Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Null
Is this you? Claim Profile »
5 months ago
in It's Over -- Political Wire on Political Wire
I wonder if Dick Clark will be there counting down to that moment when Osama is sworn in... it's almost like a friggin new year's celebration
- -1 points
- Jump to »
Chredon
When WHO is sworn in?
11 months ago
in One bug report to rule them all on Linux Hater's Blog
It simply comes down to the project.
Projects need testers where does LH think they come from. Thin air? Training and production of them is required. Lot of projects are building training documents for this reason.
Also important issue particularly seen a lot in wine. That X version of hardware causes strange effect developers and current group of trained testers don't have it some new untrained turns up with it. Bugzilla is useful for that.
Some how I think LH is just simply lazy. Laziness is the only reason really for not reporting a found bug. Ok some cases the bug will be disregarded. Other cases it will be your own error.
Now lazy people make up all kinds of reasons to explain there laziness away. Just because a few people post wrong into a Bugzilla it does not make it a useless tool. Its only useless if people with skills stop using it like LH is saying.
If bug tracking is so bad. Do as a favor LH design a system that will work. Ok I did not say code. Design only. Put that on your Blog. We would have replaced it if we had a better one that covered all problems. Put up or shut up on this topic.
show all 3 replies
Projects need testers where does LH think they come from. Thin air? Training and production of them is required. Lot of projects are building training documents for this reason.
Also important issue particularly seen a lot in wine. That X version of hardware causes strange effect developers and current group of trained testers don't have it some new untrained turns up with it. Bugzilla is useful for that.
Some how I think LH is just simply lazy. Laziness is the only reason really for not reporting a found bug. Ok some cases the bug will be disregarded. Other cases it will be your own error.
Now lazy people make up all kinds of reasons to explain there laziness away. Just because a few people post wrong into a Bugzilla it does not make it a useless tool. Its only useless if people with skills stop using it like LH is saying.
If bug tracking is so bad. Do as a favor LH design a system that will work. Ok I did not say code. Design only. Put that on your Blog. We would have replaced it if we had a better one that covered all problems. Put up or shut up on this topic.
- -1 points
- Jump to »
bic
You're forgetting that John Q. Enduser doesn't want to learn to be a developer, he just wants his programs to work. The developers demand tons of information from tools that don't come with their distros, or aren't installed by default, that John doesn't know how to use. Therefore, he gives up and boots back into Windows, where he can go about his business perfectly fine without arrogant developers yelling at him for doing the best he can in reporting a bug in their code.
If developers want detailed reports AND mainstream Linux use, why don't they write ONE central bug reporting system, AND a working, automatic utility that gathers the crash information and sends it to the server with no end-user interaction, save for a simple dialog box. (Said box would let them submit the report, cancel, or view the information it contains.)
If developers want detailed reports AND mainstream Linux use, why don't they write ONE central bug reporting system, AND a working, automatic utility that gathers the crash information and sends it to the server with no end-user interaction, save for a simple dialog box. (Said box would let them submit the report, cancel, or view the information it contains.)
whitetigersx
No, you're right, the average user should instinctively know how to get all of the information that the devs need. It just ahppens when you install linux.
The point isn't that LH is too lazy to report the bugs it's that he's disillusioned with the attitudes of the devs towards the average user of computers. They don't know anything about debug symbols, or fixing a problem by running the following fix program.
{ bool bugReport(true);
while (bugReport)
{worksForMe()};
}.
Most people don't know the first thing about terminal, and since it's all about the end user the bug reports can definitely be an epic fail.
The point isn't that LH is too lazy to report the bugs it's that he's disillusioned with the attitudes of the devs towards the average user of computers. They don't know anything about debug symbols, or fixing a problem by running the following fix program.
{ bool bugReport(true);
while (bugReport)
{worksForMe()};
}.
Most people don't know the first thing about terminal, and since it's all about the end user the bug reports can definitely be an epic fail.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver.4 on Linux Hater's Blog
Please get your information correct. Nvidia drivers are based on a older open source protocal.
Mesa has more than just intel acceleration.
Please look closer at Pulseaudio. It jacks into ALSA redirecting alsa outputs to its self. And everything with a Pulseaudio plugin as a alsa plugin so its kinda optional. Very optional. More people push this point the better.
The Official Standard of Linux Standard Base says ALSA. from a coders point of view that is all you need to bother about. Official standard of Unix's says OSS sound. So rest like pulseaudio is disregard noise.
