A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » AMD x86-64 Processors
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 10th 07, 04:39 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Venom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 284
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

And I bet you get ****ed off with this when you eventually discover it.
It installs with Vista and lives in WINLOAD.EXE in the System32 folder.
Let's see you try to get rid of it.

Threat Details

Copyright © 2007 Sunbelt-Software. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.

PC Tattletale
Type Surveillance Tool
Type Description Surveillance Tools are software applications that
monitor and capture data from computers including screenshots, keystrokes,
web cam and microphone data, instant messaging chat sessions, email, visited
websites, programs run and files accessed and files shared on a P2P (peer to
peer) network. Many Surveillance Tools can run in stealth mode, hidden from
the user, and have the ability to store captured data for later retrieval by
or transmission to another computer. A key logger is one simple, standard
type of Surveillance Tool.
Category Commercial Key Logger
Category Description A Commercial Key Logger is a program that
captures and logs keystrokes as they are entered on the computer for the
purpose of monitoring the user. The logged data, which may be encrypted, is
saved or sent to the person who installed the key logger. These applications
often run in stealth mode and are invisible to the user that is being
monitored. Such key loggers are sold commercially and may be used
legitimately if deployed by authorized administrators and disclosed to the
persons being monitored, as in a business environment. The use of a key
logger to monitor persons without their knowledge has been ruled illegal in
at least one jurisdiction.
Level Elevated
Level Description Elevated risks are typically installed without
adequate notice and consent, and may make unwanted changes to your system,
such as reconfiguring your browser's homepage and search settings. These
risks may install advertising-related add-ons, including toolbars and search
bars, or insert advertising-related components into the Winsock Layered
Service Provider chain. These new add-ons and components may block or
redirect your preferred network connections, and can negatively impact your
computer's performance and stability. Elevated risks may also collect,
transmit, and share potentially sensitive data without adequate notice and
consent.
Advice Type Remove
Description PC Tattletale is an advanced keystroke logger records that
records all keystrokes - including passwords, "hidden characters", and
ordinary keystrokes. It can even capture both in and outbound e-mails.
Add. Description PC Tattletale is a powerful chat recorder that
records all chat sessions & instant messages - capturing both sides of any
chat conversation or instant messages, including: AOL chat rooms and instant
messenger, ICQ chats, MSN Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, and Trillian chat. It
features easy to read color coding for each "Chat Personality" recorded, and
can record up to 20 different chat sessions simultaneously. PC Tattletale
has "VCR like controls & playback", making it as simple as clicking the PLAY
button to watch screenshots captured when the victim was online.
Author Cyber Samurai Marketing, Inc.
Author Description PC Tattletale solves the problem of helping you
stay on top of what your child does, and is exposed to online when you're
not there to watch over their shoulder by giving you the tools and the power
to invisibly monitor your child and help keep them safe on the Internet
Author URL pctattletale.com/download.htm
Alias Spyware.PCTattletale
File Traces
%DESKTOPDIRECTORY%\ 5dpcttsetupfull791005.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ AutoUpdateClient.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ explorer.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ explorer32.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ msn6mngr.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ Netlogon.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ svchost.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ Wincmd.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ WinLoad.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ WinSysMngr.exe
%system%\ explorer32\ WinSysMngr32.exe
%system%\ PCTT.exe
%system%\ UninstallPCTT.exe
%system%\ winload32.exe
5dpcttsetupfull791005.exe
AutoUpdate.dll
CompControls.ocx
Netlogon.exe
pcttse~1.exe
pcttsetup.exe
pcttsetupfull790805.exe
pcttsetupfull791005.exe
svchost.exe
Wincmd.exe
winload32.exe
WinSysMngr.exe


  #12  
Old March 10th 07, 06:31 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Gnu_Raiz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Mar 10, 9:39 am, "Venom" wrote:
And I bet you get ****ed off with this when you eventually discover it.
It installs with Vista and lives in WINLOAD.EXE in the System32 folder.
Let's see you try to get rid of it.

Threat Details

Copyright © 2007 Sunbelt-Software. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.

