Bought a digital camera and dont like it!

moonrakerz

cathy2702 wrote: »

To be honest it didnt say it was compatible with vista,

The memory card is from my nikon coolpix camera, it's SD and it definately says the camera should be compatible with it

More than half the hardware on the planet isn't compatible with Vista, give M$ about 10 years and they will sort it !

You may find that you camera says it is compatible with an SD card, but often they are only compatible up to a certain size; 1 or 2 Gb.

weegie.geek

moonrakerz wrote: »

More than half the hardware on the planet isn't compatible with Vista, give M$ about 10 years and they will sort it !

I wasn't aware MS were responsible for coding drivers.

Marty_J

Aren't they responsible for certifying drivers as Vista compatible?

BillScarab

Marty_J wrote: »

Aren't they responsible for certifying drivers as Vista compatible?

Only if Manufacturers submit the drivers for certification.

I never bother installign any aoftware that comes with cameras. The built in Photo Software in Vista is very good anyway, no point in even downloading Picasa.

To the OP, have you tried it without using the SD card, i.e. just using the built in memory? It should just be recognised as removable drive by Vista.

wifeforlife

Thanks for all the advice guys

I tried it on my mums computer with xp and it wouldnt plug and play, I read the manual and downloaded from the cd's twice. My memory card was empty when I tried it and I tried another one just to be sure but nothing worked

So I brought it back and told the guy I didnt like it, didnt say it was faulty or anything just told him it wasnt downloading and I couldnt get my memory card to work with it and he refunded straight away. I was so surprised he was actually a great help and told me to go with a sanyo that was on offer at the moment too.

He said something about lithuim batteries also, but I'm going to wait and have a browse on the site to see if there is any good recommendations

Thanks again
Cate

moonrakerz

weegie.geek wrote: »

I wasn't aware MS were responsible for coding drivers.

Why is it so difficult to make XP drivers work in Vista ???
Am I being cynical (again) in thinking it might be to make you use M$ applications instead - as per Billscarab's post ?

Robin_T_Cox

Buy a memory card reader to plug into your USB port. And get an SD card to plug into your camera to store your pictures.

Then, when you want to transfer pictures from your camera to your computer, just take out the memory card from your camera and plug it into the card reader. You should be able to read your camera memory card from there.

penrhyn

Funny I thought that's what I said in post#10

Nice to know at least one poster agrees with me!

weegie.geek

moonrakerz wrote: »

Why is it so difficult to make XP drivers work in Vista ???
Am I being cynical (again) in thinking it might be to make you use M$ applications instead - as per Billscarab's post ?

I definitely wouldn't describe myself as a MS fan but the monotonous MS bashing bores me, especially when there's no logic behind it.

Drivers are for hardware. What's that got to do with using MS software or not? Billscarab's post says there's no point installing bundled software. Nothing about drivers not working.

Drivers are necessary for a piece of hardware to work. Bundled software isn't.

I could understand people being up in arms if nobody else's hardware worked and you had to use MS branded mice and all that.

And I've no idea why it's so difficult to make XP drivers work in Vista.

Is it difficult?

Or is it a case of the hardware manufacturer not bothering to write the drivers, so you buy their new shiny "Vista compatible" soundcard/joystick/camera/whatever? There were betas, RCs and leaks of Vista going around 3 years ago. It really takes [insert greedy/lazy HW manufacturer's name here] 3 years to modify some code?

Like I said earlier, driver writing is the hardware manufacturer's responsibility. Apart from certifying the drivers, which is only a necessity if the manufacturer wants to put a Vista logo on the box, MS has nothing to do with third-party drivers.

You conspiracy theorists are looking in the wrong place - IMO the hardware manufacturers are forcing obsolescence upon their hardware to make you upgrade. Hardware incompatibilities will just make people put off upgrading - definitely not helpful to MS in the slightest.

Odd how there are manufacturers who go the extra mile and make XP/Vista/Linux/OSX drivers for their kit.

So no, I don't think it's hard to make drivers for Vista, there's just more money in not doing so.

[Deleted User]

moonrakerz wrote: »

Why is it so difficult to make XP drivers work in Vista ???
Am I being cynical (again) in thinking it might be to make you use M$ applications instead - as per Billscarab's post ?

There's two points that go hand in hand with your question.

Firstly, writing drivers to work within Vista isn't just a simple process. The way MS implimented UAC and the issues that go with that and there's now much more Virtualisation that needs be taken into account, the making of drivers and driver software has got a stricter set of rules to play with.

Secondly, Hardware manufacturers will have to take the commerical decision whether it is worth devoting manhours and funds to rewrite previous software to allow their devices to work with Vista. It has to be decided how far back you are willing to do this, considering it's not going to generate any additional income for the company. As you'll see with most consumer electronics, they are always getting minor updates/redesigns so the company always has a new ball to run with

For what it's worth, Microsoft have bundled over 40,000 drivers in Vista. Their certified scheme doesn't ensure the actual working quality of the drivers (which I often wish they would), just that suitable testing has already taken place and logs of this have been provided.