Vista reactivation required after Microsoft Update optional update

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007.

  1. As Felix reported a few days ago, there is an optional update on Microsoft
    Update that requires reactivation of Vista after the update is installed. I
    did two updates today and discovered that my activation status had changed
    from Activated to "Three days remaining....".

    The updates today were:

    NVIDIA Corporation - Storage - NVIDIA nForce4 Serial ATA Controller

    KB936824 (the iPod update)

    Since the system drive figures very importantly in the hardware hash that is
    used to calculate when reactivation is required, my bet would be that the
    NVIDIA update would cause reactivation because it is a change involving the
    hard drive controller. (note: my update history shows this update was
    installed successfully twice and that does not make a lot of sense either.)
    But my assumption means nothing and maybe it was the iPod update. Hardware
    is involved there too.

    In any case, be aware that an optional update is on the server that will
    require you to use phone activation to reactivate Vista following
    installation of the update. Internet activation will not be accepted.
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. A further thought. I saw an option in the activation wizard that I have not
    seen before. In addition to the choices to activate online now, remind me
    later, etc. I saw an option that said my product key was not valid and
    offered information on how to obtain a valid one. That suggests to me that
    the offending update is stepping on the result of the latest Genuine Windows
    check and changing that result from "yes" to "no."
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Colin Barnhorst

    Guest Guest

    Colin:
    As a side note I have become reluctant to install hardware driver updates
    from Microsoft.
    This started when a couple of months ago MS posted a RAID driver for NForce4
    which made my system crash.
    Unless I have no driver, i.e. I have an exclamation sign in Device Manager,
    I only use hardware drivers from the chipset manufacturer (NVidia, ATI, etc.)
    Latest update for NForce4 chipset was on Feb 5.
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce4_amd_winvista64_15.00.html
    and so far, no news on NVidia.
    Can you post the SATA controller version you got from MS so that I can
    compare it with the one included in the above package?
    Carlos
     
    Guest, May 23, 2007
    #3
  4. I don't know how to determine the controller version associated with the
    update. How did you do that?

    This is the explanation of the update from my Update History:

    "NVIDIA Corporation - Storage - NVIDIA nForce4 Serial ATA Controller

    Installation date: ‎5/‎22/‎2007 2:19 PM

    Installation status: Successful

    Update type: Optional

    NVIDIA Corporation Storage sofware update released in December, 2006

    More information:
    http://winqual.microsoft.com/support/?driverid=20028236

    Help and Support:
    http://support.microsoft.com/select/?target=hub"

    And this is the Device Manager details for the controller:

    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0054&SUBSYS_81621043&REV_F3
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0054&SUBSYS_81621043
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0054&CC_010185
    PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0054&CC_0101
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #4
  5. The SATA IDE driver installed on my system by the Microsoft update is 8.64.

    The official nVidia version in the v15 driver package is 9.31 WHQL.
     
    Dominic Payer, May 23, 2007
    #5
  6. Colin Barnhorst

    Guest Guest

    Dominic:
    So, assuming the 8.64's were developed by NVidia (remember the song "it is
    up to the hardware manufacturer to develop drivers...blah, blah, blah"?), it
    means that MS is offering drivers that are older than the ones posted by
    NVidia at their web site.
    I am not at a Vista machine right now but I can recall that in one of the
    tabs in Device Manager (right click on the SATA device, choose properties) it
    is now possible to determine which is the inf file that installed the driver.
    If such is the case and my memory is right, it would be then possible to
    open that file and see additional details, e.g.: manufacturer, date, version,
    etc.
    This way we could double check if the 8.64's belong to NVidia.
    Carlos
     
    Guest, May 23, 2007
    #6
  7. Colin Barnhorst

    Guest Guest

    Colin:
    I am not at a Vista machine right now, but if you could get to the "Details"
    tab, the controller version should show up in the "Controller" tab.
    It seems that Dominic found that these are v8.64 and that the NVidia ones
    (in the web) are v9.31
    Looks like MS is behind schedule here.
    Carlos
     
    Guest, May 23, 2007
    #7
  8. The version is is 8.24, not 8.64. The author is nVidia with a driver date of
    23/12/2006 in Device Manager.

