🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <WYCik.33137$E41.31782@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says...
> 
> Don't buy or become reseller for Foxcon Mboards being fitted with dodgy BIOS
> 
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249
> 
> They have now been reported to the FTC.
> 
> It will be a support nightmare.
> 
There is no problems with the BIOS. The problem is with Linux's 
dependence on the tables in the BIOS.

Power management is fucked on Linux anyway so would anyone even notice?


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 12:15:30 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <WYCik.33137$E41.31782@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7
> says...
> > 
> > Don't buy or become reseller for Foxcon Mboards being fitted with
> > dodgy BIOS
> > 
> > http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249
> > 
> > They have now been reported to the FTC.
> > 
> > It will be a support nightmare.
> > 
> There is no problems with the BIOS. The problem is with Linux's 
> dependence on the tables in the BIOS.
> 
I'm no expert in this sort of thing, but it seems from what he's
written that Foxconn hasn't provided a compliant ACPI interface -
they've just kludged it to work for various OS versions, and only the
Windows ones work.  The whole point of a standard interface is that it
will work with /any/ compliant system, not just the ones for which they
bothered to provide workarounds.  The fact that they seem to think that
getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the standard
really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude, does it?

Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:6f0faiF9bkjnU1@mid.individual.net: 

> In article <WYCik.33137$E41.31782@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7
> says... 
>> 
>> Don't buy or become reseller for Foxcon Mboards being fitted with
>> dodgy BIOS 
>> 
>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249
>> 
>> They have now been reported to the FTC.
>> 
>> It will be a support nightmare.
>> 
> There is no problems with the BIOS. The problem is with Linux's 
> dependence on the tables in the BIOS.
> 
> Power management is fucked on Linux anyway so would anyone even
> notice? 
> 
Nonsence. It works properly and *doesn't* get corrupted like happens
*all* the time on windoze. You just have to know what you're doing. 

-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

Bollocks! More bollocks i've just recently tested the foxcon
motherf*ucker boards with every operating system you can dream of. Sure
enough that piece of shit linxus failed.

chuckcar wrote:

> Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:6f0faiF9bkjnU1@mid.individual.net:
>
> > In article <WYCik.33137$E41.31782@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7
> > says...
> >>
> >> Don't buy or become reseller for Foxcon Mboards being fitted with
> >> dodgy BIOS
> >>
> >> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249
> >>
> >> They have now been reported to the FTC.
> >>
> >> It will be a support nightmare.
> >>
> > There is no problems with the BIOS. The problem is with Linux's
> > dependence on the tables in the BIOS.
> >
> > Power management is fucked on Linux anyway so would anyone even
> > notice?
> >
> Nonsence. It works properly and *doesn't* get corrupted like happens
> *all* the time on windoze. You just have to know what you're doing.
>
> --
> (setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

--
The Grandmaster of the CyberFROG

Come get your ticket to CyberFROG city

2 years ago I showed him that one ludicrious (sp? I don't care)
thing he posted was complete nonsence

Using my technical prowess and computer abilities to answer questions
beyond the realm of understandability

Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday

In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> The fact that they seem to think that
> getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the standard
> really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude, does it?
> 
They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility and it 
is. 

And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent built. 
To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux users are 
cheapskates.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <Xns9AE75ECD36461chucknilcar@127.0.0.1>, chuckcar says...

> > Power management is fucked on Linux anyway so would anyone even
> > notice? 
> > 
> Nonsence. It works properly and *doesn't* get corrupted like happens
> *all* the time on windoze. You just have to know what you're doing. 
> 
How do you corrupt power management, dumb fuck? And at least on my 
laptop suspend works.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <488B2D1D.E80F70FB@TheDeli.Sandwich>, Tony says...
> Bollocks! More bollocks i've just recently tested the foxcon
> motherf*ucker boards with every operating system you can dream of. Sure
> enough that piece of shit linxus failed.
> 
Cheapskate motherboard for cheapskate computing.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

I'm a tester not a cheapskate like that Chuckcar guy. Why i own my own chain
of Tony's Deli Sandwiches.

