If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:11:09 +0000, Ardent
wrote: X-No-Google-Sto yes On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 03:49:08 GMT, "S.Heenan" wrote: awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin sn/py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will delete all old BIOS info during a flash. awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin /py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will do the same and prompt to backup the old BIOS. Why use the Award flasher which is cryptic? You can use uniflash which is much more informative and helpful. http://www.rainbow-software.org/download/ It has a detailed list of chip sets it is compatible with. Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're provided above). Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of) for awardflash to do that. Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy for uniflash. Nothing against uniflash, it does serve a useful function for some needs but there's little point in choosing it instead when the supplied flasher does the job fine. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:11:09 +0000, Ardent wrote: X-No-Google-Sto yes On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 03:49:08 GMT, "S.Heenan" wrote: awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin sn/py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will delete all old BIOS info during a flash. awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin /py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will do the same and prompt to backup the old BIOS. Why use the Award flasher which is cryptic? You can use uniflash which is much more informative and helpful. http://www.rainbow-software.org/download/ It has a detailed list of chip sets it is compatible with. Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're provided above). Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone, stepping out may make you insecure and fearful.................. Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of) for awardflash to do that. Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy for uniflash. Nothing against uniflash, really? it does serve a useful function for some needs but there's little point in choosing it instead when the supplied flasher does the job fine. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote: Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why the motherboard manufacturers provide it. Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're provided above). Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone, stepping out may make you insecure and fearful.................. How about because it's the industry standard way of doing it, that there is no need to use anything else if you already have it. Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of) for awardflash to do that. Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy for uniflash. Nothing against uniflash, really? Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why the motherboard manufacturers provide it. I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad using it Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're provided above). Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone, stepping out may make you insecure and fearful.................. How about because it's the industry standard way of doing it, that there is no need to use anything else if you already have it. industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard. Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of) for awardflash to do that. Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy for uniflash. Nothing against uniflash, really? Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade. yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else would you fill up a 320 gig hard drive? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote: "kony" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why the motherboard manufacturers provide it. I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad using it Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative flashers either, so what's the point? It's not just that awdflash is provided by the manufacturer but is the correct tool by the bios writer too. I never wrote that you "have" to use it, but it seems a bit pointless to chose something else when there is no real gain rather than using the tool that they at least used and intended for this very purpose. How about because it's the industry standard way of doing it, that there is no need to use anything else if you already have it. industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard. I mean it IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD. The bios company wrote it as the specific tool to flash their bios. Go to any motherboard manufacturer whose boards have award bios. What flasher do they provide? Uniflash? No. Awdflash or a motherboard-rebranded version of it. That is the industry on this planet Earth, where are you? I do not suggest using it to flash a non-award bios, but did anyone else? I would consider that off-topic. Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade. yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else would you fill up a 320 gig hard drive? I agree about redundancy, and have practically all awdflasher versions in multiple archives, as well as both old and new variants of uniflash. Uniflash is great, just not needed for a routine m'board bios flash and in that scenario is only more time and trouble to use. Not difficult, just relatively the wrong tool compared to the specific tool written for the job, release by bios company for the job, and used industry-wide for the job because they know this, too. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: "kony" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why the motherboard manufacturers provide it. I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad using it Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative flashers either, so what's the point? sorry...i want to supposedly sue................ It's not just that awdflash is provided by the manufacturer but is the correct tool by the bios writer too. I never wrote that you "have" to use it, but it seems a bit pointless to chose something else when there is no real gain rather than using the tool that they at least used and intended for this very purpose. How about because it's the industry standard way of doing it, that there is no need to use anything else if you already have it. industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard. I mean it IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD. The bios company wrote it as the specific tool to flash their bios. Go to any motherboard manufacturer whose boards have award bios. What flasher do they provide? Uniflash? No. Awdflash or a motherboard-rebranded version of it. That is the industry on this planet Earth, where are you? I do not suggest using it to flash a non-award bios, but did anyone else? I would consider that off-topic. Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade. yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else would you fill up a 320 gig hard drive? I agree about redundancy, and have practically all awdflasher versions in multiple archives, as well as both old and new variants of uniflash. Uniflash is great, just not needed for a routine m'board bios flash and in that scenario is only more time and trouble to use. Not difficult, just relatively the wrong tool compared to the specific tool written for the job, release by bios company for the job, and used industry-wide for the job because they know this, too. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:36:57 -0700, "JAD"
wrote: Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative flashers either, so what's the point? sorry...i want to supposedly sue................ It would be nice if there were no liability on the flasher (person), and it is troubling that motherboard manufacturers don't provide a more automated way that doesn't rely on windows. Even so, do you really have that many failed bios flashes? Its' quite rare for me and I always flash to newest bios on a board before ever installing OS or stability testing. I suppose if your board doesn't work right and you have no guarantee with a flasher, you can just return the board for refund if you find the flaw soon enough. Otherwise, sure, it's a small risk. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
JAD wrote:
"kony" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: "kony" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD" wrote: Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to work? supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that? Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why the motherboard manufacturers provide it. I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad using it Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative flashers either, so what's the point? sorry...i want to supposedly sue................ ROTFLOL |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IDE RAID- Major problem need to save my data | MC | Storage (alternative) | 21 | December 5th 04 05:38 AM |
A8V bios update problem | no spam | Asus Motherboards | 0 | October 23rd 04 06:27 AM |
Bios update: which file? | Katy | Asus Motherboards | 2 | September 23rd 04 04:54 AM |
K8V SE Deluxe BIOS 1004sd.001 (beta) problems | Charlie King | Asus Motherboards | 2 | June 28th 04 12:59 PM |
Large Hard Drive & BIOS upgrade problems | Lago Jardin | Homebuilt PC's | 1 | June 12th 04 02:08 PM |