I'm using a corporate Laptop with 64 Bit Vista on it.
I can't seem to access a Windows 2003 (32 bit) server PHOTO printer from the laptop 64 bit Vista - something about Drivers not being signed etc etc.
I'm currently not a particular fan of Vista but unless I'm doing something really stupid I SHOULD be able to access a Networked Photo Printer from a laptop.
(I can't re-install the OS on this laptop for all sorts of reasons I won't go into here).
Anybody else got an idea of how to fix this / connect to the printer (short of "using another laptop with another OS on it").
I also get horrible authentication messages when trying to logon to the windows 2003 remote server " Remote computer credentials cannot be verified" - this could be due to the remote computer running an earlier version of Windows.
Now there are still zillions of remote windows 2003 32 bit servers out there which won't change for a while yet. People have to connect to these remotely all the time - I can't really believe Microsoft was that stupid to make this process nearly impossible with newer 64 bit enabled Intel laptops (or perhaps can I ?).
The more I look at Vista the more I hate it.
I never seem to have these problems with Linux, or Macbook machines.
Anyway, as for as your authentication error message, there is an option under Remote Desktop that will let you suppress that error, I think its something like "always connect, even if authentication fails"
As for the printer experience, those drivers *MUST* be signed.
Vista 64 has "enhanced" securitah that does not allow you to place anything into kernel memory (read: drivers) unless they are digitally signed by a handful of trusted CA's
So Check the photo printers website and see if they have signed drivers.
(rant)
I wonder how much Apple stock MS owns? It's like MS proved Apple's point when they released Vista.
Vista is not as bad as people have made it out to be, but this has created a deployment nightmare.
(end-rant)
Anyway Kyle, if it's a Corporate Laptop, and its a corporate printer, your best bet is to contact your IT Admin guy. And if it's not a corporate printer, it's still best practice to contact the IT dept and let them know what's up. They might be able to help you.
HinduG wrote:
(rant)
I wonder how much Apple stock MS owns? It's like MS proved Apple's point when they released Vista.
Vista is not as bad as people have made it out to be, but this has created a deployment nightmare.
(end-rant)
Anyway Kyle, if it's a Corporate Laptop, and its a corporate printer, your best bet is to contact your IT Admin guy. And if it's not a corporate printer, it's still best practice to contact the IT dept and let them know what's up. They might be able to help you.
I know this is sort of off the subject, but why in the world would you install a 64-bit version of vista on a laptop?
In the OP I said it's a corporate laptop so I didn't install anything.
However there's nothing wrong in using 64 Bit OS'es on a 64 Bit laptop (as the Dual Core Intel chips now are).
I run very successfuly Open SUSE 10.3 64 bit on my own laptop and have no connectivity probs at all --even the in built INTEL PRO wireless card worked "Straight out of the box" and performance using the processing power of the Dual core's 64 bit capability works great when using a "Real OS" such as Linux.
The Windows 2003 server is my own studio's server which I was trying to access remotely.
Actually that server is really a VM running on a Linux 64 bit box. The Windows server is there for other users to access Windows apps like EXCEL and PHOTOSHOP etc and access the Photo Printers (none of which have any 64 bit VISTA drivers or are likely to any time soon if ever.
Open office is still not good enough yet for spreadsheets compared to EXCEL.
I'm not either going out to install a new SERVER OS on my server when the one I'm using works perfectly well for what it's intended to do.
While this is a Photographers Forum I do know many people use networking or have other computer problems related to running / connecting to Photographic equipment so some of these posts are definitely relevant.
Note also if you have 64 bit Vista (in any sort of combination or on any type of machine) you won't be able to load ANY UNSIGNED DRIVERS.
Note also that 32 bit drivers won't work either so if you have your old Scanners, printers / plotters etc just keep this in mind (or if you INSIST on Vista 64 bit run a 32 bit VM machine).
Finally connecting to hardware running on a remote Windows 32 bit machine from a 64 Bit Vista machine is a NIGHTMARE.
I'd hate to be in I.T deployment at the moment - especially as most large organisations haven't even THOUGHT of upgrading to 64 bit Vista even if client workstations (which could be users own laptops) might well have this stuff (pre-) installed already.
using vista without reading the manual is a bit like a L-plate driver going out in rush hour traffic without knowing the road rules...one is doomed to fail.
