Win10 update changed BIOS settings

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:


BIOS stands for Basic Input Output System so that extent UEFI is still
a form of BIOS. Except that it ain't quite so basic.

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

Nor is UEFI only an input output system...

correct.

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

Well, in the context of Windows machines, I don't think that is possible
- otherwise, of course.

that's true, but eric stevens has generalized 'bios' to be much more
than just windows computers and believes that anything qualifies, even
computers that predate bios.

On 1/20/2020 12:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 20/01/2020 19.28, Ken Blake wrote:
On 1/20/2020 11:14 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 20/01/2020 16.54, Ken Blake wrote:
On 1/19/2020 5:17 PM, Paul wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 11:06:34 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On 1/19/2020 9:38 AM, philo wrote:
On 1/19/20 4:52 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 17/01/2020 17.35, philo wrote:
My wife has a fairly new Lenovo laptop with Win10,

She had me check it last night because the function keys no
longer responded unless she presses the "Fn" key first.

She told me it happened immediately after the last update.


After seeing no tweak for that in the OS, I saw one bios
setting had changed and I reset it.
All working fine now.

There is zero chance my wife would have been fooling around in
the BIOS.


I am puzzled how and update could change a BIOS setting though.
Because your laptop being "fairly new", you don't don't have
BIOS. You have UEFI. Even if you activated "legacy support" etc,
it is still UEFI.

You should forget the word "BIOS".



The correct term is UEFI BIOS but I think most here understood
what I meant

Sorry, that is *not* the correct term (although many people say
it). Although they do similar things, UEFI and BIOS are two
different things. Saying "UEFI BIOS" is like saying "zebra horse."

If you don't believe me, do a google search on "uefi."

And you will find it full of references to "UEFI BIOS". See
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...e-e078930b8c6e


UEFI is just a type of BIOS.


I like the term "UEFI BIOS", mainly so people will
understand what part of the process it plays. Rather
than being a "dictionary correct term". It's something
we deal with on "BIOS days", and it's the "UEFI flavor".

I mean, they've gone out of their way to use "uncomfortable
terminology" that doesn't help people understand it.



I'm with you entirely, I think "UEFI BIOS" would be a better term
than "UEFI," and just keeping the term "BIOS" would be better still.

Then you are *not* at all with me :-P


You? I was replying to Paul.

Huh, sorry, I misread the graph.


OK, no big deal.



--
Ken

On 1/20/20 12:12 PM, nospam wrote:

[snip]

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

So all those chips on your SATA drive are NOT integrated?

--
"Socrates: You are wise if you admit you know nothing. DeCartes: Only
the Wise can know Anything. Sart you're an asshole if you think you
are Wise."

In article , Sam E
wrote:

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

So all those chips on your SATA drive are NOT integrated?

they are, but that doesn't make a sata drive an ide drive.

On 1/20/20 12:12 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Sam E
wrote:


BIOS stands for Basic Input Output System so that extent UEFI is still
a form of BIOS. Except that it ain't quite so basic.

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

My first PC hard drive (in 1990) was not IDE (it required a separate
controller card that connected to the drive with two ribbon cables). My
second was PATA, and had the controller integrated. What's really
strange is when we went to SATA, the controller isn't there anymore.

As to PC firmware, UEFI must have I/O routines. Does it still provide
them to the OS, like BIOS did.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Cure available for EMS (excess money syndrome). $10,000 per week.
Guaranteed to work or you pay for it again.

On 1/20/20 4:11 PM, nospam wrote:

[snip]

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

It would be really hard to use a computer with no firmware at all, but
it could be just an OS loader.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Cure available for EMS (excess money syndrome). $10,000 per week.
Guaranteed to work or you pay for it again.

On 1/20/20 4:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[snip]

Well, in the context of Windows machines, I don't think that is possible
- otherwise, of course.

It is. It could do minimal hardware setup and load Windows. No
user-configurable settings. No I/O routines provided to the OS.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Cure available for EMS (excess money syndrome). $10,000 per week.
Guaranteed to work or you pay for it again.