PC Tattletale
Type Surveillance Tool

snip

Thats a feature as the developers would say! We need to protect you
from yourself, as you can not be trusted in doing the right thing
towards the **AA's.

It's funny that if everyone paid detail attention to what the eula's
say as well as what is running on their Windows system they would be
horrified at what is going on. Heck people are upset that a few FBI
agents have misused privacy laws, just imagine if they found out what
the the software they are using does.

Gnu_Raiz


  #13  
Old March 10th 07, 08:06 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Mar 9, 4:27 pm, Benjamin Gawert wrote:
* YKhan:

Microsoft has already made clear that Vista would require ACPI
2.0-compliant hardware and BIOS to work properly when they published the
first specifications over a year ago. Every hardware manufacturer that
got surprised by Vista RTM not supporting ACPI 1.0 any more is just an
idiot.


Yet, somehow, the beta and RC versions of Vista were all supporting
and working with ACPI 1.0, right up until the end. Why disable such a
fundamental feature in the final version but leave them enabled in the
beta versions?


Because they were *beta* versions? It's quite common that beta versions
contain things that won't be there in the final version. And it's really
not that MS made a secret out of the fact that Vista RTM won't support
ACPI 1.0 any more.


Yes, things are usually removed from final versions that were in beta
versions. But that usually refers to debugging code, such as
breakpoints, triggers, dumps, etc. It doesn't usually refer to removal
of functionality.

Functionality might be removed if a particular feature is so buggy
that it doesn't work, and there's no time to fix it. For example, MS
quite publically removed their new WinFS filesystem from the feature
list because it didn't work, and they couldn't fix it quickly enough
for release. Removal of that kind of functionality is quite related to
beta-testing and debugging problems. However, this is a first I've
heard of a feature being removed that was working perfectly.

Actually it isn't the first I've heard of Microsoft removing perfectly
working functionality without informing anybody. My brother does tech
support for HP, and he tells me that a program used to help sync iPaq
PDAs to PCs was mysteriously deleted from Vista, which used to be in
XP. So it's now upto HP to come up with a replacement for it. Even big
companies have to put up with Microsoft's arrogance.

The point is fining bugs and non-working features. Betas are *not* final
code, nor contain they everything that is in the final versions.


In this case, the final version contains *less* than what was in the
betas.

These
testers would've likely caught the problem, and Microsoft or the mobo
makers would've issued fixes beforehand.


Nope. The manufacturers of these mobos were sitting on their arses for
over a year while the rest of the world was already aware that ACPI 1.0
is a dead horse. Still they didn't fix their crap.


There are cases where there is not likely going to be any further BIOS
upgrades, such as older P3 or Athlon XP systems. They may have been
part of the original beta test of Vista and they worked fine (even
with Aero, with a sufficiently powerful video card). The people who
beta-tested Vista may have been confident enough in Vista that they
decided to buy the final version, based on their good beta experience.
Little did they know that they were beta testing some other OS.

Yousuf Khan

  #14  
Old March 10th 07, 08:27 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Benjamin Gawert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,020
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

* YKhan:

Yes, things are usually removed from final versions that were in beta
versions. But that usually refers to debugging code, such as
breakpoints, triggers, dumps, etc. It doesn't usually refer to removal
of functionality.


It does. It happened on Vista, it happened on Windowsxp, it happened on
Windows2000 and on every release before...

Functionality might be removed if a particular feature is so buggy
that it doesn't work, and there's no time to fix it. For example, MS
quite publically removed their new WinFS filesystem from the feature
list because it didn't work, and they couldn't fix it quickly enough
for release. Removal of that kind of functionality is quite related to
beta-testing and debugging problems. However, this is a first I've
heard of a feature being removed that was working perfectly.


ACPI 1.0 working perfectly? Yeah, right. It works so perfectly that AMD
and MS had to provide kernel patches for several CPUs with power
management like Athlon64/Opteron or Pentium-M/Core just to have
powermanagement working correctly. ACPI 1.0 is very old (probably around
a decade now), and just lacks functionality for modern hardware...