    The nvstor64.sys file in system32/drivers is 5.10.2600.0824 and shows a Date
    modified of 05/01/2007.
    The nvstor64.sys file in the v15 set is 5.10.2600.0931with a Date modified
    of 22/12/2006.
    Both files are attributed to nVidia.
     
    Dominic Payer, May 23, 2007
    #8
  9. I hope we are talking about the same thing.

    In Device Manager/IDE ATA/ATAPI controller/NVIDIA nForce4 Serial ATA
    Controller/Properites/Details tab I do not have any further "Controller Tab"

    But I do see in the Driver File Details that the driver file at
    C:\Windows\system32\nvstor64.sys is provided by NVIDIA and is file version
    5.10.2600.0824 built by WinDDK.
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #9
  10. Colin Barnhorst

    Guest Guest

    Guest, May 23, 2007
    #10
  11. Bingo. That's the one I installed yesterday on Vista x64.
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #11
  12. Colin Barnhorst

    Guest Guest

    Colin:
    I am now on my Vista PC.
    In Device Manager/IDE ATA/ATAPI controller/NVIDIA nForce4 Serial ATA
    Controller/Properites
    choose the "Controller" tab from there and not from the "Details" tab.
    I have version 5.10.2600.931 which corresponds to the NVidia supplied one.
    I'll keep that one (If it ain't broke, don't fix it).
    The inf file name can be obtained from the dropdown list in the Details tab.
    Look for something like "INF name" (I have the Spanish version).
    My inf is oem14.inf

    Carlos
     
    Guest, May 23, 2007
    #12
  13. It is the info I reported just above (5.10.2600.0824). I think what you are
    calling a Controller tab is the Driver Details button on the Driver tab on
    my system. No matter.

    The Inf Name is oem9.inf
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 23, 2007
    #13
  14. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA512

    I was hit by the same problem. When I posted the problem, the MVPs
    immediately blamed nvidia and ignored the fact that the activation
    process can't differentiat between a hardware change and a software change.

    Have fun talking to a drone in India. At least it will get you running
    again.

    - --
    Iron Feliks

    Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFGVZt2IEgejQPpTu4RClzfAKCUFpgwziCSaji8UVLQG+KzSMaggwCfRQGr
    3RcCd2HPkGV6s8t6s/wr5xg=
    =I1vP
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Feliks Dzerzhinsky, May 24, 2007
    #14
  15. If you read my original post I said you had reported this and I am an MVP
    and did not belittle your report. It is in fact an NVIDIA created problem.
    The update is authored by them and supplied by them to MS for inclusion in
    Microsoft Updates.
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 24, 2007
    #15
  16. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA512

    You got a better MVP than I did. ;-)

    So, no hardware is changed, but The activation module thinks there was.
    And this is nvidia's fault because?

    By the way, did MS pull those drivers from Windows Updates. If they are
    flawed, they should be removed.

    The re-activation requirement is supposed to be hardware related, not
    software related, so MS is still passing the buck.
    - --
    Iron Feliks

    Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFGVayRIEgejQPpTu4RCs6uAKClqeuO+lnaQ+1l5jxo/8EA5oBy2QCgg86q
    g3PqU//qFMiOomPWrFbaJNU=
    =MslY
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Feliks Dzerzhinsky, May 24, 2007
    #16
  17. I don't know why NVIDIA released the upgrade with it doing whatever it is
    doing to other things in the system. Obviously someone missed something
    along the way. By now, one hopes, that PSS has gotten enough calls from the
    activation center to do something.
     
    Colin Barnhorst, May 24, 2007
    #17
  18. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA512

    I still haven't seen a logical reason that changing drivers convinced
    Vist there had been a change of hardware. Clearly, there are ways to
    identify drives that is not dependent on the dirvers. therefore, I
    still believe this to be a Vista problem rather than an nvidia one.

