A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

For those considering Linux...



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old December 21st 17, 06:05 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
5
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default For those considering Linux...

On 12/21/2017 05:31 AM, John Doe wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote:

I had a motherboard a few years ago which had two BIOS
chips. If the first one gets corrupted, the second is used
as a failsafe. I believe the motherboard's brand was DFI. I
don't know if their motherboards are any good but that
feature, at the very least, was very welcome.


That is GIGABYTE DualBIOS™

After losing my last motherboard to a BIOS problem, I made it a
point to get one. I suppose Paul's version would work too.


It could have been DFI, with a BIOS Savior installed. I don't know if
they're still made, but they were popular a decade ago with overclocking
enthusiasts.
Ads
  #33  
Old December 21st 17, 06:25 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default For those considering Linux...

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 10:23:53 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 02:41:00 -0600,
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-

Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.


This comes as no surprise to me. I wanted to try Linux some years ago.
I wrote some ISO files to flash drives to make them bootable, and
runable. I began with several brand new flash drives.

Not only did many of them not boot on any of my computers, but these ISO
files literally killed the flash drives. Most of them had 5 writes or
less. After killing 5 or 6 flash drives, I quit all linux use after
that. Even the few distros that did boot, did not impresse me.

I guess I can be thankful that my only losses were about $35 worth of
flash drives, and not a motherboard or entire computer.


Generally, you can fix those USB keys by re-formatting them using a
Linux application. You basically need to re-arrange the partitions and
make sure that there is only one formatted as FAT32. I've been in that
situation for I empathize completely.

I _keep_ getting lured into the Linux beast but am learning to resist it
a lot better. It's like smoking except less satisfying.


It's not fair to blame that on Linux, any download that supposedly claims
to make a bootable usb could give same problem.
Best fix is for supplier to provide clear instructions. A google search
returns links for making a bootable usb from a cd/dvd but I've never
tested.

Note also that although you may not want to install or use linux, there
are many utilities that do, such as offline virus checking etc.

I will say this for windows, although it's a long painful process,
creating a winpe stick using windows instructions seems to work ok and
there are web instructions for installing extra windows programs like
virus checkers.
  #34  
Old December 21st 17, 07:13 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.comp.os.windows-10, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Wolffan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default For those considering Linux...

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.


I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.


And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?


His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (almost old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,

  #35  
Old December 21st 17, 07:29 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
chrisv
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default For those considering Linux...

Wolffan wrote:

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.


And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?


His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (...) rather
than pollute his environment with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,


Well, for the truly paranoid...

--
"If anything, Windows offers more choice - you have almost all of the
best oss software, and a far larger range of proprietary software." -
Tom Shillton
  #36  
Old December 21st 17, 07:35 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Snit[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,027
Default For those considering Linux...

On 12/21/17, 6:48 AM, in article ,
"Doomsdrzej" wrote:

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer Morningstar
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray carter wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.


I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.


And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?


https://youtu.be/cM_sAxrAu7Q

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

  #37  
Old December 21st 17, 07:50 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default For those considering Linux...

Doomsdrzej wrote:
rOn Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:31:17 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
wrote:

Doomsdrzej wrote:

Paul wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa..._item&px=Ubunt
u-17.10-BIOS-Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.
Before high-fiving yourself, also consider that UEFI has a
checkered history.

https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/25091.html

"Samsung can end up bricked

And I remember when I thought UEFI would make our lives
simpler and reduce the amount of ridiculous hacks we
needed. Sigh."

There was also a case in Windows, where some Windows thing
modifies a setting in the BIOS - and later when the user
gets into the BIOS, there *no* way to put it back. So even
Windows has a means of triggering trap-door behavior, by
flipping something in the BIOS, that cannot be corrected
from a BIOS setup screen.
UEFI is just a bad bad idea. That's the message.
I have no doubt of it. I tend to disable it entirely
whenever I install Linux on this machine. It's always more
trouble than it's worth.