Conor wrote:

> In article <488B2D1D.E80F70FB@TheDeli.Sandwich>, Tony says...
> > Bollocks! More bollocks i've just recently tested the foxcon
> > motherf*ucker boards with every operating system you can dream of. Sure
> > enough that piece of shit linxus failed.
> >
> Cheapskate motherboard for cheapskate computing.
>
> --
> Conor
>
> I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
> looking good either. - Scott Adams

--
The Grandmaster of the CyberFROG

Come get your ticket to CyberFROG city

2 years ago I showed him that one ludicrious (sp? I don't care)
thing he posted was complete nonsence

Using my technical prowess and computer abilities to answer questions beyond
the realm of understandability

Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday

Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:6f0p0hF99pu5U2@mid.individual.net: 

> In article <Xns9AE75ECD36461chucknilcar@127.0.0.1>, chuckcar says...
> 
>> > Power management is fucked on Linux anyway so would anyone even
>> > notice? 
>> > 
>> Nonsence. It works properly and *doesn't* get corrupted like happens
>> *all* the time on windoze. You just have to know what you're doing. 
>> 
> How do you corrupt power management, dumb fuck? And at least on my 
> laptop suspend works.
> 
Oh, you're just a bundle of laughs, and no idea of proper hehavior to
boot.  Power off your computer *once* while it's in standby, power up
and go into standby. Byebye time. 



-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:25:58 +0000, 7 aided th' terraists with the
following claims :

> 
> Don't buy or become reseller for Foxcon Mboards being fitted with dodgy BIOS
> 
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249
> 
> They have now been reported to the FTC.
> 
> It will be a support nightmare.
> 
> Go return the boards and demand refunds from your vendors.

Good luck with that.
Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.

http://howflow.com/tricks/medion_md_98300_fan_control

You're welcome :)


-- 
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, 
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire

§ñühwØ£f wrote:

> Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.

Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the 
motherboard.  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is running. 
  It should support a standard API and the OS should ask standard 
questions through that API.


-- 
              Just because I've written it doesn't mean that
                   either you or I have to believe it.

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:30:03 -0400
Meat Plow <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 18:09:00 +0100, Big and Blue wrote:
> 
> > §ñühwØ£f wrote:
> > 
> >> Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.
> > 
> > Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the motherboard.
> >  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is running.
> >   It should support a standard API and the OS should ask standard
> > questions through that API.
> 
> That's what happens in a perfect world.

Hmmm.

I'd never even heard of Foxcon before this thread popped up. Just how
cheap are these mobos? I can buy quite a civilised one here for under
30ukp. 

-- 
Will J G

Conor wrote:

> In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
>> The fact that they seem to think that
>> getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the standard
>> really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude, does it?
>> 
> They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility and it
> is.
> 
> And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent built.
> To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux users are
> cheapskates.


You don't know what cheap skate is?

I run dual core with Ubuntu and VirtualBox.
Windummy OSen runs at least twice as fast in emulation
in a neat little window as an application and its running
on a translucent 3D desktop.

Learn and weep you cheap fsck with your pathetic windummy OSen
and lack of knowledge about Linux.

http://www.ubuntu.com
http://www.youtube.com search for compiz and virtualbox

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:00:18 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > The fact that they seem to think that
> > getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the standard
> > really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude, does it?
> > 
> They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility and it 
> is. 

They wrote:
"You are incorrect in that the motherboard is not ACPI complaint. If it
were not, then it would not have received Microsoft Certification for
WHQL."
> 
> And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent
> built. To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux users
> are cheapskates.
> 
To be fair, that just further illustrates how much bullshit you spout.

In article <Xns9AE76E0B7EE4Cchucknilcar@127.0.0.1>, chuckcar says...

