Windows Drivers, or Manufacturer's Drivers?

In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a valid
generalization?

For instance, if I purchase a new wireless card, or a new printer, should
I just plug it into my pc, and let Windows install it's own driver? Is
the Windows supplied driver created by the manufacturer and handed off to
Microsoft, or is it a Windows created driver? I do understand that
Windows doesn't include user applications for devices, such as control
panels.

I've read device reviews on Amazon and Newegg, where buyers/users have
reported to use the manufacturer's driver, and others have reported to
use the Windows driver.

I'm asking because I've done it both ways in the past without problems,
and I now want to install a three year old Canon scanner. The scanner
was manufactured pre-Windows 7, but post Windows Vista. Years ago, I did
use the manufacturer's driver from the CD, and successfully installed it
on a Vista laptop. This same laptop now has a clean install of Windows 7
HP 64-bit. I could go to the Canon site where there is a Windows 7 64-
bit driver (no firmware update), or I could just let Windows update
install the scanner driver.

What's the story?

TIA

Boris wrote:

> I've read device reviews on Amazon and Newegg, where buyers/users have
> reported to use the manufacturer's driver, and others have reported to
> use the Windows driver.

It varies, the easiest generalisation is to use whatever works ...

If Microsoft provides a driver I tend to use that, unless it doesn't
work fully. These drivers often get updates for major problems via
Windows Update.

If that doesn't work, I prefer drivers from the chipset or device
manufacurer, you'll need to keep an eye out for updates yourself though,
you may not need all updates unless you're actually seeing the problems
they do fix, but updates for more minor issues may be released by the
manufacturer than through Microsoft.

I least prefer drivers from the system manufacturer (Dell, HP, etc) as
those tend to be more bloated with apps and not to be the latest versions.

On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 04:51:33 +0000 (UTC), Boris wrote:
> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a
> valid generalization?

I would say "sort of". I don't get new hardware frequently, but when
I do I let Windows install its own driver (if it has one). Only if
Windows has no driver, or if there seem to be problems with the
Windows driver, do I install the manufacturer's driver.

For example, over the past few years I've had three USB external hard
drives. All three come with their own drivers. One of them is still
in the box, but the other two have worked just fine with Windows' own
drivers, so I've seen no need to install the manufacturers' drivers.

OTOH, to get my laptop's trackpad working properly I had to download
and install Dell's driver. Why Dell didn't include its own driver on
its own computer as shipped is just one of those little mysteries.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:21:27 -0500, Stan Brown
<> wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 04:51:33 +0000 (UTC), Boris wrote:
>> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
>> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a
>> valid generalization?
>
>I would say "sort of". I don't get new hardware frequently, but when
>I do I let Windows install its own driver (if it has one). Only if
>Windows has no driver, or if there seem to be problems with the
>Windows driver, do I install the manufacturer's driver.
>
>For example, over the past few years I've had three USB external hard
>drives. All three come with their own drivers. One of them is still
>in the box, but the other two have worked just fine with Windows' own
>drivers, so I've seen no need to install the manufacturers' drivers.
>
>OTOH, to get my laptop's trackpad working properly I had to download
>and install Dell's driver. Why Dell didn't include its own driver on
>its own computer as shipped is just one of those little mysteries.

I have an old Canon scanner, model 4400F, which I believe goes back to
the XP days. I am now running Windows 7 Home Premium, 64 bit and
installed the drivers from Canon's web site. They work well and I've
had no problems using the scanner on my 64 bit setup.

I seriously doubt that Microsoft would pay software engineers to write
drivers when these drivers are already available. I suspect they adapt
the existing drivers to their software rather than start from scratch.

In article <Xns9FB0D422E961Bnospamnospaminvalid@46.4.102.18>,
d says...
>
> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a valid
> generalization?

One issue is if it's truely a DRIVER, or just some control software and
other spam to suck up memory and CPU.