I *think* I'm covered, because my computer has a special
USB port, with a flasher function built right in. You plug
in a USB stick with a named BIOS file on it, push a button,
and the image is loaded into the BIOS (there is a separate
chip on the motherboard handling this). The function works
so well, that even if the CPU is not in the CPU socket and
it's "just a motherboard", the flashing function still
works. You can buy my motherboard, connect an ATX power
supply, plug in a USB stick, flash the BIOS, power off...
and insert a previously-unsupported CPU and have it work.

I haven't needed to use that, but that's my "insurance
policy" in times of trouble.
A very cool feature, I have to admit. If anything, it's
protection against malware like the dreaded CIH virus of
1999.

The traditional BIOS, also used to write to itself, but not
anywhere nearly as badly designed as UEFI. It has a
microcode cache (I loaded mine manually on my P2B-S), it
has DMI/ESCD (mostly innocuous). Whereas UEFI can be
bricked, just via the "NVRAM storage in flash" feature, an
area used to hold various variables.
I had a motherboard a few years ago which had two BIOS
chips. If the first one gets corrupted, the second is used
as a failsafe. I believe the motherboard's brand was DFI. I
don't know if their motherboards are any good but that
feature, at the very least, was very welcome.

That is GIGABYTE DualBIOS™

After losing my last motherboard to a BIOS problem, I made it a
point to get one. I suppose Paul's version would work too.


Maybe Gigabyte does it too, but I checked and the model I had was a
DFI LANParty for AMD Athlon XP processors. I ran an Athlon 3500+ and
then 4800+ on it.


Gigabyte invented the Dual BIOS. Not Diamond Flower.
AFAIK, the Gigabyte usage pre-dates DFI usage.

One thing you should know about the Gigabyte dual BIOS, is
it's one boot block, and two main code blocks. If the
boot block gets zorched, she ain't gonna boot. It needs
an intact (single) boot block, to select between two
main code block images. That means it is not fully
redundant in the way that people might expect.
Normally, main code blocks have a checksum, so the
boot block can tell whether a main code block is
bad or not.

I don't know if DFI used the same implementation or not.

Generally speaking, with a computer industry implementation,
there's still the possibility of brick-age. The computer
industry doesn't like to add a lot of custom logic
for features like this, for cost reasons. If a feature
exists in a motherboard LSI device, fine, you get it for
free. If the logic must be provided "out-board", then
nobody will do that. You generally don't find PALs
or FPGAs on consumer motherboards.

We used dual BIOS at work, however ours had two
full images in separate flash devices, and it had
a hardware arbiter to switch from one image to
the other. After two reboots, you would have tested
both of them, if one was in a failure state and
wouldn't boot. (This is in a piece of communications
equipment, not a PC Compatible computer.) I couldn't
tell you who has a patent on that idea. Hell, it might
have been used in a spacecraft in the 1960's
for all I know.

If Gigabyte had a patent on theirs, it's hard to see
how DFI would have gotten away with it. Or vice versa.

Paul
  #38  
Old December 21st 17, 08:15 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default For those considering Linux...

5 wrote:
On 12/21/2017 05:31 AM, John Doe wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote:

I had a motherboard a few years ago which had two BIOS
chips. If the first one gets corrupted, the second is used
as a failsafe. I believe the motherboard's brand was DFI. I
don't know if their motherboards are any good but that
feature, at the very least, was very welcome.


That is GIGABYTE DualBIOS™

After losing my last motherboard to a BIOS problem, I made it a
point to get one. I suppose Paul's version would work too.


It could have been DFI, with a BIOS Savior installed. I don't know if
they're still made, but they were popular a decade ago with overclocking
enthusiasts.


There is no serial 8 pin version of a BIOS Savior.

On motherboards that don't have socketed Flash, you
can't use a BIOS Savior (without some soldering iron
work). The BIOS Savior, might have stopped around the
PLCC Flash era (the "square" BIOS chips).