> Oh, you're just a bundle of laughs, and no idea of proper hehavior to
> boot.  Power off your computer *once* while it's in standby, power up
> and go into standby. Byebye time. 

Works fine here. Perhaps you should learn how to build a computer and 
install an OS properly.

-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <488B2F1C.F53D06FE@TheDeli.Sandwich>, Tony says...
> I'm a tester not a cheapskate like that Chuckcar guy. Why i own my own chain
> of Tony's Deli Sandwiches.
> 
It was him I was reffering to.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <Rc-dneAF9umxxxbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net>, Big and Blue 
says...
> §ñühwØ£f wrote:
> 
> > Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.
> 
> Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the 
> motherboard.  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is running. 

How the fuck does the motherboard know what OS it's running, dumbass?

-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <j1Kik.33350$E41.7278@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says...

> I run dual core with Ubuntu and VirtualBox.

That's nice for you.

> Windummy OSen runs at least twice as fast in emulation
> in a neat little window as an application and its running
> on a translucent 3D desktop.
> 
Bullshit. And its been proven to be bullshit.

> Learn and weep you cheap fsck with your pathetic windummy OSen
> and lack of knowledge about Linux.
> 
I have been using Lunix since RH7.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <20080726221744.0f2a11a4@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:00:18 +0100
> Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > > The fact that they seem to think that
> > > getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the standard
> > > really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude, does it?
> > > 
> > They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility and it 
> > is. 
> 
> They wrote:
> "You are incorrect in that the motherboard is not ACPI complaint. If it
> were not, then it would not have received Microsoft Certification for
> WHQL."
> 
How does that contradict what I say?

> > And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent
> > built. To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux users
> > are cheapskates.
> > 
> To be fair, that just further illustrates how much bullshit you spout.
> 
Foxconn are cheap shit motherboards just one up from Asrock.


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

Meat Plow wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 18:09:00 +0100, Big and Blue wrote:
>
>> ���hwأf wrote:
>>
>>> Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.
>>
>> Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the
> motherboard.
>>  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is running.
>>   It should support a standard API and the OS should ask standard
>> questions through that API.
>
> That's what happens in a perfect world.
>
Yep. Interesting how he snipped the link to the workaround :)

M$ appologist perhaps?

http://howflow.com/tricks/medion_md_98300_fan_control

Conor wrote:
> In article <Rc-dneAF9umxxxbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net>, Big and Blue
> says...
>> ���hwأf wrote:
>>
>> > Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.
>>
>> Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the
>> motherboard.  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is
> running.
>
> How the fuck does the motherboard know what OS it's running, dumbass?
>
Uhhhhh...I assume that the OS tells the mobo what version it is so the
mobo BIOS can make adjustment in th ACPI?

http://howflow.com/tricks/medion_md_98300_fan_control

:)

Paul Martin <pm@zetnet.net> wrote in
news:slrng8n3ht.q82.pm@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk: 

> In article <6f0p0hF99pu5U2@mid.individual.net>,
>      Conor wrote:
>> How do you corrupt power management, dumb fuck? And at least on my 
>> laptop suspend works.
> 
> All power corrupts: power management corrupts in a managerial manner.
> 
Thanks, I needed that. Time to move on with your life I'd say though...


-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

Sounds like one of your fellow gomers from CanaDUH. The honourable Paul
Martin.

chuckcar wrote:

> Paul Martin <pm@zetnet.net> wrote in
> news:slrng8n3ht.q82.pm@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk:
>
> > In article <6f0p0hF99pu5U2@mid.individual.net>,
> >      Conor wrote:
> >> How do you corrupt power management, dumb fuck? And at least on my
> >> laptop suspend works.
> >
> > All power corrupts: power management corrupts in a managerial manner.
> >
> Thanks, I needed that. Time to move on with your life I'd say though...
>
> --
> (setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

