LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-01-2009, 03:28 PM   #16
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware 14.1 64-bit with multilib
Posts: 2,074

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199

Quote:
Originally posted by H_TeXMeX_H

I don't see anything wrong with BIOSes, except that they are not open source. That may change soon however ... hopefully.
See: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Syste...IOS-9171.shtml

And: http://www.coreboot.org/Welcome_to_coreboot
 
Old 06-02-2009, 04:12 AM   #17
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Actually coreboot = LinuxBIOS:

Quote:
coreboot (formerly known as LinuxBIOS) is a Free Software project aimed at replacing the proprietary BIOS (firmware) you can find in most of today's computers. It performs just a little bit of hardware initialization and then executes a so-called payload.
Unfortunately, they don't support many boards or chipsets, mostly server boards.
 
Old 06-02-2009, 12:27 PM   #18
corbintechboy
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 480
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 51
I understand some of the fuss about BIOS being a old technology. Why do we need any change in this? You can plug in memory and almost always it is gonna be auto detected, plug in any drive and same thing. Remember the days when you plugged in a drive and had to set all drive parameters (or anything for that matter)?

I like the open source movement, but at the same time hardware most likely will never be open source. Settings are put in place to work with the hardware that it is running on. I don't understand why we would want to give this up? Unless you are running a older machine the BIOS is very capable!

The road analogy does not work here! What we have works very well and does what it is intended to do. It may be somewhat old tech, but it does indeed work. One could argue that memory is old tech, or even the way the FSB measures the speed of some devices, or even argue that a PSU is older tech that is this big thing in a case that takes un-needed space etc....

Most always it works very well! I have 14 machines and have never had a BIOS issue with any of them (besides the occasion of a dead CMOS battery).

I just feel that if it is to complex for you (anyone) just stay out of it! Very few reasons to even worry about it these days as most stuff just works! Leave the inner setting to the inner geek!
 
Old 06-02-2009, 02:29 PM   #19
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by corbintechboy View Post
I just feel that if it is to complex for you (anyone) just stay out of it! Very few reasons to even worry about it these days as most stuff just works! Leave the inner setting to the inner geek!
And because most stuff supposedly "just works" we can forget about the other stuff that "just doesn't work", right ?

I would very much like it if BIOSes were open source, for many many reasons. Unfortunately, this will not happen for a while, and it will not happen for everyone.

BIOS is software just like any other software, and it has the same faults as any other proprietary software. And that's why it should be open source.
 
Old 06-02-2009, 03:09 PM   #20
corbintechboy
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 480
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
And because most stuff supposedly "just works" we can forget about the other stuff that "just doesn't work", right?

What don't work? I would like some examples!

50mhz machine aside, what does not work? Really? I have had no problems in years with any BIOS. Back in the day, yes they were horrible! Today I have not ran into any issue.

Why do people go on and on about open source this and that? This is crazy! Don't buy NVidia the drivers are closed source! Stop complaining about ATI drivers, at least they open sourced them!

I agree that open source is a force to be reckoned with, but why does EVERYTHING have to be open source? I have a choice when it comes to the hardware I buy! I support open source in the hardware I buy (Own all ATI products). Now we want to crop up and tell hardware companies that they should use open source tech? I have the choice at the end of the day on how I want to buy, it should remain this way!

Some people don't like they way stuff works? Get coding! Otherwise buy motherboards that work with open source products. I am perfectly content with what I have! I know a lot of computer people that feel the same way.

Sorry to say that what does not work is just far and between! Most stuff does work (in my eyes all works)!
 
Old 06-02-2009, 03:26 PM   #21
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Well, I've had problems with a number of boards, and with a laptop for sure. And, of course, any requests to fix things fell upon uncaring, deaf ears. I probably could have fixed it myself if I had the source code even with my mediocre coding abilities.

I personally think that in general FLOSS is far superior to any proprietary attempt. The software can evolve much more quickly, will have a larger developer base that can find bugs (not only 1337 haxxors who can disassemble and reassemble it at will), and will be free from possible backdoors and kill switches and rootkits that might be hidden in there.

But, whatever, I can see already from your reply that there's not much use in arguing with you, so don't take this as an argument with you ... it's just purely informational.
 
Old 06-02-2009, 03:38 PM   #22
corbintechboy
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 480
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
Well, I've had problems with a number of boards, and with a laptop for sure. And, of course, any requests to fix things fell upon uncaring, deaf ears. I probably could have fixed it myself if I had the source code even with my mediocre coding abilities.

I personally think that in general FLOSS is far superior to any proprietary attempt. The software can evolve much more quickly, will have a larger developer base that can find bugs (not only 1337 haxxors who can disassemble and reassemble it at will), and will be free from possible backdoors and kill switches and rootkits that might be hidden in there.

But, whatever, I can see already from your reply that there's not much use in arguing with you, so don't take this as an argument with you ... it's just purely informational.
See your point, your correct. It would be nice to be able to stop root kits and potential virus issues from BIOS level. Never thought of it that way. If something along those lines could be the case, I opt in.
 
Old 06-04-2009, 01:04 AM   #23
Dralnu
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2005
Distribution: Arch Linux, Gentoo Linux
Posts: 335

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Another proplem with proprietary drivers, either general hardware or BIOS, is that you really have no clue what is going on within them. They could have installed a rootkit for all you know, and sending anything and everything back to their servers for whatever purpose they wish. They also have few reasons to consider efficency. There is a benchmark someone on the net (youtube, I believe) where an old Mac and a brand new Mac are started up side-by-side. The older system boots up faster, even though the new system is probably a hundred times faster than the older system. I havn't found a reason for this that made sense yet.
 