Actually it isn't the first I've heard of Microsoft removing perfectly
working functionality without informing anybody.


That's simply not true. Every developer who was part of MSDN should know
for over a year now that ACPI 1.0 is a dead end on Vista.

My brother does tech
support for HP, and he tells me that a program used to help sync iPaq
PDAs to PCs was mysteriously deleted from Vista, which used to be in
XP. So it's now upto HP to come up with a replacement for it. Even big
companies have to put up with Microsoft's arrogance.


What for? It would be enough for your brother just to stay current on
the facts. The program you mention is called Mobile Device Center and is
the replacement for ActiveSync in Vista. Yes, it has been removed from
the final version. Now you have to download it separately:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/devicecenter.mspx

Nope. The manufacturers of these mobos were sitting on their arses for
over a year while the rest of the world was already aware that ACPI 1.0
is a dead horse. Still they didn't fix their crap.


There are cases where there is not likely going to be any further BIOS
upgrades, such as older P3 or Athlon XP systems.


Which are probably the best systems for running Vista ;-)

They may have been
part of the original beta test of Vista and they worked fine (even
with Aero, with a sufficiently powerful video card). The people who
beta-tested Vista may have been confident enough in Vista that they
decided to buy the final version, based on their good beta experience.
Little did they know that they were beta testing some other OS.


Then these peoples should have used their brains. Someone who tests a
beta version and believes the final product will work exactly the same
is a moron.

Benjamin
  #15  
Old March 10th 07, 08:57 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Carlo Razzeto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards


"know code" wrote in message
...
wrote:

If you want to name more - look at any
flavor of Linux, why the hell the end users have to edit the source
code in attempt (often futile) to make things work?


When was the last time you looked at linux? The last time I recall having
to edit source code to make something work could have been 4-5 years ago!
Things have moved on a LOT since then.

Some of the stories about certain 'features' in Vista should scare the
hell out of anyone thinking about using it. It looks like Vista is just
one huge bloated piece of spyware that will never make it onto my desktop!


You know... It seems to me I keep hearing that argument with Linux, even the
last time I tried it 5 years ago they were saying the same thing... Not that
Linux is a bad choice, it certainly is capable of doing what most people
need it to (particularly people who just want to surf the web). But I do
wish the OSS community would take a step back, breath deeply and finally
admit that yes... They are *very* far behind Microsoft and Apple in the
desktop market. Once they can finally admit that to them selves, they can
start taking a better look at OSX and Vista and start creating their own
versions of the best parts of these OS's. Search functions, enhanced kernel
protection, better organized UI's (I have yet to see a version of X Windows
that appeals to me at all) the list goes on.

Carlo

  #16  
Old March 10th 07, 10:33 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Tony Hill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:35:05 +0100, know code
wrote:

wrote:

If you want to name more - look at any
flavor of Linux, why the hell the end users have to edit the source
code in attempt (often futile) to make things work?


When was the last time you looked at linux? The last time I recall
having to edit source code to make something work could have been 4-5
years ago! Things have moved on a LOT since then.


His example of editing source code to make things work isn't very
correct, but the basic point he was trying to make is dead-on. I use
Linux fairly regularly, both at home and at work, and I find it to
often be the best choice for many situations. However I have yet to
see a distribution that wasn't FULL of bugs.

When MS released Vista they said they had 500 bugs. I would be VERY
surprised if there is ANY Linux distribution on the planet that could
pass the same level of Software QA with fewer than 10,000 bugs. The
only one I've encountered that might come close is the Debian 'stable'
branch, which is always 2+ years out of date. I gave up on Debian
'testing' and Gentoo because they were HUGELY buggy and never could
get any version of Redhat/Fedora working at anything resembling a
reliable system.

Right now I'm using SuSE, which seems ok, but it's still much, MUCH
buggier than any current version of Window (meaning Win2K, WinXP or
Vista). The Linux kernel is extremely solid, and certain key
applications are well tested and very reliable, but beyond that the
quality level goes downhill rapidly.