Vista does definately have a bigger learning curve then previous MS-OS's
I am very well aware of your dislike of MS-products, but since it looks like you have to dance with them, you might as well dance to their tune! and make the most of it
I'm not sure what EITHER of these links have to do with the problems I raised issues with -- and I'm not always anti-microsoft as I explained in posts above - the Microsoft Office - especially EXCEL can't IMO be anywhere equalled by ANY competing product that I've ever heard of.
As a Pro shooter whose use a variety of often quite complex gear over the years I'm quite capable of (and do actualy read) the manual of the equipment I'm using whether it's hardware OR SOFTWARE.
The old Lotus (now IBM) was a nightmare -- just look at that dogs dinner of a cludge called LOTUS NOTES for example - probably the most "User Unfriendly" or "User agressive" piece of collabration Software I've ever had the misfortune to use.
Please don't just be a "Cut and Paste" monkey.
If you've got a decent answer lets have it but just "cutting and pasting" alternate links doesn't really help too much as I'm sure most of us know how to use Google etc.
I've raised serious issues here for Pro Photographers who might just find themselves in the same predicament that I'm finding myself in.
Our Studio has quite a bit of working (but older hardware) which is unlikely ever to get 64 bit VISTA drivers.
Newer laptops / computers (Intel based) often come with VISTA pre-installed so the problem is actually quite real.
Also with the DUO INTEL processors 64 Bit VISTA is not nearly as rare as an installed "Feature" as you might imagine - particularly with 2 / 3 / 4 GB l RAM laptops.
I'm not having a go at you per se -- but please appear to at least understand the problem before posting seemingly irrelevant links.
I really don't want start a flaming war here -- but there seem to be an increaing number of " Cut and paste" monkeys all over the web - just not on this Forum but on loads of other ones as well these days who haven't really understood what the actual thread was all about.
Well I found a way to load an unsigned driver via google, but it would require me to Cut and paste.
Good luck
I'm sure you do -- but have you actually understood the basic problem of this post.
You've said you can "Break Vista 64 Bit" but you don't offer ANY SOLUTIONS OR WORKING LINKS.
Looks suspiciously like another anonymous 15 - 17 year old Geek to me who really has never had to live in the real world.
Incidentally if you can "Really Break" Vista 64 bit security you should be making some money somewhere else. Most of us guys are not computer Gurus or Geeks -- we just need to be able to use equipment to go about our normal daily lives as Pro Shooters.
I'm sure you actually haven't a CLUE about the REAL POINT OF THIS THREAD.
Hey, if you hadn't bit the hand that fed you, you'd be printing from your Windows 2003 server by now. The solutions weren't valid, but they were still well intentioned. I understand your frustration, but taking it out on others is not appropriate (and being rude is clearly a violation of the forum rules).
And for the other ad hominem attacks: my age, and real world: I work for a security company. Braniac and Fred can easily attest via my IP address.
It's not "breaking" Vista's security. Far from it. In fact, the solution is right under your nose.
I didn't mean any offence but "hacking"Microsoft OSés is (for me) not a particularly good way about getting the problem solved.
This is fine for perhaps home users but businesses have other concerns here.
Anyway after getting mad with this stuff -- IMO it shouldn't become a major problem to connect with a Networked printer but MS do seem to make it really compicatec to get this stuff working perhaps I was a bit rude here -- so sorry.
Í've been on this Forum quite a long time and usually DO try and help fellow shooters out.
So please don't take any offence as none was certainly intended.
You have a Vista x64 laptop and a Windows 2003 server. Are you connecting to a remote session on the server and using ts services to re-direct print jobs back to a local printer? or are you mapping to a print spooler on the win 2003 box?
If its the latter install the print drivers locally on the laptop and map to the network printer, if you try to connect directly, the print spooler looks for drivers to be installed on the server for your OS.
I think the problem is you can't install drivers locally on the laptop unless they are signed and accompanied with a signing certificate.
By hitting F8 during the boot screen, Windows Vista 64 allows you to temporarily "disable driver signature enforcement" during startup. Microsoft put this "feature" in to allow IHV's to test drivers without bothering them to sign.
Since it's a laptop, if he can just put it to sleep instead of shutting it down, and the setting will persist until he reboots.
It's not elegant, but in a pinch it should work.
It looks like the only permanent solution is to self-sign the drivers yourself. It involves generating a self signed certificate, and using it to sign the drivers. The process isn't too bad, but way more than any sane individual would want to deal with.
These two articles discuss the rather lengthy process to self sign the drivers:
