This goes back to the Win7 days and a discussion with Stephen Rose at the MVP Summit
It also tends to illustrate that a huge problem for us isn't a big deal for the general population
**************************************************************************
Back then, we'd (jcgriff2 and I) just figured out that there was an issue with the 2005 version of ASACPI.sys in Win7 installs and were wondering where it came from. I experimented a bit at work and found that it was installed from the Microsoft Update site during the installation of the OS. I haven't experimented without using an internet connection - but seem to recall that the few times I installed without an internet connection, that the system picked it up as soon as it was connected (sorta like a mandatory download from Windows/Microsoft Update).
While researching this, I discovered that I had it on my Win7 system and I didn't have any problems with it. Further research hasn't figured out anything more specific, but we've solved quite a few BSOD issues simply by updating this driver.
IMO what we see in the BSOD community is only a small segment of the total Asus population. So although the ASACPI.sys is a huge problem to us, it seems to me that it's just not that big of a deal to the large majority of Asus owners that have this driver installed. Why does this happen to some and not to others? I've been thinking on this for years and am not any closer to a solution!
*************************************************************************
In 2009/2010 I attended a session at MVP Summit given by a team that included Stephen Rose.
In that session they discussed the role of Windows/Microsoft Update in system installations (this was actually an IT Pro session)
Since we'd been pondering the issue about ASACPI.sys - I posed the question to him - "Why does Microsoft supply an outdated driver that's known to cause BSOD's?".
The response was that Microsoft provides the space for the drivers on it's Update site - but it does not require any testing of the submissions.
I was initially appalled at this, but have thought about it a lot since and I see that this is actually the only reasonable way that Microsoft can improve the installation experience for Windows.
If it required testing (like the WHQL certification), then it would increase the cost to manufacturer's and it would delay (or even prevent) the release of updated drivers.
The OEM's do a pretty good job of fixing problems even if they don't update drivers as often as we'd like. But, because they're running a business, they only invest in updating drivers when it makes economic sense to do so.