There are lots of things that Microsoft does that I don't agree with.
They make some really boneheaded design decisions which have
negatively affected the security of their systems, and IMO with Vista
they are going way too far with taking away a users control of their
own PC. However when it comes to a purely *quality* standpoint (ie
they follow their design correctly, even if the design itself is
stupid), Microsoft is WAY ahead these days. That wasn't always the
case (Win9x was *TERRIBLE* in this regard and even WinNT 4.0 was
pretty poor), but it is now.
--
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca
  #17  
Old March 11th 07, 12:54 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Mar 10, 2:27 pm, Benjamin Gawert wrote:
* YKhan:

Yes, things are usually removed from final versions that were in beta
versions. But that usually refers to debugging code, such as
breakpoints, triggers, dumps, etc. It doesn't usually refer to removal
of functionality.


It does. It happened on Vista, it happened on Windowsxp, it happened on
Windows2000 and on every release before...


Well, when I talk about "normal", I'm talking about normal software
companies and their beta test programs, which apparently doesn't
include Microsoft.

You might say that Microsoft shouldn't be included in the category of
a "normal" software company because those others don't do operating
systems development. But even ones that do operating systems
development, such as Sun, HP, or IBM, you can pretty much expect the
betas to be truly representative of the final product. Each newer beta
release gets closer to what the final release will look like, and
things don't magically completely disappear between beta and release,
as if the betas and release code were from completely separate
revision control systems.

For example, let's take Sun's Solaris as an example. Sun had one time
completely stopped development on the x86 version of Solaris and
sunsetted it. Sun later changed course and decided that x86 was a
course that it should follow. It brought the x86 code out from the
archives, dusted it off, updated it by two major version releases (it
had stopped developing after Solaris 8, and it brought it back with
Solaris 10), and added 64-bit x64 support to it. It started this
development about 3 years after Microsoft was first given the
specifications for AMD64, and it beat Microsoft out the door with an
x64 operating system by more than a year! And Microsoft's first x64
operating system Windows XP/Server 2003 x64 still never caught on due
to lack of drivers. What is wrong with Microsoft's software
development process that they are so ****ed up? Why should we buy
software from a company that has such a ****ed up software development
process?

Functionality might be removed if a particular feature is so buggy
that it doesn't work, and there's no time to fix it. For example, MS
quite publically removed their new WinFS filesystem from the feature
list because it didn't work, and they couldn't fix it quickly enough
for release. Removal of that kind of functionality is quite related to
beta-testing and debugging problems. However, this is a first I've
heard of a feature being removed that was working perfectly.


ACPI 1.0 working perfectly? Yeah, right. It works so perfectly that AMD
and MS had to provide kernel patches for several CPUs with power
management like Athlon64/Opteron or Pentium-M/Core just to have
powermanagement working correctly. ACPI 1.0 is very old (probably around
a decade now), and just lacks functionality for modern hardware...


ACPI 1.0 is obviously not what was working, it was the support for
ACPI 1.0 that was in Vista betas that was working perfectly. Why pull
functionality from something that was working?

As for AMD or MS having to provide kernel patches to get power
management working, that was only in Windows XP, where the power
management functions in the CPU were added after the operating system
came out. And so they had to provide device drivers to enable the
support, quite understandably. But Vista is released after those power
management features have been around for a long while, so MS is now
building the features natively into the kernel. ACPI 1.0 was good
enough to let the kernel know that some form of power management was
present in the CPU, maybe not all of the latest advanced features, but
at least basic features could be enabled with it, which is better than
nothing. During the betas, people were reporting that that their
hardware remained as cool as they did under XP, which is not
surprising because it included the same power management support
inside it.

What for? It would be enough for your brother just to stay current on
the facts. The program you mention is called Mobile Device Center and is
the replacement for ActiveSync in Vista. Yes, it has been removed from
the final version. Now you have to download it separately:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/devicecenter.mspx


Which I am sure was the solution he was told to use. It's just the
whole idea of having to download something to get the same
functionality that used to be built into the previous version of
Windows is screwed up. Microsoft couldn't be bothered to put the
package into the Windows DVD?