--
The Grandmaster of the CyberFROG

Come get your ticket to CyberFROG city

2 years ago I showed him that one ludicrious (sp? I don't care)
thing he posted was complete nonsence

Using my technical prowess and computer abilities to answer questions
beyond the realm of understandability

Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:34:14 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <20080726221744.0f2a11a4@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:00:18 +0100
> > Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <20080726130222.27f0837e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > > > The fact that they seem to think that
> > > > getting MS approval is the same as fully complying with the
> > > > standard really doesn't say much for their skills or attitude,
> > > > does it?
> > > > 
> > > They never claimed such a thing. They claimed MS compatibility
> > > and it is. 
> > 
> > They wrote:
> > "You are incorrect in that the motherboard is not ACPI complaint.
> > If it were not, then it would not have received Microsoft
> > Certification for WHQL."
> > 
> How does that contradict what I say?

"If it were not (ACPI compliant) then it would not have received
Microsoft certification" is the relevant bit.
> 
> > > And it's Foxconn so hardly the kind of kit you'd put in a decent
> > > built. To be fair, it just further illustrates that most Linux
> > > users are cheapskates.
> > > 
> > To be fair, that just further illustrates how much bullshit you
> > spout.
> > 
> Foxconn are cheap shit motherboards just one up from Asrock.
> 
And the fact that a single Linux user has written about his
experience with a single Foxconn board (that the makers claim is
only intended to support Windows, so that must be the target market for
their crappy product) says what about Linux users generally? What's
clever about spending more on hardware and software, anyway?

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:33:23 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> I have been using Lunix since RH7.
> 
I've been using Linux since Slackware 3.3 - so what?

Conor wrote:

> In article <j1Kik.33350$E41.7278@text.news.virginmedia.com>, 7 says...
> 
>> I run dual core with Ubuntu and VirtualBox.
> 
> That's nice for you.
> 
>> Windummy OSen runs at least twice as fast in emulation
>> in a neat little window as an application and its running
>> on a translucent 3D desktop.
>> 
> Bullshit. And its been proven to be bullshit.


If its BS, then why are you so afraid?

My next machine is gonna have to be a 5 second boot Linux BIOS fitted
Express Gate Asus mboard running quad core and run windummy OSen
at least 4x speed in Virtual Box running under Linux.

You simply have to learn to rant and weep at your own expense fool.

Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:6f1jccF9eemkU1@mid.individual.net: 

> In article <Xns9AE76E0B7EE4Cchucknilcar@127.0.0.1>, chuckcar says...
> 
>> Oh, you're just a bundle of laughs, and no idea of proper hehavior to
>> boot.  Power off your computer *once* while it's in standby, power up
>> and go into standby. Byebye time. 
> 
> Works fine here. Perhaps you should learn how to build a computer and 
> install an OS properly.
> 
When you start to read headers, you'll have a better idea to who you're
replying. 


-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

chuckcar, ye bewildered grey-coated gnat, hell is empty and all the
devils are here, ye yowled:

> Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:6f1jccF9eemkU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> In article <Xns9AE76E0B7EE4Cchucknilcar@127.0.0.1>, chuckcar says...
>>
>>> Oh, you're just a bundle of laughs, and no idea of proper hehavior to
>>> boot.  Power off your computer *once* while it's in standby, power up
>>> and go into standby. Byebye time.
>>
>> Works fine here. Perhaps you should learn how to build a computer and
>> install an OS properly.
>>
> When you start to read headers, you'll have a better idea to who you're
> replying.

All indications are that he was replying to you, you fuck-knuckled macaroon.

> -- 
> (setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )
>

-- 
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

On 26 Jul 2008, Conor verbalised:

> In article <Rc-dneAF9umxxxbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net>, Big and Blue 
> says...
>> ���hwأf wrote:
>> 
>> > Theres a hack for Grub that tells the mobo its runniing windoze.
>> 
>> Which, to me at least, indicates that the problem lies in the 
>> motherboard.  The motherboard shouldn't need to know what OS is running. 
>
> How the fuck does the motherboard know what OS it's running, dumbass?