Now just because I make a custom install disk of windows with pulseaudio on does not mean as a coder you have to give a rat's about pulseaudio when developing applications for windows. Reason pulseaudio its not part of the official API/ABI. Now why as a coder for Linux do I have to care any different about pulseaudio. Reason distributions are just custom Linux install disks nothing more. Really there big head of there place in the Linux World needs to be deflated.
Even distributions that ship with Pulseaudio its always removable. Question is how hard does the distribution make it to remove.
Mesa has more than just intel acceleration.
Please look closer at Pulseaudio. It jacks into ALSA redirecting alsa outputs to its self. And everything with a Pulseaudio plugin as a alsa plugin so its kinda optional. Very optional. More people push this point the better.
The Official Standard of Linux Standard Base says ALSA. from a coders point of view that is all you need to bother about. Official standard of Unix's says OSS sound. So rest like pulseaudio is disregard noise.
Now just because I make a custom install disk of windows with pulseaudio on does not mean as a coder you have to give a rat's about pulseaudio when developing applications for windows. Reason pulseaudio its not part of the official API/ABI. Now why as a coder for Linux do I have to care any different about pulseaudio. Reason distributions are just custom Linux install disks nothing more. Really there big head of there place in the Linux World needs to be deflated.
Even distributions that ship with Pulseaudio its always removable. Question is how hard does the distribution make it to remove.
1 reply
Anonymous coward
"Nvidia drivers are based on a older open source protocal. " -> As far as I know they ship binary drivers and they won't open them up and for that reason things like this happened: http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/our-way...
Question 3.1 on the Mesa FAQ demonstrates quite clearly that Mesa doesn't have any hardware acceleration on any current graphics card.
I understand there's currently a turf war between ALSA and PulseAudio, with each distro claiming its own favourite and emulating the other. And how does this help end users?
LSB is ignored because its basically useless, which is why distros come with PulseAudio. Linux 'standards' have already been done here too by the way: http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/standar...
Anyway, at least with this thread we've put paid to the lie that there's a standard way to get sound out a Linux box and users are caught in the crossfire.
Question 3.1 on the Mesa FAQ demonstrates quite clearly that Mesa doesn't have any hardware acceleration on any current graphics card.
I understand there's currently a turf war between ALSA and PulseAudio, with each distro claiming its own favourite and emulating the other. And how does this help end users?
LSB is ignored because its basically useless, which is why distros come with PulseAudio. Linux 'standards' have already been done here too by the way: http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/standar...
Anyway, at least with this thread we've put paid to the lie that there's a standard way to get sound out a Linux box and users are caught in the crossfire.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver.4 on Linux Hater's Blog
Close. There are better programs open source for doing lots of different graphical tasks. Even better than photoshop at some tasts. Yet gimp gets all the marketing. So everyone thinks its everything and the best OSS has to offer. What is wrong. Most people don't notice that krita is just a front end to a older tool than gimp. ImageMagick. Ok be truthful who here even knew that existed for windows other than Linux people? What about its other front end TclMagick? Imagemagick is particular good as handling really large images and batch processing them quickly. So next to photoshop really useful tool.
Simple fact some really useful tools of Open Source have got Zero press coverage. Yet stuff like gimp got tones.
Really LH could have a party pulling apart bad marketing.
Simple fact some really useful tools of Open Source have got Zero press coverage. Yet stuff like gimp got tones.
Really LH could have a party pulling apart bad marketing.
1 reply
Karkhalash
I actually do use ImageMagick on Windows, sometimes. (mostly batch resizes) Thing is Photoshop does batch processing, too, which is arguably more flexible in many ways than Imagemagick. Why would I fire up image magick, when I have Photoshop rigged to -> save as 16-bit psd (working copy) -> flatten, save as zip-compressed 16-bit Tiff (master copy) -> drop to 72dpi, drop to 8-bit, convert to RGB, resize to 50%, save as PNG -> drop to 50%, save to JPG -> wait for input, saved cropped image as GIF, all one buttonclick away? Does the work for me on a macro upon completing an original piece.
IM becomes useful for large collections of images outside of that workflow, or for mass resizing camera dumps, since it's more convenient that loading hundreds of images into Photoshop (but Photoshop can be scripted to load images on at a time, anyway), so why bother with IM at all?
IM's strength is is it's language bindings, works well for automatically generated or manipulated images on the fly on the server end, via perl (eww), python, or PHP, since who's going to install PS on a server?
I'll agree with that last point, though, there are some OSS gems out there.
IM becomes useful for large collections of images outside of that workflow, or for mass resizing camera dumps, since it's more convenient that loading hundreds of images into Photoshop (but Photoshop can be scripted to load images on at a time, anyway), so why bother with IM at all?