A lot of motherboards now, the 8 pin Flash chip is
soldered down. There is a pin header next to it
(or a pad pattern), with maybe seven contacts, and
that has been used on occasion for re-programming.
When the 8 pin format first came out, there was more
interest in providing a pin header. But to save $0.07,
they eventually remove interfaces like that to save money.

You can still gain access to the 8 pin DIP flash, using
a logic probe style clip.

This shows the "hacker spirit" for re-programming serial flash.

https://learn.adafruit.com/programmi...akout/overview

And this product shows a clip you can use, to connect
electrically to a 8 pin flash, without using a soldering iron.
There must be sufficient clearance around the IC, to fit
the clip and clamp it in place. You must orient the
clip properly, to avoid accidents (no alignment feature
prevents improper connections). If you rotate this
clip 180 degrees, and apply power, the serial flash
gets fried.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....SL._SX342_.jpg

You still need a "lead set" to plug onto the individual pins
on that big clip, to run it off to your protoboard. You can
see the business end required, on some of the harnesses here.
These are harnesses you find laying around on benchtops in a
hardware lab.

http://hobbycomponents.com/1707-thic...lip-bundle.jpg

I don't think I've run into anyone yet, who needed help with
their 8 pin serial flash. Which means the procedures for
updating a BIOS, must have improved drastically compared
to the "old days". I ended up forwarding a lot of people
to "badflash.com" for help with the older BIOS Flash chip types.
Using a BIOS Savior was one way to avoid the expense of
(eventually) ending up needing help from the folks at badflash.com.
But the BIOS Savior company, I don't know why they effectively
withdrew from the business. I'm pretty sure they could have
come up with solutions for newer motherboards, if there was
money in it.

At one time, Asus Tech Support in North America, was offering
a BIOS re-programming service, but it's pretty hard finding
the web page with details. And they might have stopped
offering that service (as the Asus EStore has disappeared too).

When I type in "estore.asus.com" now, some wholesale-type
page appears instead, like they weren't making money working
with "Joe Lunchbox" people :-)

Paul

  #39  
Old December 21st 17, 08:20 PM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default For those considering Linux...

mechanic wrote:
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray carter wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter
Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.
One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.


Seems to be an Intel driver problem that Ubuntu might/should have
caught in their testing of new kernels. See the comments on the site
listed above for more insight.


An inquiring mind might ask

"why does that driver exist?"

Why is there a driver for that, in the first place ?

The BIOS is supposed to pass ACPI tables to the
OS during boot handoff. Wasn't that good enough ?

Why are we doing I/O to SPI ???

An attempt to overwrite Intel ME or something ?

Or was the bus I/O intended for some other device
on the same bus ?

For lots of computer-type stuff, there is a BIOS
interface for requesting low-level operations.
(That provides a layer of insulation.)
You hardly ever want access to every fricken
thing underneath, because stuff like this happens.

Paul
  #40  
Old December 22nd 17, 12:25 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Doomsdrzej[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 262
Default For those considering Linux...

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:13:31 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.


And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?


His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (almost old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,


Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?
  #41  
Old December 22nd 17, 12:30 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
mike[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,073
Default For those considering Linux...

On 12/21/2017 11:15 AM, Paul wrote:
5 wrote:
On 12/21/2017 05:31 AM, John Doe wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote:

I had a motherboard a few years ago which had two BIOS
chips. If the first one gets corrupted, the second is used
as a failsafe. I believe the motherboard's brand was DFI. I
don't know if their motherboards are any good but that
feature, at the very least, was very welcome.

That is GIGABYTE DualBIOS™

After losing my last motherboard to a BIOS problem, I made it a
point to get one. I suppose Paul's version would work too.


It could have been DFI, with a BIOS Savior installed. I don't know if
they're still made, but they were popular a decade ago with
overclocking enthusiasts.


There is no serial 8 pin version of a BIOS Savior.

On motherboards that don't have socketed Flash, you
can't use a BIOS Savior (without some soldering iron
work). The BIOS Savior, might have stopped around the
PLCC Flash era (the "square" BIOS chips).

