5 ms·

So you are using a motherboard under conditions that they state it's not certified for... Where's the news here? Is this just a pissing match gone bad? "I'll

by gm 18y ago

So you are using a motherboard under conditions that they state it's not certified for... Where's the news here? Is this just a pissing match gone bad? "I'll be damned if I'm going to buy a copy of Vista just to get the crashing caused by Foxconn's BIOS to stop, I am not going to be terrorized." Isn't this whole thing the result of bad research before purchase? About the only thing interesting about this is if the guy gets sued under DMCA for disassembling the BIOS of the motherboard.

LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
The point is that the motherboard was advertised as being ACPI compliant. It is not. In fact, it checks specifically for Linux ands hands back ACPI data which crashes the machine. I'm not certain what the potential anti-trust implications are.
- gm 18y ago
  But it's still not Linux certified. About the DMCA, yes it sucks, and yes, it would be irrational to sue because of that, that's why it would be interesting. Anyway, not that I am hoping for that. Stupid laws should go away.
  - ajross 18y ago
    I'm not following your logic. ACPI is a published, open standard. Foxconn doesn't need to do anything for "linux" or "windows" specifically. They just put the tables in memory and hand them to the OS to use. But they aren't. They're specifically testing for OS versions and handing back different (and, in this case, broken) data to "linux" software. At best, that's horribly broken and a reason to avoid Foxconn hardware. Excusing it with this "Certification(tm)" canard is just spin, and you appear to have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
    - gm 18y ago
      Well, you guys can mod me down all you want, but the fact remains, they said the motherboard itself is not certified for Linux, so putting Linux on it is a gamble, regardless of the ACPI standard. "Run an O/S we support, and tell us if the motherboard still does not work": Pretty standard response when you try to do something unsupported and then run into trouble. There's no manufacturer that's going to tell you otherwise. Try and complain to Intel about overclocking problems with their motherboards: They will first say "turn off the overclocking and tell me if it does not work still. Oh, and you have just voided your warranty." Just switch brands already. I have my own brand that I like for MBs exactly because I have never had to put up with this cheesy crap from the mfg I use. Foxconn sucks for pulling this crap, so the guy writing the article should stay away from retard brands. Next time, spend the extra $10 or whatever and get a good motherboard. That is the real lesson I see in all of this.
      - orib 18y ago
        Linux claims to support the ACPI standard. This motherboard claims to support the ACPI standard. Ergo, Linux support is implicitly claimed by transitivity, barring bugs. If you bought a desk that was rated for holding 100 pounds of stuff, and it collapsed because you put 75 pounds of monitors on it (well, they were big CRTs...). You call the company, and they refuse to honor the warranty because they don't provide CRT support, despite their desk being certified for 100 pounds of weight. Now, if you're saying that it's ridiculous to expect a cheap manufacturer to actually conform to the specs they say they do... well, you may have a point.
      - krschultz 18y ago
        I don't think you understand the problem here. The board works under Linux if the BIOS is modified to follow the ACPI spec, but under their own implementation it does not follow the spec. Thus at the minimum it is a faulty product that does not match the advertisement, and at worst it is an anti-trust violation. Certified or not, recommended or not, warranty or not, it does not fulfill the spec. The fact that Vista covers this up does not mean that it fits the spec when running Vista, no matter how you slice it, it is broken.
        18y ago
donw 18y ago
From reading the original article, it seems that Linux can use the DSDT table handed to Vista, but that Foxconn's BIOS deliberately detects Linux, and hands it a broken DSDT table; I will wager that this behavior does violate the ACPI specifications, which Foxconn claims to honor. It's equivalent to having a web application that states that it is W3C-standards compliant, purchasing a subscription, and then discovering that it only works in IE, not because Firefox and Safari don't work with it, but because they've added a bit of browser-detection code that turns other browsers over to Tubgirl.

by gm 18y ago

LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago

The point is that the motherboard was advertised as being ACPI compliant. It is not. In fact, it checks specifically for Linux ands hands back ACPI data which crashes the machine. I'm not certain what the potential anti-trust implications are.

gm 18y ago
But it's still not Linux certified. About the DMCA, yes it sucks, and yes, it would be irrational to sue because of that, that's why it would be interesting. Anyway, not that I am hoping for that. Stupid laws should go away.
- ajross 18y ago
  I'm not following your logic. ACPI is a published, open standard. Foxconn doesn't need to do anything for "linux" or "windows" specifically. They just put the tables in memory and hand them to the OS to use. But they aren't. They're specifically testing for OS versions and handing back different (and, in this case, broken) data to "linux" software. At best, that's horribly broken and a reason to avoid Foxconn hardware. Excusing it with this "Certification(tm)" canard is just spin, and you appear to have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
  - gm 18y ago
    Well, you guys can mod me down all you want, but the fact remains, they said the motherboard itself is not certified for Linux, so putting Linux on it is a gamble, regardless of the ACPI standard. "Run an O/S we support, and tell us if the motherboard still does not work": Pretty standard response when you try to do something unsupported and then run into trouble. There's no manufacturer that's going to tell you otherwise. Try and complain to Intel about overclocking problems with their motherboards: They will first say "turn off the overclocking and tell me if it does not work still. Oh, and you have just voided your warranty." Just switch brands already. I have my own brand that I like for MBs exactly because I have never had to put up with this cheesy crap from the mfg I use. Foxconn sucks for pulling this crap, so the guy writing the article should stay away from retard brands. Next time, spend the extra $10 or whatever and get a good motherboard. That is the real lesson I see in all of this.
    - orib 18y ago
      Linux claims to support the ACPI standard. This motherboard claims to support the ACPI standard. Ergo, Linux support is implicitly claimed by transitivity, barring bugs. If you bought a desk that was rated for holding 100 pounds of stuff, and it collapsed because you put 75 pounds of monitors on it (well, they were big CRTs...). You call the company, and they refuse to honor the warranty because they don't provide CRT support, despite their desk being certified for 100 pounds of weight. Now, if you're saying that it's ridiculous to expect a cheap manufacturer to actually conform to the specs they say they do... well, you may have a point.
    - krschultz 18y ago
      I don't think you understand the problem here. The board works under Linux if the BIOS is modified to follow the ACPI spec, but under their own implementation it does not follow the spec. Thus at the minimum it is a faulty product that does not match the advertisement, and at worst it is an anti-trust violation. Certified or not, recommended or not, warranty or not, it does not fulfill the spec. The fact that Vista covers this up does not mean that it fits the spec when running Vista, no matter how you slice it, it is broken.
      - 18y ago

donw 18y ago

From reading the original article, it seems that Linux can use the DSDT table handed to Vista, but that Foxconn's BIOS deliberately detects Linux, and hands it a broken DSDT table; I will wager that this behavior does violate the ACPI specifications, which Foxconn claims to honor. It's equivalent to having a web application that states that it is W3C-standards compliant, purchasing a subscription, and then discovering that it only works in IE, not because Firefox and Safari don't work with it, but because they've added a bit of browser-detection code that turns other browsers over to Tubgirl.