It asks the OS via the _OSI predefined object. (ACPI does after all
involve the operating system executing BIOS-provided AML code via an
interpreter which is *part* of the operating system. This isn't like
SMIs: the OS maintains control.)

(A tiny little bit of research in the topic you're arguing in wouldn't
go amiss. A couple of quick searches showed me pages 172--173 of
<http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec30a.pdf> (labelled 154--155)
which plainly describe this interface. This took me less than a minute
to find, and anyone else who can use Google could have done the same.)


Unfortunately the interface isn't much use as specified there. Nothing,
not even Linux, returns true for _OSI("Linux"), because what would it
mean? Different versions of the Linux kernel have different bugs and
different capabilities in regard to hardware interaction. So Linux
pretends to be Windows via _OSI and has to emulate its bugs.

There is discussion of ways to get around this, because it's plainly
inelegant to have to emulate Windows's hardware-interaction bugs, but
nothing firm has resulted yet. The _OSI interface is probably broken: we
really need feature-test macros instead. However, even that is fraught
with problems, because vendors can't very well add a macro that states
that they have, or don't have, a bug before the bug is known. So we'd
need at least three states: we have this bug/feature, we don't have it,
and we don't know: and then there'd be bugs when BIOSes interpreted
`we don't know' in an unwise manner... this is a nest of snakes, and
it is definitely not a sign of dumbassery to find the whole thing
thoroughly confusing.

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:13:43 +0100, ThePunisher aided th' terraists with
the following claims :

> "Folderol" <folderol@ukfsn.org> wrote in message 
> news:20080726192122.32c3c5de@folderol.ukfsn.org.ukfsn.org...
> 
>> Hmmm.
>>
>> I'd never even heard of Foxcon before this thread popped up. Just how
>> cheap are these mobos? I can buy quite a civilised one here for under
>> 30ukp.
>>
> 
> How cheap do you think China's biggest exporter is?

Foxconns been around fer fucking ages. The big connector in my Apple
Performa circa 1994 is a foxconn. Mybe they used to be non-crappy?

-- 
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, 
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.bedoper.com

In article <20080727021707.7f0cbe11@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> What's
> clever about spending more on hardware and software, anyway?
> 
Well if you buy decent stuff, it tends to work.

-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:52:56 +0100
Conor <conor_turton@hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <20080727021707.7f0cbe11@bluemoon>, Rob Morley says...
> > What's
> > clever about spending more on hardware and software, anyway?
> > 
> Well if you buy decent stuff, it tends to work.
> 
What if the software I'm using cost nothing (apart from some
bandwidth and a CDR) and works really well on my obsolete hardware?

Nix wrote:

> (A tiny little bit of research in the topic you're arguing in wouldn't
> go amiss. A couple of quick searches showed me pages 172--173 of
> <http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec30a.pdf> (labelled 154--155)
> which plainly describe this interface.

The diagram on p-4 (pdf p-22) denotes the API Registers/BIOS/Tables 
interfaces as "OS Independent technologies, interfaces, codes, and 
hardware".  I can't see why it should need to specify an OS setting for 
this.  If it does then it seems to me to be perpetuating what it was 
trying to stop.

However the rest of the document implies that ACPI ("OSPM") can try to 
work out what it should reply for a particular query based on this 
setting, though.  Seems barmy to me.  Why doesn't it just respond with 
reality and leave it up to the OS decide what to do with the result? 
Patching an OS is (relatively) simple.  Flashing a new BIOS on all 
motherboards to accommodate each new OS isn't simple.  But then, 
Microsoft is involved, and this means they can blame the hardware 
manufacturer for any problems.


-- 
              Just because I've written it doesn't mean that
                   either you or I have to believe it.