Windows XP + USB = Idiocy

[jaclaz]

.. or a non-existent black cat in a dark room.

You'll have to explain how comes that the invisible box where I put that little devil in makes loud "meows" from time to time.

Grofluigi's approach is IMHO the most sensible one (cleaning from time to time and anyway when needed the "USB related" parts of the Registry).

I find this one a very handy tool for it:

http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/usb_devices_view.html

jaclaz

Edited May 17, 2012 by jaclaz

[naaloh]

Am I to assume that you don't consider features like AutoPlay or Desktop Cleanup Wizard stupid? Never thought people like that existed... except perhaps those who think that "stupid" is not a word strong enough to describe those features B)

As to the name, none that I'm aware of.

You are correct on your assessment of my position.

Not even an "unofficial" name? If you were to objectively describe it in words, what would you call it?

Would you mind explaining what kind of use you find in AutoPlay? Are you one of those people who connect/insert data storage media without knowing why, so that when an id***-friendly OS like XP scans the contents and displays the "What do you want Windows to do?" dialog, they find it useful and not consider the time wasted on scanning wasted

As to the name, I can't come up with anything shorter than "simultaneous use of multiple identical USB devices with no serial numbers", but that name doesn't imply the problems actually caused by the feature.

Some explanation here: Section "USB serial number". And the entire site is very useful.

That much I knew already. This website is actually confusing because it doesn't mention the OSes that the information applies to. For example, I know for certain that on Windows ME the same device is NOT installed anew when plugged into a different receptacle. Tripredacus said something about "the issue in Vista and Windows 7 being more transparent and less annoying", but did not explain what he meant despite my asking him to do so.

The character restriction is not something we have set, it is in the forum software. It is to prevent searches from taxing the server, especially when on forums that are as old as this one.

No problem. I'm not trying to tell you how to run this forum.

Grofluigi's approach is IMHO the most sensible one (cleaning from time to time and anyway when needed the "USB related" parts of the Registry).

I find this one a very handy tool for it:

http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/usb_devices_view.html

No, it's not sensible at all. Such policy leads to the virtual port numbers of USB modems, Bluetooth adapters, SIM card readers, etc, etc being constantly changed. The only sensible policy right now is to use one specific receptacle for each device.

Aslo, there's no need whatsoever for third-party tools to see (and remove if necessary) non-present devices. Editing two registry keys (see the attached regfile) and enabling the "Show hidden devices" option lets you do it in the XP Device Manager.

ShowPhantomDevices.reg

Edited May 18, 2012 by naaloh

[bphlpt]

@naaloh

To answer your original question:

No, as far as we know there is no way to get rid of this behavior.

We're glad you already know about the information provided in the link GrolfLuigi provided - Section "USB serial number"

Thank you very much also for clearly stating your opinion of this change in behavior that MS began sometime after Win ME and unfortunately continues to this day in all succeeding versions of Windows.

Can we give it a rest now please? Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Cheers and Regards

Edited May 18, 2012 by bphlpt

[jaclaz]

The only sensible policy right now is to use one specific receptacle for each device.

If you are happy with it, that's good.

Aslo, there's no need whatsoever for third-party tools to see (and remove if necessary) non-present devices. Editing two registry keys (see the attached regfile) and enabling the "Show hidden devices" option lets you do it in the XP Device Manager.

I never said it was "needed", I said "handy", and, had you simply tested it, you would have found my statement to be accurate.

jaclaz

[Tripredacus]

That much I knew already. This website is actually confusing because it doesn't mention the OSes that the information applies to. For example, I know for certain that on Windows ME the same device is NOT installed anew when plugged into a different receptacle. Tripredacus said something about "the issue in Vista and Windows 7 being more transparent and less annoying", but did not explain what he meant despite my asking him to do so.

Windows Vista + won't prompt you for a driver, but will install it in the background. You may or may not end up seeing an "Installing Devices" pop-up from the System Tray, but even this can be configured to hide such notifications. Windows 8, on the other hand, seems to fix this problem altogether, as once you tell Win8 to open UFDs, it opens within a second of you pluggin it in and with no apparent lag time of installing a driver. This seems true even if using different ports or even USB drives that have not been plugged into the system before.

So Windows XP is stuck in the middle of USB support progression. With the horrible (if absent) support (except for Altec Lansing speakers) in Windows 95B, to Win98... I can't speak of ME or 2000. Getting better in Vista and 7 and with Windows 8 the best yet.

[naaloh]

Windows Vista + won't prompt you for a driver, but will install it in the background. You may or may not end up seeing an "Installing Devices" pop-up from the System Tray, but even this can be configured to hide such notifications. Windows 8, on the other hand, seems to fix this problem altogether, as once you tell Win8 to open UFDs, it opens within a second of you pluggin it in and with no apparent lag time of installing a driver. This seems true even if using different ports or even USB drives that have not been plugged into the system before.

So Windows XP is stuck in the middle of USB support progression. With the horrible (if absent) support (except for Altec Lansing speakers) in Windows 95B, to Win98... I can't speak of ME or 2000. Getting better in Vista and 7 and with Windows 8 the best yet.

What interests me is whether newer-than-XP OSes install another device only when an identical device/devices is/are already present or regardless of that.