On 1/20/20 6:07 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Sam E
wrote:

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

So all those chips on your SATA drive are NOT integrated?

they are, but that doesn't make a sata drive an ide drive.

Then, IDE is something other than Integrated Drive Electronics. Perhaps
you could say what it is?

--
"Socrates: You are wise if you admit you know nothing. DeCartes: Only
the Wise can know Anything. Sart you're an asshole if you think you
are Wise."

In article , Sam E
wrote:

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

So all those chips on your SATA drive are NOT integrated?

they are, but that doesn't make a sata drive an ide drive.

Then, IDE is something other than Integrated Drive Electronics. Perhaps
you could say what it is?

it isn't.

On 21/01/2020 01.33, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 1/20/20 4:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[snip]

Well, in the context of Windows machines, I don't think that is
possible - otherwise, of course.

It is. It could do minimal hardware setup and load Windows. No
user-configurable settings. No I/O routines provided to the OS.

Please provide documentation that proves that Windows can boot and work
on a PC without BIOS or UEFI.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 21/01/2020 01.30, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 1/20/20 4:11 PM, nospam wrote:

[snip]

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

It would be really hard to use a computer with no firmware at all, but
it could be just an OS loader.

You are getting it wrong. There are firmwares that are neither BIOS or
UEFI, there are others. And other types of computers besides "the PC".

To be more clear: a MAC has neither BIOS nor UEFI. It has a firmware
with a different name.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 21/01/2020 01.27, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 1/20/20 12:12 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Sam E
wrote:


BIOS stands for Basic Input Output System so that extent UEFI is still
a form of BIOS. Except that it ain't quite so basic.

In the same way IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, and applies
equally well to PATA, SATA, SCSI, NVMe, and probably a lot of other
interfaces as well.

other than pata, no.

My first PC hard drive (in 1990) was not IDE (it required a separate
controller card that connected to the drive with two ribbon cables). My
second was PATA, and had the controller integrated. What's really
strange is when we went to SATA, the controller isn't there anymore.

As to PC firmware, UEFI must have I/O routines. Does it still provide
them to the OS, like BIOS did.

At least, some of them. Nominally, it needs enough to boot, which if the
disk is GPT means it needs to read the main table, then find the EFI
partition, then read the filesystem and find files by name. Which is way
more than BIOS can do, it could only read disk sectors by number, no
idea of files.

Then it can display text on the display - possibly in graphics mode,
read an USB keyboard and mouse - well, some BIOS can do that, but not
all, it is not a requirement.

Final test: boot MSDos. does it fuly work?


--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

It would be really hard to use a computer with no firmware at all, but
it could be just an OS loader.

You are getting it wrong. There are firmwares that are neither BIOS or
UEFI, there are others. And other types of computers besides "the PC".

To be more clear: a MAC has neither BIOS nor UEFI. It has a firmware
with a different name.

intel macs use uefi.
powerpc macs used open firmware.
68k macs had nothing.

On 21/01/2020 03.29, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

It would be really hard to use a computer with no firmware at all, but
it could be just an OS loader.

You are getting it wrong. There are firmwares that are neither BIOS or
UEFI, there are others. And other types of computers besides "the PC".

To be more clear: a MAC has neither BIOS nor UEFI. It has a firmware
with a different name.

intel macs use uefi.
powerpc macs used open firmware.
68k macs had nothing.

Nothing configurable, but surely it has firmware :-)
At least enough to load the boot code from disk and display some error
code if not.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

also, not all computers have uefi or bios.

It would be really hard to use a computer with no firmware at all, but
it could be just an OS loader.

You are getting it wrong. There are firmwares that are neither BIOS or
UEFI, there are others. And other types of computers besides "the PC".

To be more clear: a MAC has neither BIOS nor UEFI. It has a firmware
with a different name.

intel macs use uefi.
powerpc macs used open firmware.
68k macs had nothing.

Nothing configurable, but surely it has firmware :-)

At least enough to load the boot code from disk and display some error
code if not.

68k macs booted directly from rom, which contained a substantial
portion of mac os, aka the toolbox. the startup code was just another
part, which ran only once.