Vista x64, Will modified video drivers still be possible?

[LoR*Evanescence]

After reading news on vista. it seems Microsoft is forcing that all drivers must be digitaly signed or they can not be installed on the x64 version. I have attached the news article below form neowin.

With this, I'm wondering, will this make the modified inf files we find here to be not to be abel to be used? I'm running on a 64-bit notebook right now with xp x64, and plan on upgrading to vista x64 when it comes out. However, what I have found, is there are no video drivers for my notebook for x64. I have a G-Force 440 Go 64MB video card in my HP. You can not install the normal forceware drivers, and N-Vidia does not suppor this video card, and tells me to contact the computer manufacturer. HP has no drivers for x64, and tell me I should revert back to the 32 bit version. I have to use laptopvidoes2go vidoes drivers to get a screen resolution higher then 640 x 480!

So, with this all said and done, would I have a problem with video when it comes to drivers with Vista x64? Or will there be a way to install the forceware drivers? As for all my other drivers, the manufacutres seem to have drivers out, not all signed but I'm sure they will by the time vista comes out.

Vista x64 to require digital signatures for many drivers

Posted by Mike Stanclift on 22 January 2006 - 11:53 | 21 comments

With little fanfare, Microsoft just announced that the xX64 version of Windows Vista will require all kernel-mode code to be digitally signed. This is very different than the current WHQL program, where the user ultimately decides how they want to handle unsigned drivers.

Vista driver developers must obtain a Publisher Identity Certificate (PIC) from Microsoft. Microsoft says they won't charge for it, but they require that you have a Class 3 Commercial Software Publisher Certificate from Verisign. This costs $500 per year, and as the name implies, is only available to commercial entities.

Also, drivers must be signed for devices that stream protected content. This includes audio drivers that use Protected User Mode Audio (PUMA) and Protected Audio Path (PAP), and video device drivers that handle protected video path-output protection management (PVP-OPM) commands.

View: Microsoft x64 PIC Driver Requirements

News source: OSNews

[LSudlow]

I've read the same thing. If it's true, then modded drivers probably won't be possible. However, remember MS wanted to do the same thing with XP but eventually relented and allowed us to install with just a warning. Maybe the same thing will happen with Vista, especially since the LDDM (or whatever it's called now) driver model is much less likely to crash the system. Or maybe we'll find a registry key that will allow it.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[LoR*Evanescence]

I've read the same thing. If it's true, then modded drivers probably won't be possible. However, remember MS wanted to do the same thing with XP but eventually relented and allowed us to install with just a warning. Maybe the same thing will happen with Vista, especially since the LDDM (or whatever it's called now) driver model is much less likely to crash the system. Or maybe we'll find a registry key that will allow it.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

yeah, and will for the x86 normal 32-bit version. But it seems to have been confirmed, that with the case of the x64 version. You will be required to have signed drivers, and they wont allow you to bypass this.

I hope things can still change though.

[mobilenvidia]

I've got the modded INFs for LDDM 8505 64bit, now we need someone to test this.

Vista being in Beta stage, this not being Signed might not be implemented yet.

Microsoft wants signed drivers as they probably charge a fortune for it.

So nVidia probably have to pay out big $$ to have a driver signed.

We as end users will no doubt have to foot the bill so Bill stays the richest man on this planet.