Windows update policy aside (I'm seeing reports that you can disable driver updates even in home edition, or something, I don't care).
Isn't this NVidia's fault for releasing a crap driver?
And haven't they released about 378 crap drivers in the past? This may be a conservative number... I can't even remember how many separate home and work systems that have been screwed up by NVidia drivers in the past, but it seems to happen on every system I have ever used with NVidia chipsets. One of my last systems had the same NVidia driver sitting in WU for at least 2 years, no update... the same driver that wouldn't even allow Windows to finish booting. (Standard Dell workstation config.)
Microsoft should probably make it much easier to disable particular driver updates, if for no other reason than to distance themselves from this kind of issue. But more so, NVidia needs to make it much easier to not break your computer by installing an update.
a major problem here is that Microsoft is taking on the role of the gatekeeper of what drivers we get and when they are installed.
if Microsoft did not provide them to the user and the user had to go and get them then the user can not blame Microsoft for them not working.
but first Microsoft created the windows hardware quality testing lap process and now they are set to take complete control of installing the drivers.
this makes it very much an issues that Microsoft will have to make sure it works or risk a huge set of issues.
if they are going to push this I can see this winding up in court or in some other legal move to block this.
unless Microsoft gets really hard core about spending a lot more money in a lot better testing of drivers and that will get really costly.
or Microsoft backs off and says "ok we will not force drivers on any users"
which is what folks are telling them to do.
honestly I think Microsoft has to back down and accept that they can not fully test and manage all of the system drivers.
it's too much risk for very small rewards.
Sven: please tell the folks at Microsoft that the feedback tool lacks any sort of feedback from Microsoft. we have a huge amount of feedback posted but no form of reply from Microsoft on what they are doing with that feedback. I know they can't reply to each post but the way it is right now I can't tell if they even see my feedback..... this lack of feedback down to the tester makes for a case where the tester feels abandoned and that the effort has no reward. it's pointless to keep posting the feedback if we can't see that our feedback is being acted on.
if they could work on that the insider program might be a LOT better.
so I have a 3 monitor setup with dual NVidia cards.
I started my system and saw issues, had to shutdown it was bad.
turned off two displays and re-started, windows booted, back to a normal display.
turned on second display and let windows see it. ok.... tuern on third display - same deal.
ok all better now.
was that a pain; yes.
should it be fixed; yes.
was it the end of the world; no
was my pc bricked; no
rightfully a lot of users are angry that it happened .... but even with windows xp/vista/7 etc... driver updates to video cards often need a reboot and some fussing with the display.
if I follow this right then my answer is do not do that.
you need an "audit trail" yes?
do not try to make EF do that, it's the wrong place to do it.
my way to do this is in the db.
1) the application code using EF can be compromised to break the security and reliability of the audit trail.
2) it makes the object model have dependency on how it works with the data store and custom code in the ef model may break if you ever change the data store.
3) the database has tooling and functions better at this ten in the ef layer.
4) if you do this in the db then you do not have any round trips between the app / service and the database that can be a source of a performance hit.
5) security if you do the audit in the db server it can have security settings so that the ef layer can not mess with the audit trail and you have a better validation that it's not tampered with by non-sql code down stream from the db.
there are many ways to do the audit but my first choice is to use some SQL CLR code to make a general class for it and then hook up the code in the sql server via triggers.
the way it has been done is to make a general table to hold table name, column name and tracking the user, the date and the changed value of a column.
that one table can then work for a whole database or you can make a set of audit tables if needed for a high load with lots of detail tracking.
the trigger on a given table calls the clr code with the info on who and the inserted / updated / deleted and a string or list that says what columns you need to track.
the upside of this is that if some tables have many columns but you only need to track edits on some of them then you only track them and not copy the whole row
this can save space and make the audit tables smaller.
if you do this right you can watch any edit to any table / column in the whole database in one table.
and as this all runs inside the sql server any kind of client code gets audited even if it's not using ef.
and the client code has no need to know about the audit at all.
there is a command line tool that will set the flags in a .net assembly to make it the way you want.
when .net v1 came out the default for all builds was "as any".
and yes the problems come about when you have dependency on a non .net dll.
as any lets the system load the assembly to the os default and jit the code for that case.
the x64 and x86 flags allow you to set the option and not have the runtime try to decide which way to load and jit.
I have to say that I find it amusing and scary how this thread does reflect what I have seen from more than a few folks in the world.
to sum it up you want the following things to all be true and this is frankly impossible to make it happen:
1) the operating system to be perfect on day one and never require any re-boot.
2) updates to happen 100% without any problem.
3) no update shall ever stop you from doing something at any time you do it.
4) the OS has to figure out when you are not going to use it and update then.
5) you expect to leave the pc turned off and not need any updates when you do turn it on.
6) you want to know every detail of each update and pick the ones you want.
if you read that list with care you will see that several of the items are in conflict and can not be done at the same time as far as I know, with any operating system I have seen ever.
this fantasy is like the saying about having the cake and also eating it.
this does not mean that things are perfect or that Microsoft should not be trying to do better.
but folks let's deal with REALITY here.
if business buy cheap and re3fuse to do maint on systems and then point the finger at Microsoft when bad things happen it's not Microsoft's fault.
do you expect to also drive a car and never take it to a shop for an oil change ? drive with the same breaks and tiers for the life of the car and get 100,000,000,000 miles from the same engine and drivetrain ? I hope not.
but many seem to expect this from the windows OS. that is just stupid; wake up!
I think ian my be referign to the touch-cover keyboard not the on-screen keyboard. I know for the pro 2 there are touch and type keyboards each is different, not sure if the 3 pro also had them both ??
Yeah it's not the end of the world but it is sad that with each new version of windows the overall UI gets more and more fragmented into chunks that each have a dated look from that era of the OS, the xp looking parts the vista stuff the seven stuff the eight stuff and now the ten bits.
they really should focus on the UI for a while and get more of it cleaned up, and do something to make it possible to re-do the system look w/o having to spend months tacking down where all the bits are hidden for that.
well as started your question is impossible to really answer.
for example you should use connection strings to connect to data, that is part of the answer.
but are you talking about say 5 databases with the same tables structures or multiple different databases that are not related ?
that is a different thing in what you are going to need.
do you need to build a design tool for a non programmer or one for a sql dba ?
different users may need different kinds of tools to help them.
so this question as stated is not answerable , you need to give us a lot more details and parameters.