I accept half the blame

I get a job to install some hardware on all the PCs in an office. It should be the easiest bread and butter task I could be asked to perform. I haven't touched this particular device but its just some USB kit, simple right? We even have our own documentation as well as the manufacturers.

I get down there and start from the beginning of our internal instructions. And immediately hit the first hurdle installing some software. "Do you want to modify or remove this application?". So it's already been installed? Confused, I skip this and move on until something actually starts behaving as expected. Eventually I figure it out. A colleague must have made a start before the hardware arrived, so I'm picking it up halfway through on a separate ticket that hasn't referenced the old one.

OK, so I carry on with the device installs. There's a driver, and a custom firmware, as well as the software. I run the install batch file for the driver, move to the next desk and repeat for each. Back on the first machine I go to install the firmware. "Device could not be found".

Ummkay? I open up device manager and devices and printers, unplug and reconnect and watch as both windows do their twitching and burbling as they recognise the hardware being reattached. Two distinct devices appear, as expected for this type of kit. But one of them is not as it appears in the documentation. I confirm with another dis/reconnect its definitely this device that dis/reappears.

So I raise a ticket with the hardware provider. They send documentation that confirms this should work, but no troubleshooting guide. They say this is what the software provider sent them, so I raise a ticket with software company as well. They too provide basically the same instructions.

The only difference between theirs and mine is the current firmware is later than the version in their screenshot. So I try the older version. Same result. I dig online and if I understand correctly the software and hardware come from different suppliers and the firmware is made by another entity altogether. The stuff I'm reading gives vibes that its more of a project than a company. No wonder the two suppliers are unable to help and refer me to the other.

Between some health issues, closing times and waiting for responses I've had to give up and make another trip about 5 times now. It's getting on my nerves. I've also been out to an existing installation to try and compare, but nothing obvious came to mind. I've been banging my head against the wall with the firmware so I work backwards. I know SOMETHING is installed from device manager, even if its not what I expect to see from the documentation screenshot. I try installing the driver again with the batch file and.. cmd pops up for a fraction of a second and closes.

Arse. That's way too fast. There's my problem. This time I open a command prompt and paste in from copy as path. ".....could not be run". Obviously the firmware updater isn't going to see a device that hasn't got a driver for the OS to recognise it. I open the batch file in notepad.

Now I can write very basic batch files but that's it. I take a look and there's something along the lines of:

If xyz x86, run install32, with parameters

If xyz x64, run install64, with parameters

I get it, but I have no idea how to fix it if its not working. So I find the 64bit version and use copy as path to paste in the full path, and add the switches (just to make it silent, nothing special). This takes a good minute, so progress. I try the firmware again, and it "just works".

Sigh. Thankfully this whole job is for a yearly seasonal cycle so "as long as its working by the end of next month is fine" is the time frame, no impact other than the time I've wasted. If I had sat down for just one computer I would have noticed straight away, but my setting one off running and moving on to the next desk plan means I missed the command window closing suspiciously fast.

To solve the problem for the future I create my own batch file and document it, noting not to use the provided batch file. As I'm working on it, something catches my eye.

If xyz x64 run install64

Versus

path\to\install64.exe

It cannot be, right? I've already finished the rest of the installs so I'm not wasting further time undoing one to test. But is that truly it? The firmware people just forgot a file extension?? I run the batch file again and paying more attention this time it does say "Install64 was not recognised as an application" or whatever the exact wording is. I can't be bothered to contact the firmware people but I close the tickets with hardware and software with my findings, "hope this helps".

When we reimage for Windows 11, I'm going to keep my eye out for this request for this office. I need to know.