Device trees I: Are we having fun yet?

Posted Nov 14, 2013 9:23 UTC (Thu) by deepfire (guest, #26138)
In reply to: Device trees I: Are we having fun yet? by olof
Parent article: Device trees I: Are we having fun yet?

> The x86 space has been more organized because Microsoft forced people to
> comply with the standard specs (and a product wouldn't ship, plain and
> simple, if it didn't boot an unmodified Windows install).

I find "boot an unmodified Windows install" being a rather weak substitute for standards compliance.

Device trees I: Are we having fun yet?

Posted Nov 14, 2013 14:24 UTC (Thu) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link] (1 responses)

Well it isn't just being able to boot, MS has pushed for several device standards such as for webcams so they didn't have to deal with buggy crashy vendor drivers making them look bad.

Device trees I: Are we having fun yet?

Posted Nov 26, 2013 17:18 UTC (Tue) by nye (subscriber, #51576) [Link]

On a related note, anyone know why there's no such thing as a standardised ethernet class driver?

Device trees I: Are we having fun yet?

Posted Nov 15, 2013 17:52 UTC (Fri) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link]

> I find "boot an unmodified Windows install" being a rather weak substitute for standards compliance.

Yet it's the most effective standards compliance mechanism that has ever existed as far as hardware goes.