    The argument that it doesn't happen with other drivers is deficient. I
    might change my opinion if someone from MS could provide an explanation
    of why this happened, but so far, no one has. Until that happens, my
    view is that it is a Vista problem.
    - --
    Iron Feliks

    Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFGVfhyIEgejQPpTu4RCnsWAKCWH07OKfvUOzviiRqH68gaVk5vywCfV48p
    aKNi12bjJT0VTiUQgnjJxbs=
    =X/21
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Feliks Dzerzhinsky, May 24, 2007
    #18
  19. Hello Feliks,
    Let's look at it like this. How does Windows talk to hardware and thus
    identify hardware? That happens through the drivers for the hardware.
    I am speaking generically, not to this specific issue since I don't have
    any updates for this issue. If the driver is not present, Windows has
    little to no information about teh device, so if you add a driver it
    reports back information to the OS on the hardware. If the driver changes
    what it reports back to Windows, it can appear as different hardware, if it
    appears as different hardware, then Windows thinks that hardware is changed.
    see this for an example
    Why is activation not available in Safe Mode? Because most of the drivers
    in Safe Mode are not loaded, so if you activate in Safe Mode without the
    drivers, when you boot normally, the drivers would load and Windows would
    now see all the devices that were not present before. This could trigger
    activation due to the appearence of hardware changes.

    Drivers can change the way hardware is represented to Windows, so hardware
    appears differnet even though it may not be.

    Thanks,
    Darrell Gorter[MSFT]

    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
    --------------------
    |>Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:41:22 -0700
    |>From: Feliks Dzerzhinsky <>
    |>User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
    |>MIME-Version: 1.0
    |>Subject: Re: Vista reactivation required after Microsoft Update optional
    up
    |>References: <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    |>In-Reply-To: <>
    |>X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0
    |>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
    |>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    |>X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000743-4, 05/24/2007), Outbound message
    |>X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
    |>Message-ID: <e#>
    |>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general
    |>NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-67-126-141-121.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net
    67.126.141.121
    |>Lines: 1
    |>Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
    |>Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general:6862
    |>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general
    |>
    |>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    |>Hash: SHA512
    |>
    |>Colin Barnhorst wrote:
    |>> I don't know why NVIDIA released the upgrade with it doing whatever it
    |>> is doing to other things in the system. Obviously someone missed
    |>> something along the way. By now, one hopes, that PSS has gotten enough
    |>> calls from the activation center to do something.
    |>>
    |>I still haven't seen a logical reason that changing drivers convinced
    |>Vist there had been a change of hardware. Clearly, there are ways to
    |>identify drives that is not dependent on the dirvers. therefore, I
    |>still believe this to be a Vista problem rather than an nvidia one.
    |>
    |>The argument that it doesn't happen with other drivers is deficient. I
    |>might change my opinion if someone from MS could provide an explanation
    |>of why this happened, but so far, no one has. Until that happens, my
    |>view is that it is a Vista problem.
    |>- --
    |>Iron Feliks
    |>
    |>Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
    |>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    |>Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
    |>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
    |>
    |>iD8DBQFGVfhyIEgejQPpTu4RCnsWAKCWH07OKfvUOzviiRqH68gaVk5vywCfV48p
    |>aKNi12bjJT0VTiUQgnjJxbs=
    |>=X/21
    |>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    |>
     
    Darrell Gorter[MSFT], May 24, 2007
    #19
  20. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA512
    While I appreciate your answer, I have to tell you the activation system
    is a bit paranoid. Or, perhaps more accurately, it is an equation with
    far too many variables.

    It reminds me a bit of the old (1980s) protection scheme MS use with
    its applications that relied on a hidden file. The problem was that if
    the drive suffered a soft read error, it produced a statement on the
    user's screen that contained the lines, "The tree of evil bears bitter
    fruit", and , "Now trashing your hard drive". At least you don't use
    similar verbiage today. You only threaten people with crippling their
    computer if they don't jump through hoops.

    I've saved the best questions for last. The first is, if MS is aware
    that changes in software (drivers) can change the way hardware is
    reported to Windows, why not use a hardware detection schem that is less
    easily fooled? The second is why are third party drivers available via
    Windows Update, that have not been tested and determined not to cause
    such problems?

    - --
    Iron Feliks

    Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFGVm1CIEgejQPpTu4RCsDkAJ9ejEthwUDPJNw2MnTfpmFMi7jRwgCfQIXy
    7g0Kv5vtiFTZV0OuAjZ6Umc=
    =+DgZ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Feliks Dzerzhinsky, May 25, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.