A lot of motherboards now, the 8 pin Flash chip is
soldered down. There is a pin header next to it
(or a pad pattern), with maybe seven contacts, and
that has been used on occasion for re-programming.
When the 8 pin format first came out, there was more
interest in providing a pin header. But to save $0.07,
they eventually remove interfaces like that to save money.

You can still gain access to the 8 pin DIP flash, using
a logic probe style clip.

This shows the "hacker spirit" for re-programming serial flash.

https://learn.adafruit.com/programmi...akout/overview


And this product shows a clip you can use, to connect
electrically to a 8 pin flash, without using a soldering iron.
There must be sufficient clearance around the IC, to fit
the clip and clamp it in place. You must orient the
clip properly, to avoid accidents (no alignment feature
prevents improper connections). If you rotate this
clip 180 degrees, and apply power, the serial flash
gets fried.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....SL._SX342_.jpg

You still need a "lead set" to plug onto the individual pins
on that big clip, to run it off to your protoboard. You can
see the business end required, on some of the harnesses here.
These are harnesses you find laying around on benchtops in a
hardware lab.

http://hobbycomponents.com/1707-thic...lip-bundle.jpg


I don't think I've run into anyone yet, who needed help with
their 8 pin serial flash. Which means the procedures for
updating a BIOS, must have improved drastically compared
to the "old days". I ended up forwarding a lot of people
to "badflash.com" for help with the older BIOS Flash chip types.
Using a BIOS Savior was one way to avoid the expense of
(eventually) ending up needing help from the folks at badflash.com.
But the BIOS Savior company, I don't know why they effectively
withdrew from the business. I'm pretty sure they could have
come up with solutions for newer motherboards, if there was
money in it.

At one time, Asus Tech Support in North America, was offering
a BIOS re-programming service, but it's pretty hard finding
the web page with details. And they might have stopped
offering that service (as the Asus EStore has disappeared too).

When I type in "estore.asus.com" now, some wholesale-type
page appears instead, like they weren't making money working
with "Joe Lunchbox" people :-)

Paul

Don't suppose you have a link to a fixit procedure that a mortal
EE could implement?
I still have that gateway computer.
Has unlabeled pads around the chip.
I found a BIOS upgrade that claims to let you disable UEFI.
Might be an interesting winter project.

Problem is that I have no details.
I'd rather not desolder the chip.
How do we keep the CPU from conflicting with the programmer?
What's in the bios update file? How do I determine what to
copy to what chip addresses?
I suspect it's simple the second time you do it.
  #42  
Old December 22nd 17, 01:16 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Alan Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default For those considering Linux...

On 2017-12-21 3:25 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:13:31 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.

And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?


His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (almost old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,


Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?


You mean other than the utterly obvious implication of him saying he
never dated a girl "without her mother's permission".

Hint for you: if you're dating adults, you don't need permission.
  #43  
Old December 22nd 17, 01:22 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default For those considering Linux...

mike wrote:

Don't suppose you have a link to a fixit procedure that a mortal
EE could implement?
I still have that gateway computer.
Has unlabeled pads around the chip.
I found a BIOS upgrade that claims to let you disable UEFI.
Might be an interesting winter project.

Problem is that I have no details.
I'd rather not desolder the chip.
How do we keep the CPU from conflicting with the programmer?
What's in the bios update file? How do I determine what to
copy to what chip addresses?
I suspect it's simple the second time you do it.


Well, I don't have a Gateway, and I don't know what
they're trying to offer you in this case. This might be
a box with one of the older Intel inspired EFI designs
(I would have to go look up the details on one of those).

Normally, you offer a CSM code module, to add legacy BIOS
behavior to a UEFI BIOS. That's what modern BIOS have. Mine,
for example, offers to switch to CSM only, UEFI only, or
auto-detect (you select a boot drive, it figures it out).
Mine has everything I need to test scenarios, all except
a TPM and Secure Boot. Which is fine by me.

A UEFI-only BIOS, would be missing a CSM module (a piece of code).

