k95 rgb How to make K95 RGB work on Windows XP x64

[SEMA]

So if you try to install CUE on Windows XP x64 you get message about not having the latest service pack. Apparently whoever made the install MSI file isn't aware that XP x64 only has 2 SP's. Being technically minded, rather stubborn, and completely unable to tolerate the poor user interfaces of the newer Windows versions i set about trying to get it to work anyway. And I succeeded. Here's how:

 

1. Grab the CUE MSI from the website. Find a program to extract the files from it. You'll get a CorsairHID.exe, a pile of DLL's and some directories, including a "Win" and a "driver" directory.

2. The "Win" directory contains 3 DLL's that'll have to be moved to your Windows directory or placed together with CorsairHID.exe.

3. The "driver" directory contains driver files that seem to enable the macro playback and key remapping functions. Use "Add Hardware" from the control panel to add CorsairVBusDriver.inf. Then another device will show up and you need CorsairVHidDriver.inf for that one.

4. You should now be able to start up CUE by running CorsairHID.exe. You might want to move the directory it's located in to some permanent location, like "Program Files (x86)". As far as i can tell everything everything works except for the firmware upgrade.

 

Edit 2015-03-31:

NOTE: XP x64 ONLY!!! Apparently CorsairHID.exe uses the Vista and onward GetThreadID() function which is actually available anyway on XP x64, but NOT on XP x86

[terabyte]

CUE does not support Windows XP, be it 32 or 64 bit. You might have been able to install it with that procedure but you might still have other issues after that too since it was not coded to work on it.

 

 

I do understand what you're saying about the UI in Windows Vista/8/8.1 but Windows 7 is quite good imo. If you install Classic Shell on Windows 8/8.1 it works just like 7 and you don't even have to see that horrible metro interface. XP is just too old at this point, you should really consider upgrading unless you have other reasons not to (for example a program working only on XP?).

[SEMA]

Nonsense, it's all just Windows NT with increasing amounts of junk piled on top. As far as I'm aware the only significant change in the driver architecture for the non graphics drivers since 1995 was the addition of Plug'n'Pray in Windows 2000.

 

And the GUI seems to use QT, which Micro$oft doesn't control, so no reason it shouldn't keep working on XP.

 

Anyway, so far no trouble at all since I got the driver installed. And all the lighting effects worked even without the driver. The trick was figuring out that the driver was to create a virtual keyboard, in stead of being a driver for the physical keyboard, Once I saw that on the Win 7 machine I was using to upgrade the firmware I had everything running smoothly in 5 minutes.

 

 

 

My programs run just fine on Win 7, it's just that I refuse to pay money to move to an inferior system, and the more Micro$oft try to force me the more I resist :-)

[SEMA]

So I've had a week to test the K95 RGB on Windows XP x64, and so far I've only found 4 small problems:

1. The "Start on system startup" doesn't seem to do anything. But of course it's trivial to manually set CUE to run at logon.
   
2. When shutting down CUE doesn't stop, and it prevents the computer from shutting down, requiring you to quit CUE manually when shutting down.
   
3. When unlocking the computer automatic profile selection no longer works. But selecting a profile manually or activating the CUE window reactivates automatic profile selection.
   
4. Macro playback without delays seem somewhat slow compared to my previous Logitech keyboard. The virtual keyboard solution to playing back macros seem to be less than optimal. The Text actions work much faster, but they only work for "text", that is no navigation keys or F keys :-(
   

 

All in all I'm quite satisfied with my keyboard, the lights especially, even at the lowest intensity, are 10 times brighter that my old Logitech at their brightest :-)

 

On the other hand I must say I'm disappointed that Corsair choses to help Micro$oft extort us XP users by not supporting XP. We paid good money for our Windows XP, and more than once too :-(

[JalYt_Justin]

Can't really expect things to work on an outdated OS. Microsoft stopped supporting XP back in 2014, almost a whole year ago, so you can't expect things to be made for it when it's clearly not the most updated. I'm glad you're happy with it, but you really should complain when using an outdated system. xD

[Inheritance]

It costs a lot of money to support an out of date OS

[SEMA]

It's not outdated!!! It's a perfectly fine OS capable of supporting all current hardware and software if it's maker wasn't sabotaging it. And it's GUI is simple, clean and efficient, unlike the newer OSes. The only reason those newer pieces of crap exist is to make noobs impressed, regular users frustrated and make fools part with their hard earned money so uncle Bill can become even more stinking rich than he already is :-(

 

Besides, how much can it cost to support XP, there's the same Windows NT core somewhere at the bottom of all the systems.

[Inheritance]

It is out dated since Microsoft does not support the product line anymore. Only people that will get XP support are business with XP server systems.

 

The OS may share some code but they also differ in many ways, so it would cost quite a bit. Also just because the core is teh same doesnt mean its at all similar.

[terabyte]

XP was first released 14 years ago, 14 years for computers is outdated. That's a fact.

 

Newer apps use new APIs not available in XP, the windows registry itself has a different structure for some things and that leads things to not work properly. Heck, even the startup folder is different and I had to change some apps manually for auto-start. While the core is the same, as you've said, everything else is slightly or hugely different in new OS.

[Inheritance]

I think for a computer 14 years is dead