IM's strength is is it's language bindings, works well for automatically generated or manipulated images on the fly on the server end, via perl (eww), python, or PHP, since who's going to install PS on a server?
I'll agree with that last point, though, there are some OSS gems out there.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver.4 on Linux Hater's Blog
CMYK was covered in gimps relegation Cinepaint. It never got the press coverage because it was aways branded as a movie retouching tool.
Next version major verison of gimp will have CMYK. Ok you could also go Krita.
GImp is a classic case of media seeing something and over marketing it to the better tools out there.
show all 3 replies
Next version major verison of gimp will have CMYK. Ok you could also go Krita.
GImp is a classic case of media seeing something and over marketing it to the better tools out there.
- 0 points
- Jump to »
Kharkhalash
Krita was covered in my previous comment, where although a better choice than Gimp, in that it possesses support for CMYK, it has only limited usefullness due to a lack of decent colour-managent and Panntone support. GeGL was also covered in the previous comment (also covered by LH's FOSS motto "Eventually (tm)".
The worst part of Gimp's marketting, is that it's actually pitched as already having CMYK support, in that it essentially opens CMYK images, as8-bit RGB, which is pretty useless.
Pantone support is unlikely to ever be included into either project due to it being proprietary, which limits both their usefulness considerably, due to the whole being not only the industry standard, but also a standard by legislation.
CinePaint is certainly interesting, and certainly has potential, but its Windows port is far from useable, and the interface is even more attrocious than Gimp's. It's enhanced featureset, however, is largely targetted at film retouching, and it's pretty good at that, but Photoshop is targetted at print and graphic design (also film editing, with CS3 extended), and that does make a difference.
The worst part of Gimp's marketting, is that it's actually pitched as already having CMYK support, in that it essentially opens CMYK images, as8-bit RGB, which is pretty useless.
Pantone support is unlikely to ever be included into either project due to it being proprietary, which limits both their usefulness considerably, due to the whole being not only the industry standard, but also a standard by legislation.
CinePaint is certainly interesting, and certainly has potential, but its Windows port is far from useable, and the interface is even more attrocious than Gimp's. It's enhanced featureset, however, is largely targetted at film retouching, and it's pretty good at that, but Photoshop is targetted at print and graphic design (also film editing, with CS3 extended), and that does make a difference.
Crunchinator
Fucking brilliant! Getting wheels for your car in the future doesn't change the fact that you can't use it without them prior.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver.4 on Linux Hater's Blog
Merge cycle audio messy. There are not that many that conflict.
The issue is that there really can only be 1 sound server running on a computer at once controlling all audio output. ESD ALSA NAS were the 3. Pulse tries to cover 2 ESD and ALSA then provide its own interface. Yes it has some issues.
Most of the audio wrappers on linux don't conflit with themselfs. Windows users really don't know that most of the things counted as Linux Audio libs are also used in games running on windows. Its only really the sound servers where the mess is.
As long as someone wins the merge everything will be nice.
The issue is that there really can only be 1 sound server running on a computer at once controlling all audio output. ESD ALSA NAS were the 3. Pulse tries to cover 2 ESD and ALSA then provide its own interface. Yes it has some issues.
Most of the audio wrappers on linux don't conflit with themselfs. Windows users really don't know that most of the things counted as Linux Audio libs are also used in games running on windows. Its only really the sound servers where the mess is.
As long as someone wins the merge everything will be nice.
1 reply
anonymous coward
Have you ever stopped and thought why Linux even has a sound server? How are you supposed to get sound out the speakers with a latency of less than 100ms if you've got several different libraries talking to that all trying and failing at backwards compatibility which then push the audio to some flaky daemon listening on localhost whose only job is to shove it on to the kernel. Because obviously running audio through TCP/IP and into a daemon process is the best way to get a response in near realtime.
Did anyone even sit down and think of a design before embarking on a project to unify Linux sound? Here was a chance to avoid repeating that car crash known as X Windows and the developers went right ahead and repeated X Windows. Because network transparency is the most important thing for when it comes to sound, I can't see why anyone wouldn't want it to come out of some speakers attached to a computer 50 miles away from where I'm typing at the keyboard.
And then the lead developer said that the best thing about PulseAudio is that it broke Flash and that would force Adobe to open up their code. DirectX and QuickTime concentrate on getting sound out the computer instead of furthering a political agenda, but I suppose that's because they're done by horrible capitalist companies who deliberately write useful frameworks to make FOSS look bad.
By the way:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png
Did anyone even sit down and think of a design before embarking on a project to unify Linux sound? Here was a chance to avoid repeating that car crash known as X Windows and the developers went right ahead and repeated X Windows. Because network transparency is the most important thing for when it comes to sound, I can't see why anyone wouldn't want it to come out of some speakers attached to a computer 50 miles away from where I'm typing at the keyboard.