If the BIOS is an earlier version, there were EFI BIOS
which might not be quite as mature. I would expect
some of the earlier ones to be less flexible in their
approach, or have outright bugs ("brick-able").

BIOS flashing, the operation itself, is pretty simple. You erase
segment after segment, and reprogram them. The BIOS chip, if it's
a boot block flash, can have a low 8KB segment or a high 8KB segment,
which is managed a bit separately from the rest. And a persistent
chunk of code might be designed to run in there. The presence of
such a code, is intended to make recovery from a bad flash possible.
An 8KB code segment, isn't big enough to run a video display,
so recovery is "done blind".

You could, in theory, flash upgrade the main portion of
such chips, leaving the boot block intact. If the flash fails,
you can do a "blind flash" and attempt to put it back together
again. If the flash fails and your plan B doesn't work out, then
it's soldering iron time for the Flash soldered to the
motherboard. On a PLCC, you can buy a $100 pair of micro snipper
pliers (I broke mine), and cut the legs on the chip one by one.

(Yes, the center to center is pretty damn tight...)

https://sc01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1YjFOL...pg_220x220.jpg

That makes it easier for someone who doesn't have a hot air
de-soldering station. Things you cannot get the snippers
on, you can use a special low temperature solder (Chip Quik),
to make it easier to remove surface mount components
(again, because you lack a hot air rework setup). Once you
coat all the solder pads with Chip Quik, you could just
turn the board upside-down, heat the lid on the chip, and
the surface mount PLCC chip just falls off. Chip Quik melts
at such a low temperature, all the other solder joints
remain intact.

http://www.chipquik.com/store/index.php

*******

When mention of EFI/UEFI first came out, there were some
BIOS flashes offered, to change a legacy BIOS motherboard
to a UEFI BIOS motherboard. But that practice stopped
almost immediately. From then on, you either got legacy
motherboards or you got UEFI motherboards, but with no
secondary file offered to change them over. It costs
money to make both versions, license money, and the novelty
of offering both wore off real fast. I think the BIOS
companies may have promoted this, with relaxed pricing,
during the interval where "catastrophies" were likely.

You may have a product with CSM added or subtracted, rather
than a file which is a legacy design and a completely
different design which is UEFI based.

I don't think there is a problem attempting to do this,
the problem is what happens if it doesn't work and
the thing is bricked. But that's aways been the case
(unless you owned a BIOS Savior, in which case you can
plan ahead, and with one of two Flash chips bricked,
you survive to live another day). When you plug in a BIOS
Savior, you have a total of two flash chips. The second
chip holds your "known-working" copy, and a slide switch
selects chip A or chip B. People releasing hacked BIOS
to the Internet, they would use those for testing,
so the people on the Internet weren't used as guinea pigs.

Paul
  #44  
Old December 22nd 17, 02:16 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Doomsdrzej[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 262
Default For those considering Linux...

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:16:30 -0800, Alan Baker
wrote:

On 2017-12-21 3:25 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:13:31 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...tu-17.10-BIOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.

And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?

His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (almost old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,


Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?


You mean other than the utterly obvious implication of him saying he
never dated a girl "without her mother's permission".

Hint for you: if you're dating adults, you don't need permission.


So you have none and are operating entirely off of assumptions, like
with the "Russian collusion" garbage.

You're an idiot, Baked Anus. Possibly dumber than Peter the Klöwn,
John Gohde and Michael Glasser of Prescott, Arizona.

With that in mind, *plonk*
  #45  
Old December 22nd 17, 02:18 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Doomsdrzej[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 262
Default For those considering Linux...

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 19:51:05 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-21 18:25, Doomsdrzej wrote:
[...]

Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?


You mean, apart from what the victims said?


You mean what the _alleged_ victims said and supported with unverified
evidence.

Be kinda hard to get, since kiddie-diddlers take great care not to be
observed.


So you believe that people are guilty until proven innocent.

I don't want to live in the same world as you, Comrade.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.