"Bill in Co" wrote in
m:

I guess that may be implying that the old versions of nusb won't or can't
handle as many devices as the new ones can, too. OR that the old versions
were so limited in what they added that there were no potential conflicts.
But I'm still not sure I'm getting it.


I think you are, now. The earlier more limited forms may well not have been
full enough to satisfy many needs. (Safe assumption, or why else develop
further?)

When any maker has to write an INF file, they have to do as little as
possible, and assume that the context they're going into is complete and
correct enough to support what they add. For NUSB that meant a conflict of
interest, because it is a small generic driver support, in which case the
usual maker's logic applies, or is it a whole new subsystem? In earlier
versions they likely tried to stay with guidance a maker normally uses, but
eventually they got to the point where if your OS is well-established and
customised, it may be better to rip out all the INF files before adding NUSB.
That would cause bother in non-USB stuff, especially stuff in Machine.inf
and other core data sets. So they started advising th only thing they COULD
advise: uninstall all USB hardware, and any pre-existing NUSB too.

Like slipstreaming OS service packs to customised installs, NUSB is a thing
best added cleanly at install time.