Can the W2K3 SP1 RC1 DDK be used for shipping products today

We're having an internal debate about which DDK version is appropriate for a
driver we plan to ship shortly.

I believe the W2K3 SP1 RC1 DDK is the one to use. Some people here are
uncomfortable with the RC1 designation and feel we should use the two year
old W2K3 DDK. One of the arguments against the RC1 DDK seem to be drivers
built with the old W2K3 kit are supported, but drivers build with the SP1
RC1 kit are not. Another argument, in favor of the RC1 DDK is it's the
compiler/headers being used right now at Microsoft for OS's/patches/drivers,
and has bugs fixed that may still be in the old W2K3 kit.

Can someone from Microsoft comment?

Thanks.
Jan

Jan
Tue Feb 15 15:57:51 CST 2005

I see to get a MSFT response I was supposed to use a magic registered email
alias... Sorry for the duplicate.

"Jan Bottorff" <jbottorff-removethis@inmage.net> wrote in message
news:OClzaz5EFHA.2824@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> We're having an internal debate about which DDK version is appropriate for
> a driver we plan to ship shortly.
>
> I believe the W2K3 SP1 RC1 DDK is the one to use. Some people here are
> uncomfortable with the RC1 designation and feel we should use the two year
> old W2K3 DDK. One of the arguments against the RC1 DDK seem to be drivers
> built with the old W2K3 kit are supported, but drivers build with the SP1
> RC1 kit are not. Another argument, in favor of the RC1 DDK is it's the
> compiler/headers being used right now at Microsoft for
> OS's/patches/drivers, and has bugs fixed that may still be in the old W2K3
> kit.
>
> Can someone from Microsoft comment?
>
> Thanks.
> Jan
>
>
>

Maxim
Wed Feb 16 15:11:53 CST 2005

As usually, the w2k build environment from the very latest DDK.

--
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

"Jan Bottorff" <jbottorff-removethis@inmage.net> wrote in message
news:OClzaz5EFHA.2824@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> We're having an internal debate about which DDK version is appropriate for a
> driver we plan to ship shortly.
>
> I believe the W2K3 SP1 RC1 DDK is the one to use. Some people here are
> uncomfortable with the RC1 designation and feel we should use the two year
> old W2K3 DDK. One of the arguments against the RC1 DDK seem to be drivers
> built with the old W2K3 kit are supported, but drivers build with the SP1
> RC1 kit are not. Another argument, in favor of the RC1 DDK is it's the
> compiler/headers being used right now at Microsoft for OS's/patches/drivers,
> and has bugs fixed that may still be in the old W2K3 kit.
>
> Can someone from Microsoft comment?
>
> Thanks.
> Jan
>
>
>

Eliyas
Tue Feb 22 15:20:23 CST 2005

According to the pre-release EULA pointed to me by the DDK team, the answer
is NO.
1. GRANT OF LICENSE. This Agreement grants Recipient the following
rights provided that Recipient complies with all terms and conditions of
this Agreement:

(a) Microsoft grants to Recipient a limited, non-exclusive,
nontransferable, royalty-free license to install and use five (5) copies of
the executable code of the Software on computers residing on Recipient?s
premises, solely for purpose of (i) testing the compatibility of Recipient?s
application or other product(s) which operate in conjunction with Microsoft
Windows 2000 Professional; Microsoft Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server
and Datacenter Servers; Microsoft Windows XP, Microsoft Windows XP Service
Pack 1; Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Standard, Enterprise and Datacenter
Edition operating system products and any Microsoft operating system product
that is a successor to any of the foregoing (each an "OS Product"), and (ii)
evaluating the Software for the purpose of providing feedback thereon to
Microsoft. Due to the nature of the development work, Microsoft provides no
assurance that any specific errors or discrepancies in the Software will be
corrected.

--
-Eliyas
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/driver/kb-drv.mspx