a standard. Newer cameras are UVC (USB Video Class) compatible. They work up to about 960*??? or so. If you want a higher resolution choice, or custom features (pan/tilt/zoom), then a custom driver is needed for the extra features. The camera consists of two parts. A CMOS or CCD sensor with a glass top. And a "digital bus" to USB packet chip to get to the computer. Even if you detected the conversion chip via its plug and play information, that doesn't tell you what sensor is being used. If, on the other hand, the conversion chip accepts an SPD chip off to the side, then a custom declaration can be used to state what camera it is. And then PNP could be used to track down a driver. Now, if you went to the Linux side, you might find source code for basic operation. You might even be able to track down a jumbo Windows driver, based on what you discover using the enumeration. A tool like Uwes USBTreeView can be used for this purpose. https://www.uwe-sieber.de/usbtreeview_e.html Using the info from USBTreeView, you can look up the device here. For example, your webcam could be a Sonix non-UVC camera. http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids 0c45 Microdia 62c0 Sonix USB 2.0 Camera Then you'd head off to Linux land, and see what materials they used to make the FOSS driver for the thing. Note that a few of the Chinese sites hosting a driver for a Sonix, may harbor malware, so be careful. You can use Virustotal.com to attempt a scan of a downloader site like that. Some camera I was working on here, had me searching in places like that. Because a lot of these "$5 dental cameras", there's *no* fancy website to get driver materials. You're left to collect floor sweepings to make your new purchase work. That's one reason why vanilla UVC is a useful option. Even if you cannot "Skype" at 1920x1080, a UVC with 640x480 mode may be sufficient for a connection. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
On 14/07/2018 20:04, VanguardLH wrote:
Brian Gregory wrote: On 13/07/2018 07:48, VanguardLH wrote: pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. I think Microsoft writes some drivers but not many. I suspect the only "drivers" that Microsoft writes are the INF files to define classes of generic devices (i.e., their miniport drivers). No there are actual drivers written by Microsoft. I use Microsoft drivers for the SATA ports on my Intel Z87 chipset based motherboard because I find them more reliable and compatible than the Intel "rapid storage" drivers. -- Brian Gregory (in England). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
Brian Gregory wrote:
On 13/07/2018 07:48, VanguardLH wrote: pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Probably because the last driver provided by Creative (Microsoft doesn't write the drivers, they just included them in later versions of Windows) was a 32-bit driver. Unless Creative created a 64-bit driver, there isn't one for Microsoft to bundle with a later version of Windows. I think Microsoft writes some drivers but not many. Microsoft writes "Class" drivers, which take into account the "quirks" of various commercial offerings. There would be Class drivers for USB2 and USB3 and Firewire. USBStor or UASPStor would be examples of layers above the physical layer. I couldn't tell you whether Bluetooth has sufficient standards to have a "standard register set" on a dongle, so a single driver can handle all of them. USB has class declarations so the device can be declared as "Custom", and then nobody but the device manufacturer can offer a driver. As only they know what functions the registers perform. Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
pjp wrote:
I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Are these on the catalog server ? https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
In article , lid says...
pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Are these on the catalog server ? https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx Paul Appear to be, least Broadcom Bluetooth shows up as both 32 % 64 bit versions. I'll try again as perhaps it was simply a network connection issue. I have the driver to install 64 bit but hopefully it's not needed. Biggest issue is I have no bluetooth device to check it works, dongle kinda just fell into lap so to speak. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
pjp wrote:
In article , lid says... pjp wrote: I have an old Creative Webcam Gen3. Under XP it required a driver and that's the last one available. Driver is very old, basically unuasable in todays OS's. As a curiousity I plugged it into a couple of Win7 32 bit pcs and they all saw the camera, downloaded a driver and it was seen as a Windows Imaging Device and it worked. Under 64 bit Win7 it can't locate a driver!!! Same thing happened in last 24 hours, 64 bit Windows with a bluetooth dongle and it's go looking yourself. 32 bit downloads a driver that appears to work properly. Is this a common occurence? Are these on the catalog server ? https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx Paul Appear to be, least Broadcom Bluetooth shows up as both 32 % 64 bit versions. I'll try again as perhaps it was simply a network connection issue. I have the driver to install 64 bit but hopefully it's not needed. Biggest issue is I have no bluetooth device to check it works, dongle kinda just fell into lap so to speak. With two dongles, in theory you can do a piconet (Internet Connection Sharing). When I did an experiment here, I think I managed to get one or two ping packets through two dongles, before the connection died. Windows 10 didn't seem to be prepared in any way, for a user to want a Bluetooth piconet. The datarate would be about as fast as one of the old dialup modems. Not exactly screaming fast. Finding a Bluetooth peripheral, if you're not a Bluetooth person, might well be more difficult. I couldn't find anything here to buy, that didn't look like pure rubbish. So like you, I can't test the "high runner case" (A2DP). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tooth_profiles One of the problems I have with the stores here now, is there's nothing in stock for an "impulse buy". It looks like the stores, when they want to go bankrupt, will have a "very small clearance sale". Even a year ago, things looked a little bit better. Now all the stores just want to run mail order outfits. Where is the service differentiation ? If they want my business, how will they demonstrate superior attributes to customers ? Paul |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
In message , pjp
writes: [] Biggest issue is I have no bluetooth device to check it works, dongle kinda just fell into lap so to speak. Do you have a fobile moan? They mostly have Bluetooth these days, I think, so might be usable to test your adapter. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Never make the same mistake twice...there are so many new ones to make! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
pjp wrote:
In article , says... In message , pjp writes: [] Biggest issue is I have no bluetooth device to check it works, dongle kinda just fell into lap so to speak. Do you have a fobile moan? They mostly have Bluetooth these days, I think, so might be usable to test your adapter. Never heard the term "fobile moan". It's "meaning"? The juxtaposition of phonemes ? mobile phone mobile fone fobile moan luaP |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New Device detection, 32 vs 64 bit
On Sat, 14 Jul 2018 02:00:12 -0300, pjp wrote:
In article , says... [...] Do you have a fobile moan? They mostly have Bluetooth these days, I think, so might be usable to test your adapter. Never heard the term "fobile moan". It's "meaning"? spoonerism (plural spoonerisms) A play on words on a phrase in which the initial (usually consonantal) sounds of two or more of the main words are transposed. REF: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spoonerism -- Kind regards Ralph |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|