And then the lead developer said that the best thing about PulseAudio is that it broke Flash and that would force Adobe to open up their code. DirectX and QuickTime concentrate on getting sound out the computer instead of furthering a political agenda, but I suppose that's because they're done by horrible capitalist companies who deliberately write useful frameworks to make FOSS look bad.
By the way:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png
11 months ago
in Foxnews^H^H^H^Hconn conspiracy on Linux Hater's Blog
http://www.top500.org/stats/list/31/os << You must mean another top 500. Because that one says only 2 windows 2003's.
1 reply
B1663r
You must have trouble reading because that top list you are looking at says 5.
Since that list was compiled Windows Server 2008 HPC beta 1 has shipped and several of the larger clusters have switched over to windows. At current count it is 25. Oh and they are all faster than the linux clusters that they replaced.
I think the most poignant example is NCSA's example where they had three Linux clusters, and each cluster was modded to dual boot Windows HPC, and where each system was unique before, and each one required custom programming, now they all run their Linux flavor and dual boot into windows and the windows systems are homogeneous, all all three are faster than their native linux;)
The results from Windows HPC Server beta 1 are so overwhelming in fact, by the time that list is recompiled at the end of this year, I expect you will see a significant decline in linux systems, or else they face being displaced with systems making the upgrade to Windows;)
Oh also, I thought it was really neat that the Windows HPC development environment is just visual studio with with a HPC plugin.
Oh also the researchers are all excited because the software that they develop on a 32 core workstation is the same software that they deploy to the clusters. It is expected to be a radical shift in supercomputing. But thats just what the no nothings at NCSA say right?
Since that list was compiled Windows Server 2008 HPC beta 1 has shipped and several of the larger clusters have switched over to windows. At current count it is 25. Oh and they are all faster than the linux clusters that they replaced.
I think the most poignant example is NCSA's example where they had three Linux clusters, and each cluster was modded to dual boot Windows HPC, and where each system was unique before, and each one required custom programming, now they all run their Linux flavor and dual boot into windows and the windows systems are homogeneous, all all three are faster than their native linux;)
The results from Windows HPC Server beta 1 are so overwhelming in fact, by the time that list is recompiled at the end of this year, I expect you will see a significant decline in linux systems, or else they face being displaced with systems making the upgrade to Windows;)
Oh also, I thought it was really neat that the Windows HPC development environment is just visual studio with with a HPC plugin.
Oh also the researchers are all excited because the software that they develop on a 32 core workstation is the same software that they deploy to the clusters. It is expected to be a radical shift in supercomputing. But thats just what the no nothings at NCSA say right?
11 months ago
in Foxnews^H^H^H^Hconn conspiracy on Linux Hater's Blog
Captain Obvious idiot. Tyan motherboards watch what you order. Some of there motherboard out box can only load a Linux. You have down download a little linux disk to flash the bios so it will boot windows. And if the board has to be replace for any reason you will have to go threw the refixing of bios again because the board started life as Linux.
They have been going for a long time. Reason cuts start up time of board way down for linux.
They are not going bankrupt they produce boards for high end super computer setups. Somewhere that Windows compatibility is kinda pointless.
So know you companies thecodewitch. So what SudoAptitude said is more than possible. Lot of PC manufacturer that do Servers do have the Linux bios option for the higher end markets.
They have been going for a long time. Reason cuts start up time of board way down for linux.
They are not going bankrupt they produce boards for high end super computer setups. Somewhere that Windows compatibility is kinda pointless.
So know you companies thecodewitch. So what SudoAptitude said is more than possible. Lot of PC manufacturer that do Servers do have the Linux bios option for the higher end markets.
2 replies
thecodewitch
Really? I used to play with circuits and program EPROMS when I was at school too.
whitetigersx
Yeah, because it's a great idea to provide out of the box support for one operating system. I mean if those Tyan motherboards only supported Windows then I suppose that would be ok? Nobody is going to get upset because the motherboard doesn't directly support another operating system without having to jump through a couple of hoops?
Or it could be that most Windows users would say, I'm mad, I don't like that. I'm taking this back and getting something that does what I want it to do. Instead of the knee-jerk reaction that it's some conspiracy targeted directly at one operating system and demand that they support them out of the box.
Perhaps the reason that Foxconn didn't bother with a valid linux check is because they can't figure out what the hell to look for.
Or it could be that most Windows users would say, I'm mad, I don't like that. I'm taking this back and getting something that does what I want it to do. Instead of the knee-jerk reaction that it's some conspiracy targeted directly at one operating system and demand that they support them out of the box.