Another poster mentioned drivers for some external drives, but that
would most likely only be encryption drivers and software. If you want
to just use the drives basically, you don't need anything.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.comcast.net/~andyross

On 12/4/2011 8:29 AM, Andrew Rossmann wrote:
> In article<Xns9FB0D422E961Bnospamnospaminvalid@46.4.102.18>,
> d says...
>>
>> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
>> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a valid
>> generalization?
>
> One issue is if it's truely a DRIVER, or just some control software and
> other spam to suck up memory and CPU.
>
> Another poster mentioned drivers for some external drives, but that
> would most likely only be encryption drivers and software. If you want
> to just use the drives basically, you don't need anything.
>

There is no easy/simple answer to the MS vs. Mfrs drivers question.
Scanners and cameras are perhaps the worst category to deal with.
MS has it's own support built in windows. The Mfrs software, often a re
do of earlier stuff, may or may not integrate properly.

Multifunction print/scan/copy/fax devices are one of the areas that seem
to be/have been the most problematic. Several Epson networkable
multifunctions that i've used have built in windows support, and also
mfr' support. I was able to get both windows built in support and the
Epson support packages to co-exist, more or less, as long as you don't
try changing from one to the other in the middle of a session. Viewscan
added another variable, and is also usable over a network connection.

Actually, there were/are several different schemes that might be involved.
Mfr's unique solutions
Twain - Scanners
Microsoft's Windows support
A third party program, such as Viewscan from Hamrick software.

Another possible area of angst involves laptops, display drivers, non
standard keyboards, touch pads, and other things somewhat unique to
laptops.

On 12/03/2011 09:51 PM, Boris wrote:
> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a valid
> generalization?
>
> For instance, if I purchase a new wireless card, or a new printer, should
> I just plug it into my pc, and let Windows install it's own driver? Is
> the Windows supplied driver created by the manufacturer and handed off to
> Microsoft, or is it a Windows created driver? I do understand that
> Windows doesn't include user applications for devices, such as control
> panels.
>
> I've read device reviews on Amazon and Newegg, where buyers/users have
> reported to use the manufacturer's driver, and others have reported to
> use the Windows driver.
>
> I'm asking because I've done it both ways in the past without problems,
> and I now want to install a three year old Canon scanner. The scanner
> was manufactured pre-Windows 7, but post Windows Vista. Years ago, I did
> use the manufacturer's driver from the CD, and successfully installed it
> on a Vista laptop. This same laptop now has a clean install of Windows 7
> HP 64-bit. I could go to the Canon site where there is a Windows 7 64-
> bit driver (no firmware update), or I could just let Windows update
> install the scanner driver.
>
> What's the story?
>
> TIA
>

If you plug in your peripheral and Windows has/finds a driver and it
works for what you need, then go with it. If you need to get a driver,
by all means go the the manufacturer's site and see what is offered.
However, when Windows wants to update a driver such as Nvidia, you would
be wise not to accept it but rather go to Nvidia directly and DL the
driver. Why? Because many people, including myself have had bad crashes
after allowing a Windows driver update. The fanboys and MS themselves
will deny it happens, but it is well documented that it does, by many
sites, and just simply searching for say, "Windows driver update crashed
my computer." Not paying attention, I allowed a Windows video driver
update and wound up with the "Black Screen of Death" which after much
research and trying EVERY fix out there, could not recover from it. MS
recommended a full reinstall of Windows if their fix wouldn't work. Yep,
that is what I had to do. I have since done the same on a test machine
and have been able to verify all sorts of problems with installing
Windows update drivers, but not always. It's a crap-shoot.

This is not to say everyone has problems, but I and many others
recommend using drivers straight from the hardware manufacturer. I have
never had a problem doing it that way.

G'day

..