There are cases where there is not likely going to be any further BIOS
upgrades, such as older P3 or Athlon XP systems.


Which are probably the best systems for running Vista ;-)


Hey, if they worked fine, then they worked fine. You just need enough
memory, and a DX9 video card and you're good to go, so a lot of those
systems fulfilled more than the basic requirements to run Vista. So
that's all that should matter. What's it of your business to make fun
of that?

They may have been
part of the original beta test of Vista and they worked fine (even
with Aero, with a sufficiently powerful video card). The people who
beta-tested Vista may have been confident enough in Vista that they
decided to buy the final version, based on their good beta experience.
Little did they know that they were beta testing some other OS.


Then these peoples should have used their brains. Someone who tests a
beta version and believes the final product will work exactly the same
is a moron.


I think you're so brainwashed by Microsoft-think that your logic
circuits have become scrambled. Just play back your own words in your
own head: beta software has nothing to do with the final software?
Prior to your indoctrination you would've likely laughed at a person
who said something like that. In the Microsoft universe, it's your
fault for buying Microsoft software, Microsoft is not responsible.
Every other software company is responsible for making sure their
software works, but not Microsoft. Microsoft only makes software
worthwhile of piracy, nothing worthwhile of payment.

Yousuf Khan

  #18  
Old March 11th 07, 12:56 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Mar 10, 4:33 pm, Tony Hill wrote:
His example of editing source code to make things work isn't very
correct, but the basic point he was trying to make is dead-on. I use
Linux fairly regularly, both at home and at work, and I find it to
often be the best choice for many situations. However I have yet to
see a distribution that wasn't FULL of bugs.


I wouldn't trust an enterprise to Linux. Solaris is the way to go.

Yousuf Khan

  #19  
Old March 11th 07, 01:01 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

On Mar 10, 10:39 am, "Venom" wrote:
And I bet you get ****ed off with this when you eventually discover it.
It installs with Vista and lives in WINLOAD.EXE in the System32 folder.
Let's see you try to get rid of it.

Threat Details

Copyright © 2007 Sunbelt-Software. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.

PC Tattletale
Type Surveillance Tool
Type Description Surveillance Tools are software applications that
monitor and capture data from computers including screenshots, keystrokes,
web cam and microphone data, instant messaging chat sessions, email, visited
websites, programs run and files accessed and files shared on a P2P (peer to
peer) network. Many Surveillance Tools can run in stealth mode, hidden from
the user, and have the ability to store captured data for later retrieval by
or transmission to another computer. A key logger is one simple, standard
type of Surveillance Tool.


It's not installed by Microsoft, it's something that is installed
after the fact, as an application.

Yousuf Khan

  #20  
Old March 12th 07, 03:03 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64
Alexander Grigoriev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

Usually MS goes to great length to make buggy platforms work with the OS.
Since beginning, there were some workarounds to work with buggy PCI chipsets
and bridges, ACPI bioses, etc. Now they seemed to decide that enough is
enough and dropped those kludges.

"YKhan" wrote in message
ups.com...

Functionality might be removed if a particular feature is so buggy
that it doesn't work, and there's no time to fix it. For example, MS
quite publically removed their new WinFS filesystem from the feature
list because it didn't work, and they couldn't fix it quickly enough
for release. Removal of that kind of functionality is quite related to
beta-testing and debugging problems. However, this is a first I've
heard of a feature being removed that was working perfectly.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards YKhan General 63 March 22nd 07 10:50 AM
Cool'n'Quiet? Erland Sommarskog Asus Motherboards 28 August 19th 06 08:06 PM
k8ns-939 and cool'n'quiet Carchidi 4 President Gigabyte Motherboards 3 July 1st 05 10:57 PM
Cool'N'Quiet and Overclocking Ed Light AMD x86-64 Processors 1 May 26th 05 10:55 PM
Cool'N'Quiet Overclocking Ed Light Overclocking AMD Processors 0 May 26th 05 10:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.