Perhaps the reason that Foxconn didn't bother with a valid linux check is because they can't figure out what the hell to look for.
11 months ago
in Foxnews^H^H^H^Hconn conspiracy on Linux Hater's Blog
Motherboard Companies really have to take the flak. Reason look at that table provided. Some features of the motherboard can only be got by saying you are windows. There is no standard following way to get all features. Say Linux or Unknown still get a limited feature set. Reactos clone of windows will most likely have to lie as well and run the gauntlet like every other open source OS. This ACPI issue is a major one.
Linux was basically stuck. Either emulate Windows ACPI or be feature short. Of course Linux developers have allowed the tables to be over ridden at software level. So you want to know how a maker can support Linux and Windows. 2 key ways provide a replacement table for Linux initrd's or add name particular feature rich to the bois no windows tweeking for the Linux guys and tell them to use "acpi_os_name= [HW,ACPI] Tell ACPI BIOS the name of the OS" after kernel to override what Linux tells the OS so it works. All linux installers allow this option to be used.
This could even be in the motherboard book. Not like linux guys have made it imposable. Imposable is if they had not included any overrides. The motherboard companies are more than free to create a table named anything for Linux the way is open.
Lack of support for Linux caused this mess of stealthiness of linux to get access to features.
Linux was basically stuck. Either emulate Windows ACPI or be feature short. Of course Linux developers have allowed the tables to be over ridden at software level. So you want to know how a maker can support Linux and Windows. 2 key ways provide a replacement table for Linux initrd's or add name particular feature rich to the bois no windows tweeking for the Linux guys and tell them to use "acpi_os_name= [HW,ACPI] Tell ACPI BIOS the name of the OS" after kernel to override what Linux tells the OS so it works. All linux installers allow this option to be used.
This could even be in the motherboard book. Not like linux guys have made it imposable. Imposable is if they had not included any overrides. The motherboard companies are more than free to create a table named anything for Linux the way is open.
Lack of support for Linux caused this mess of stealthiness of linux to get access to features.
- 2 points
- Jump to »
Anonymous coward
Yes, and why was Linux stuck? Because nobody in freetardland wrote the specifications and sent them out to manufacturers.
Motherboard companies can't make up Linux IDs in isolation, they have to be the same across all motherboards. They have to be specified by the kernel developers because only the kernel developers know which revisions of the kernal accept which ACPI features. If you read the original post by Linux Hater you'd find a link to http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/24/286 where even a Linux kernel developer has admitted as much.
Yet this was too complicated as it required too much work and organisation so it was decided to fake Windows IDs. When this plan comes unstuck (first it's difficult to perfectly emulate Windows and second BIOS developers may make make bug fixes for Windows which trip up Linux), a freetard's natural response is to blame Microsoft, BIOS developers, and motherboard manufacturers.
Pathetic. The ball is in Linux's court and Linux failed.
Motherboard companies can't make up Linux IDs in isolation, they have to be the same across all motherboards. They have to be specified by the kernel developers because only the kernel developers know which revisions of the kernal accept which ACPI features. If you read the original post by Linux Hater you'd find a link to http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/24/286 where even a Linux kernel developer has admitted as much.
Yet this was too complicated as it required too much work and organisation so it was decided to fake Windows IDs. When this plan comes unstuck (first it's difficult to perfectly emulate Windows and second BIOS developers may make make bug fixes for Windows which trip up Linux), a freetard's natural response is to blame Microsoft, BIOS developers, and motherboard manufacturers.
Pathetic. The ball is in Linux's court and Linux failed.
11 months ago
in Foxnews^H^H^H^Hconn conspiracy on Linux Hater's Blog
PS Basically Linux guys have changed ID because there OLD ID was stuffed because they were not providing all features the motherboard supported. If manufacturers truly got there heads united and started providing a working ID Linux guys would go there. Linux Hater you are asking the wrong party to put up the Stable ID first.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has. As you have seen Linux fixs itself for bios so it really does not need the work around option at bios level. As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues. Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has. As you have seen Linux fixs itself for bios so it really does not need the work around option at bios level. As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues. Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
1 reply
guz
If manufacturers truly got there heads united and started providing a working ID Linux guys
replace second word with 2 last words. The manufacturers deliver. This seems to escape you.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has.
I re-read this 4 times.
As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues.
You don't need to, thanks to open-source BIOS (coreboot). You can download the specs for the chips and disassemble the motherboard to see the copper on the PCB. You have people like Ryan who are willing to have a go at life this way. Maybe you could then accuse the MB manufacturers for not cooperating because they use vias which are hidden between layers on the PCB.