Old 06-04-2009, 02:18 PM   #24
corbintechboy
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 480
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dralnu View Post
Another proplem with proprietary drivers, either general hardware or BIOS, is that you really have no clue what is going on within them. They could have installed a rootkit for all you know, and sending anything and everything back to their servers for whatever purpose they wish. They also have few reasons to consider efficency. There is a benchmark someone on the net (youtube, I believe) where an old Mac and a brand new Mac are started up side-by-side. The older system boots up faster, even though the new system is probably a hundred times faster than the older system. I havn't found a reason for this that made sense yet.
I have a 90mhz machine here that will stomp my main system (dual core with fast sata drives) on bootup. It runs windows 3.1 and is really fast.

Reason for this is just the fact that programs have become more resource heavy. On a 90mhz machine there is not much room for cpu intensive tasks, MS knew this and made a really light system for its DOS products as well as windows 3.*. Wasn't until windows 95 things got bloat.

Don't know about Apple computers (never owned one) would venture to say they are the same.
 
Old 06-05-2009, 08:12 AM   #25
kalleanka
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Mallorca, Spain
Distribution: xubuntu
Posts: 547

Rep: Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by corbintechboy View Post
You may be correct, but my theory is that it is not broke why fix it?
But they are broken.
 
Old 06-05-2009, 08:28 AM   #26
kalleanka
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Mallorca, Spain
Distribution: xubuntu
Posts: 547

Rep: Reputation: 38
a good googletalk about coreboot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X72LgcMpM9k


and a fast boot with everything in bios:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuzRsXKm_NQ
 
Old 06-05-2009, 10:30 PM   #27
corbintechboy
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 480
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalleanka View Post
But they are broken.
I think broken is the wrong word to use here, in light of what has been said maybe light on features would be a better term.
 
Old 06-07-2009, 07:45 AM   #28
V!NCENT
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Distribution: Kubuntu 8.10 KDE4
Posts: 208

Rep: Reputation: 30
The BIOS is a piece of old tech and crappy hackery. It runs, stays in memmory, can read out your entire ram and has network access. Needles to say this needs to become a fast booting, transparant (open source), clean C programmed piece of tech. People also thought that Linux was a joke in the beginnin, and some probably still do, but the foundation is there now, so it's a matter of time...
 
Old 06-08-2009, 04:07 PM   #29
ProtoformX
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: LFS SVN
Posts: 334

Rep: Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by browny_amiga View Post
It might change, but not in a loooooong time. Ever seen how the OEMs work? They shun and avoid Linux whereever they can, sometimes I wonder if they think open source is some contagious disease. You know, it would be so open to use Linux as a BIOS, sooooo easy! They would not even have to do it themselves. The community would help. But heck, these decision makes must be old men and women, conservative and stuck on the old old old thing of recooking and recooking BIOS. Change as little as possible, over more than 20 years.

If we would all think like this, we would now have powerful cars, very modern, with a STEAM plant and looking like a locomotive, because if it ain't broken, don't fix it and just improve on the original design, slightly, as little as possible, because that costs money and ingeniuity.

To me it seems that the industry lost the guy that had the inventive spark and is now just cooking up the old stuff. Much like when Jobs left Apple, no new Macs came out.. but wait, Performas were there. Looking, exactly like.... PCs I am sure that was not because he liked them so much, but because he really did not know how to create something new.

A BIOS would require a diagnostic section, where Hardware diagnostics can be run, and maybe a place where you can install an OS (if you get the board new), directly from the internet with Netboot and to satisfy everybody, a browser (yes, all BIOSes need s TCP/IP stack and a basic browser, ever noticed how you cannot connect to the internet for BIOS upgrades within the BIOS? They just can make it with that old garbage so far) and so an internetshop where so inclined people can shell out the cash for their Windows license and then start downloading and automatically installing their Windows Vista or 7 or whatever.
Or as I know MS, first have a trial, then get the open hand for the license fee or lights out ;-) *grin*

Markus
Either you are a complete noob or just completely unintelligent
I can think of a very good reason why the BIOS should never touch the internet with a 328947328463254324 foot poll, Trojans and virii come to mind, what is easy for the user is not always the best way, the hard it is to do things the more likely it is that it is harder to attack

The BIOS is doing its job, let the kernel fix or detect the hardware, Maybe you want the BIOS to open the A20 Gate too while you are at it, and if you don't know what an a20 gate is then were done talking because clearly you have no idea of what and how the BIOS really works.
 
Old 06-08-2009, 04:14 PM   #30
ProtoformX
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: LFS SVN
Posts: 334

Rep: Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by corbintechboy View Post
I have a 90mhz machine here that will stomp my main system (dual core with fast sata drives) on bootup. It runs windows 3.1 and is really fast.

Reason for this is just the fact that programs have become more resource heavy. On a 90mhz machine there is not much room for cpu intensive tasks, MS knew this and made a really light system for its DOS products as well as windows 3.*. Wasn't until windows 95 things got bloat.

Don't know about Apple computers (never owned one) would venture to say they are the same.
Actually the reason why this is is because it doesn't have an MMX chip and thus its FPU instructions are not extensions, when MMX came out 166Mhz + P1's they moved the CPU's FPU functions to the MMX chip.

Also back then they used a lot of assembly, it doesn't matter what people think ASM is much much faster at everything it does, C/C++ is much easier to work with but nothing can compare to assembler if written properly. The past is 100% proof of this.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Goodbye Linux and good riddance zamoti General 29 11-29-2006 06:48 AM
I finally got my trash can icons changed and working in KDE!!!!!!!!!!!! Ausar LinuxQuestions.org Member Success Stories 1 08-04-2004 04:54 PM
I finally got my trash can icons changed and working in KDE!!!!!! Ausar Linux - Newbie 1 08-04-2004 01:58 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration