4 ms·
> PPS: In meantime, you can download the older driver (v3.8.39.0 worked for me) and use it instead. This implies that the fake IC isn't being bricked and will
by bsilvereagle 4y ago
> PPS: In meantime, you can download the older driver (v3.8.39.0 worked for me) and use it instead.
This implies that the fake IC isn't being bricked and will work with Linux, etc. after the new Windows driver has communicated with it. It appears the Windows driver refuses to communicate with the IC.
- bogantech 4y agoSo unlike the FTDI driver that really did brick clone devices this could even be some change that inadvertently causes issues for third party clones. Do people expect them to QA against clones?
- josephcsible 4y agoGiven that the effect of using a clone is that the device name is replaced with the message "THIS IS NOT PROLIFIC PL2303. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR SUPPLIER.", it seems pretty clear that this is intentional sabotage.
- bogantech 4y agoThat's what I get for not reading the article I guess.
- manicdee 4y agoYour definition of sabotage is quite broad and creative. There is no damage to the hardware. The driver is simply not operating with hardware that Prolific didn’t get paid to support.
- josephcsible 4y agoIf a disgruntled employee went into the office one night and changed all of the computers to not try to boot from the hard drive anymore, would that not be sabotage, just because it's possible to undo?