Oh, and coreboot has tint. Finally. I predict 500 versions and spin-offs in the near future.
Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
Knowing how the Linsux community works it would probably be futile.
replace second word with 2 last words. The manufacturers deliver. This seems to escape you.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has.
I re-read this 4 times.
As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues.
You don't need to, thanks to open-source BIOS (coreboot). You can download the specs for the chips and disassemble the motherboard to see the copper on the PCB. You have people like Ryan who are willing to have a go at life this way. Maybe you could then accuse the MB manufacturers for not cooperating because they use vias which are hidden between layers on the PCB.
Oh, and coreboot has tint. Finally. I predict 500 versions and spin-offs in the near future.
Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
Knowing how the Linsux community works it would probably be futile.
11 months ago
in Foxnews^H^H^H^Hconn conspiracy on Linux Hater's Blog
Did provide a stable target. Then had companies say simple we don't support Linux. Ok simple solution use someone else's ACPI you do support. Caused effect.
Companies answer with we don't support linux we don't test to spec but use Microsoft tests so we miss defects Microsoft disregards. Even worse ship failed ACPI settings. Causes the mess you have now of not identifiable linux.
It takes two parties to have a dispute. If you want Linux to use a ID linux has to be sure that ID will work.
Please go back and look at what else the person changed. There are a set of ACPI flags that have specal meaning that windows disregards. Linux made the bad mistake of obeying them as per standard.
No serous question its made there live harder. Yet why does windows get away with shipping buggy programs that do need bios level hacks?
You know the simplest way for hardware vendors to fix it now for Linux. Include there own direct boot loader of linux.
http://www.pchell.com/support/antivirusgolden.s... providing link to rescue another pack of Windows Idiots from the path to doom. Don't flow the AVG(antivirusgolden) link it is a know trojan.
Yes Linux systems are safe. Windows IDIOT's are suckers for installing any majware trojan than claims to clean registry, improve secuirty or my personal favourite removes malware.
Companies answer with we don't support linux we don't test to spec but use Microsoft tests so we miss defects Microsoft disregards. Even worse ship failed ACPI settings. Causes the mess you have now of not identifiable linux.
It takes two parties to have a dispute. If you want Linux to use a ID linux has to be sure that ID will work.
Please go back and look at what else the person changed. There are a set of ACPI flags that have specal meaning that windows disregards. Linux made the bad mistake of obeying them as per standard.
No serous question its made there live harder. Yet why does windows get away with shipping buggy programs that do need bios level hacks?
You know the simplest way for hardware vendors to fix it now for Linux. Include there own direct boot loader of linux.
http://www.pchell.com/support/antivirusgolden.s... providing link to rescue another pack of Windows Idiots from the path to doom. Don't flow the AVG(antivirusgolden) link it is a know trojan.
Yes Linux systems are safe. Windows IDIOT's are suckers for installing any majware trojan than claims to clean registry, improve secuirty or my personal favourite removes malware.
- 0 points
- Jump to »
thecodewitch
Did provide a stable target. Then had companies say simple we don't support Linux. Ok simple solution use someone else's ACPI you do support. Caused effect.
No, didn't provide stable target. Target defined by community. Community stupid. Therefore, target no there.
No, didn't provide stable target. Target defined by community. Community stupid. Therefore, target no there.
void
PS Basically Linux guys have changed ID because there OLD ID was stuffed because they were not providing all features the motherboard supported. If manufacturers truly got there heads united and started providing a working ID Linux guys would go there. Linux Hater you are asking the wrong party to put up the Stable ID first.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has. As you have seen Linux fixs itself for bios so it really does not need the work around option at bios level. As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues. Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
Could be as simple ACPI 2.0 ie to spec no tampering for OS's with all features this board has. As you have seen Linux fixs itself for bios so it really does not need the work around option at bios level. As long as bios operates to spec there will be only minor issues. Knowing what spec the bios was using would be handy.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver. 3 on Linux Hater's Blog
I have never found a place in windows to place a custom acpi table to use instead of the bios one.
If there is one then this problem is a minor annoyance. If there is not one. This can in time become a major problem.
Issue is product is not broken. So no returning it if you buy it by mistake your stuck with it. Ok if laws everywhere said something like this made the board returnable it would not be a issue either. In that case I would suspect the motherboard maker would fix BIOS so there boards were not getting returned.
If there is one then this problem is a minor annoyance. If there is not one. This can in time become a major problem.
