Microsoft scares users of its OS - XP - about using unsigned drivers.
But
does not install the approved and signed drivers, when they are needed.
As
an example, I have a video cum display card of ATI (AIW Radeon 8500 DV
Hercules 3D Prophet) installed on my computer. It has worked for some 3
to 4
years without any problem with the drivers which were there on the
installation disk and later with the earlier versions of Catalyst
drivers.
MS always insists on installing new patches for improving security and
other
considerations but does not warn if the periodic updates which it does
to my
system have any side effects.

The video card has become useless now because Windows does not approve
of
the latest drivers (Catalyst 6.5 and MMC 9.14) recommended by ATI on
its
web-site for this card but does not say which earlier versions of the
same
series it approves for this card. On one occasion, even the driver
approved
and installed by Windows failed to work and the Windows froze as soon
as it
was opened. So I am now in a limbo with neither MS nor ATI providing
the
drivers which will work under the conditions created by perennially
upgraded
XP and am working with a VGA Display driver without any functionality
for
tv, video capture or even graphic acceleration while watching a slide
show
of family photographs, while the entire RAM of 1 GB installed on the
video
card is sitting idle.

Of course, on some occasions, I have asked XP to ignore the driver
signing
and install the Catalyst drivers recommended by ATI in the past and it
has
worked on some occasions. But this time I have not been successful.
Which
means that ATI too does not provide correct information on which of the
scores of drivers it has released for its video cards, is suitable for
each
of the models they have sent in the world market, over the years.
Clever way
of cornering customers to keep updating with the latest hardware,
costing
pocketful of money.

Is it better to freeze the system and live with outdated versions of OS
and application software?

P. Jayant