On 12/9/2011 4:38 PM, Muad'Dib wrote:
> On 12/03/2011 09:51 PM, Boris wrote:
>> In general, my understanding is to use the manufacturer's driver as
>> opposed to Windows drivers when installing a new device. Is this a valid
>> generalization?
>>
>> For instance, if I purchase a new wireless card, or a new printer, should
>> I just plug it into my pc, and let Windows install it's own driver? Is
>> the Windows supplied driver created by the manufacturer and handed off to
>> Microsoft, or is it a Windows created driver? I do understand that
>> Windows doesn't include user applications for devices, such as control
>> panels.
>>
>> I've read device reviews on Amazon and Newegg, where buyers/users have
>> reported to use the manufacturer's driver, and others have reported to
>> use the Windows driver.
>>
>> I'm asking because I've done it both ways in the past without problems,
>> and I now want to install a three year old Canon scanner. The scanner
>> was manufactured pre-Windows 7, but post Windows Vista. Years ago, I did
>> use the manufacturer's driver from the CD, and successfully installed it
>> on a Vista laptop. This same laptop now has a clean install of Windows 7
>> HP 64-bit. I could go to the Canon site where there is a Windows 7 64-
>> bit driver (no firmware update), or I could just let Windows update
>> install the scanner driver.
>>
>> What's the story?
>>
>> TIA
>>
>
> If you plug in your peripheral and Windows has/finds a driver and it
> works for what you need, then go with it. If you need to get a driver,
> by all means go the the manufacturer's site and see what is offered.
> However, when Windows wants to update a driver such as Nvidia, you would
> be wise not to accept it but rather go to Nvidia directly and DL the
> driver. Why? Because many people, including myself have had bad crashes
> after allowing a Windows driver update. The fanboys and MS themselves
> will deny it happens, but it is well documented that it does, by many
> sites, and just simply searching for say, "Windows driver update crashed
> my computer." Not paying attention, I allowed a Windows video driver
> update and wound up with the "Black Screen of Death" which after much
> research and trying EVERY fix out there, could not recover from it. MS
> recommended a full reinstall of Windows if their fix wouldn't work. Yep,
> that is what I had to do. I have since done the same on a test machine
> and have been able to verify all sorts of problems with installing
> Windows update drivers, but not always. It's a crap-shoot.
>
> This is not to say everyone has problems, but I and many others
> recommend using drivers straight from the hardware manufacturer. I have
> never had a problem doing it that way.
>
> G'day
>
> .

I usually check the Mfr's web site before I do the install.
The software (and drivers) may be newer than that included with the
device, or included with windows. It can be useful to look at any FAQs
or other information pertaining to the device.

Multifunction devices (Generally Printer/Scan/Fax) can have more than
one set of usable (and even active) drivers. My networked Epsons have
both the Epson and Windows included drivers and print queues available
for use.

Cameras can be another example of dual drivers and software.

Driver update crashes - - My experience has been that this is unusual.
It can occur, for instance, when the old drivers were "legacy" drivers
originally intended for use with older windows versions, then marginally
updated to allow some level of use with win 7 or Vista.
These should usually be removed prior to the driver update. It's
unfortunate that the automatic driver update process does not work
properly under all circumstances.

I really get unhappy when a stack of windows updates is done at one
time, and the update process fails in some way, or the system crashes
after/while the updates are being "finalized". Sometimes a system
restore is the best way out, followed by manual install sequencing of
the updates one by one. (at least until you identify the problematic
update.

As things progressed, the update process has become cleaner. I see far
fewer problems than I did a year or so ago.

On 12/10/2011, charlie posted:
> Driver update crashes - - My experience has been that this is unusual.

I had driver crashes (instant black-screen with a solid freeze) happen
with two successive updates of the Intel embedded-graphics drivers on
this computer, whether I got them from Microsoft or from Intel.

Luckily, it was possible to recover by booting to safe mode and
reverting the driver.

I went online and discovered many reports of (apparently) the same
crash going back a few years (but I didn't keep the details, sorry).

Eventually a third update arrived, and since I had successfully
recovered from the first two, I bravely installed that update, and it
was fine.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

In article <>, idaspud52
@nospamhotmail.com says...
> If you plug in your peripheral and Windows has/finds a driver and it
> works for what you need, then go with it. If you need to get a driver,
> by all means go the the manufacturer's site and see what is offered.
> However, when Windows wants to update a driver such as Nvidia, you would
> be wise not to accept it but rather go to Nvidia directly and DL the
> driver. Why? Because many people, including myself have had bad crashes
> after allowing a Windows driver update. The fanboys and MS themselves
> will deny it happens, but it is well documented that it does, by many
> sites, and just simply searching for say, "Windows driver update crashed
> my computer." Not paying attention, I allowed a Windows video driver
> update and wound up with the "Black Screen of Death" which after much
> research and trying EVERY fix out there, could not recover from it. MS
> recommended a full reinstall of Windows if their fix wouldn't work. Yep,
> that is what I had to do. I have since done the same on a test machine
> and have been able to verify all sorts of problems with installing
> Windows update drivers, but not always. It's a crap-shoot.

In the case of the example above, if you start with a manufacturers
drivers, then STAY with manufacturer driver updates. If you try to let
Windows Update update a downloaded manufacturers driver, you could have
problems.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.comcast.net/~andyross