Issue is product is not broken. So no returning it if you buy it by mistake your stuck with it. Ok if laws everywhere said something like this made the board returnable it would not be a issue either. In that case I would suspect the motherboard maker would fix BIOS so there boards were not getting returned.
1 reply
Alexei
Returnable or not, if Linux had a significant share of the desktop market, people who bought their boards would get mad at them, and Foxconn would feel the heat. But Linux on desktop is almost nonexistent, so Linux users have virtually no clout. And whose fault is it that Linux fails on desktop?
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver. 3 on Linux Hater's Blog
You are really missing why its a issue. The precedence allows the following.
Linux only motherboard would nicely force use of Vista Business or better after XP leaves the market. Due to the only way to run windows then would be in the Linux hypervisor. So Nice higher priced version of windows that has to acquired or not be able to run windows.
There are way more effective uses of this kind of lock against Windows users. Where is the windows place to provide ACPI table overrides.
Support for these motherboards with buggy ACPI is in 2.6.26 linux kernel so no work around needed any more. This is the response causes from not providing a Bios update. While Bios updates were being provided might as well use temp cure not long term kernel alterations in the hope the defect would over time cease to exist.
PS windows kernel debugger alone does not solve a acpi issue. Reason OS can be failing to even to get to running the debugger due to the ACPI. Only way to prove it is be able to get the ACPI tables and check them. So run without ACPI function completely and still without checking them you have no clue if the defect is intentional or not.
Problem is you guys don't even know the limits of your tools. There are some problems a kernel debugger is no help at all. Because you cannot run that code section to find out.
show all 3 replies
Linux only motherboard would nicely force use of Vista Business or better after XP leaves the market. Due to the only way to run windows then would be in the Linux hypervisor. So Nice higher priced version of windows that has to acquired or not be able to run windows.
There are way more effective uses of this kind of lock against Windows users. Where is the windows place to provide ACPI table overrides.
Support for these motherboards with buggy ACPI is in 2.6.26 linux kernel so no work around needed any more. This is the response causes from not providing a Bios update. While Bios updates were being provided might as well use temp cure not long term kernel alterations in the hope the defect would over time cease to exist.
PS windows kernel debugger alone does not solve a acpi issue. Reason OS can be failing to even to get to running the debugger due to the ACPI. Only way to prove it is be able to get the ACPI tables and check them. So run without ACPI function completely and still without checking them you have no clue if the defect is intentional or not.
Problem is you guys don't even know the limits of your tools. There are some problems a kernel debugger is no help at all. Because you cannot run that code section to find out.
3 replies
Brandon
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that there is a bug in the Foxconn BIOS's code. However, investigation has revealed the bug is in the Linux kernel itself.
Recent Linux kernels already report themselves as being Windows during the OSI check.
Recent Linux kernels already report themselves as being Windows during the OSI check.
stallmanix
Yes it is posible to load acpi table in windows using ms asl compiler and there is others ways to do the same.
Your problem is that you spend too much time masturbating with the idea that linux some day will take over windows and you do not see the present.
Man you are just full of shit.
Your problem is that you spend too much time masturbating with the idea that linux some day will take over windows and you do not see the present.
Man you are just full of shit.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver. 3 on Linux Hater's Blog
You missed it. Linux community complained that foxconn would not move then will work around it for good.
File a bug-report for windows does not work i this case. It was OS targeted system alteration. It also gives the green light to makers to build Linux Only Boards by stuffing the ACPI as well. Nicely prevents the MS claim that box's with Linux on are being pirated to windows.
Any hardware allowed defect like this is a worry.
Remember just because something like this disadvantages Linux now. It sets precedence. The question is not that Linux is effected what else will be effected next.
File a bug-report for windows does not work i this case. It was OS targeted system alteration. It also gives the green light to makers to build Linux Only Boards by stuffing the ACPI as well. Nicely prevents the MS claim that box's with Linux on are being pirated to windows.
Any hardware allowed defect like this is a worry.
Remember just because something like this disadvantages Linux now. It sets precedence. The question is not that Linux is effected what else will be effected next.
1 reply
guz
Any hardware allowed defect like this is a worry.
It's not worrying, your imagination is. Crappy DSDT tables have been around for a while ... I remember the same story for Dell laptops a while back, there's a blacklist somewhere but I can't be arsed to search. This is a fantastic demonstration of communication skills in the linux community. They normally solve this by ignoring the DSDT from bios and using a custom replacement in the kernel. You can even use initrd so you don't have to recompile. It sure is a lot cleaner than how they solved it now. Are you an only child ?
Linux can keep on changing windows versions or using ACPI patching.
Good for them. Maybe the linux support for ACPI will be done before its successor comes along. Or let's say "eventually" - yeah, that's safer.
It sets precedence.
It sure does, the number of Foxconn boards running linux will drop from 7 to 2: one for Ryan to frame in and one for his mom.
It's not worrying, your imagination is. Crappy DSDT tables have been around for a while ... I remember the same story for Dell laptops a while back, there's a blacklist somewhere but I can't be arsed to search. This is a fantastic demonstration of communication skills in the linux community. They normally solve this by ignoring the DSDT from bios and using a custom replacement in the kernel. You can even use initrd so you don't have to recompile. It sure is a lot cleaner than how they solved it now. Are you an only child ?
Linux can keep on changing windows versions or using ACPI patching.
Good for them. Maybe the linux support for ACPI will be done before its successor comes along. Or let's say "eventually" - yeah, that's safer.
It sets precedence.
It sure does, the number of Foxconn boards running linux will drop from 7 to 2: one for Ryan to frame in and one for his mom.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver. 3 on Linux Hater's Blog
Heres the thing soon it will not matter. Foxconn is the odd company that stood there ground and did not update bios to fix. So has now causes a reaction.
So now solution is simple. For ACPI Linux will just be Windows.
Now prepare for pain. Now to attack linux you will have to remove a windows versions. Linux can keep on changing windows versions or using ACPI patching. So its a zero win. So I hope none of you guys are ever hoping to run old versions of window again on new hardware. Or you better have a way to manually work around ACPI issues.
Only one catch with it works or its broken. Its not that simple. How do you tell the difference between a intermittent crash caused by video card bios or some other hardware bit.
Be warned same line could be used with 2000 and NT ok they were not support by that motherboard. Sorry motherboard works perfectly so no refund. In time XP as well.
Its not broken if its to spec. And its spec does not say it supports linux so linux guy cannot return it. Any motherboard that does not include the OS you want to run on it your stuck.
Nice base line. So if a motherboard says Vista only by that and you get a downgrade to XP and it does not work you are stuck too. XP not working does not make the hardware defective since vista works.
Some how I am puting foxconn on my company list not to touch with a 10 foot pole.
So now solution is simple. For ACPI Linux will just be Windows.
Now prepare for pain. Now to attack linux you will have to remove a windows versions. Linux can keep on changing windows versions or using ACPI patching. So its a zero win. So I hope none of you guys are ever hoping to run old versions of window again on new hardware. Or you better have a way to manually work around ACPI issues.
Only one catch with it works or its broken. Its not that simple. How do you tell the difference between a intermittent crash caused by video card bios or some other hardware bit.
Be warned same line could be used with 2000 and NT ok they were not support by that motherboard. Sorry motherboard works perfectly so no refund. In time XP as well.
Its not broken if its to spec. And its spec does not say it supports linux so linux guy cannot return it. Any motherboard that does not include the OS you want to run on it your stuck.
Nice base line. So if a motherboard says Vista only by that and you get a downgrade to XP and it does not work you are stuck too. XP not working does not make the hardware defective since vista works.
Some how I am puting foxconn on my company list not to touch with a 10 foot pole.
2 replies
hurd
Using a kernel debbuger, that's how do i tell the difference between a intermittent crash caused by video card bios or some other hardware bit.
Go sucks Linux balls.
Go sucks Linux balls.
Alexei
BTW what prevents you from debugging/disassembling your BIOS in Windows? And changing BIOS tables, instead of OS behavior?
About NT/2k: no, I don't want to run those, really. XP is much better. By the time they drop support for XP (am I imagining stuff, of did MS promise to support it until 2014?) I'm probably not going to want to run XP too.
P.S. I do agree with you, however, that this whole stuff - BIOS working differently under different OSes kinda sucks. Companies can do this. You can stop buying their products. Freedom.
About NT/2k: no, I don't want to run those, really. XP is much better. By the time they drop support for XP (am I imagining stuff, of did MS promise to support it until 2014?) I'm probably not going to want to run XP too.
P.S. I do agree with you, however, that this whole stuff - BIOS working differently under different OSes kinda sucks. Companies can do this. You can stop buying their products. Freedom.
11 months ago
in Lusers make me laugh ver. 3 on Linux Hater's Blog
Sorry that motherboard has a fixed bios now. Goto the asus site and download it.
The board is odd because maker of board will not provide update.
So nop not dieing.
Next linux kernel is going to start calling itself windows. So yep killing it has just got harder.
Predictable outcome.
The board is odd because maker of board will not provide update.
So nop not dieing.
Next linux kernel is going to start calling itself windows. So yep killing it has just got harder.
Predictable outcome.
1 reply
guz
follow the thread, void, it's not the board.
