Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

My guess is that the beta in question didn't provide new functionality yet
and didn't include Vista-complete HAL, thus it included ACPI 1.0 HAL from
XP. That could also be done to let it run on not-up-to-date systems.

"YKhan" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Mar 10, 2:27 pm, Benjamin Gawert wrote:

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?

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.

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!

The ability to go to the source code and edit it to one's pleasure has
long been touted by Linuxoids as main advantage of Open Source.
Quoting the OP: "...somebody else could go into the source code and
discover the problem and fix it again." If, as you say, it is not
necessary, then what is the advantage of Linux? Just that it's
un-Microsoft? Bashing MS and Bill Gates personally might be
fashionable in certain circles, but making business decisions based on
that is not exactly the most prudent thing to do, to say the least.
As for the "features" of Vista that bother you so much, just wait, and
somebody will post somewhere how to disable or otherwise fool them.
AFAIK, the activation (not the smallest of those "features") has
already been cracked. ;-)
As much as I'd prefer to stay away from Vista, eventually I'll have to
surrender because such will be the requirement of my then-current job.
It's your right to shun Vista or MS in general, but eventually most of
the businesses will transition to Vista, and you will have to walk
away from many prospective jobs because of that. Last time I looked,
there were plenty of jobs requiring skills in one MS product or the
other, and quite lesser demand for Linux-based stuff.

Rgds,

NNN

On Mar 11, 10:07 pm, "Alexander Grigoriev" wrote:
My guess is that the beta in question didn't provide new functionality yet
and didn't include Vista-complete HAL, thus it included ACPI 1.0 HAL from
XP. That could also be done to let it run on not-up-to-date systems.

"YKhan" wrote in message

ps.com...

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

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?

More ACPI related disorders in Vista. Looks like with the pulling of
the ACPI 1.0 stuff, Vista can't even reawaken some PCs properly from
sleep-states:

Slashdot | Prescription Meds For Vista Sleep Disorder
http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/03/11/015251.shtml

wrote:
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.

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!

The ability to go to the source code and edit it to one's pleasure has
long been touted by Linuxoids as main advantage of Open Source.
Quoting the OP: "...somebody else could go into the source code and
discover the problem and fix it again." If, as you say, it is not
necessary, then what is the advantage of Linux?

With linux, if you *want* to go into the source code and examine/improve
it/fix bugs, you *can*, though to run a linux system successfully there
is no need to these days. With MS, you don't even have that option.
That is the advantage of linux, everything is out in the open with no
hidden spyware that phones home every so often (never mind the usual
traits of better stability, no viruses, etc).

Just that it's
un-Microsoft? Bashing MS and Bill Gates personally might be
fashionable in certain circles, but making business decisions based on
that is not exactly the most prudent thing to do, to say the least.

I used to use XP at home and I still use XP at work. I now use openSUSE
at home and have no intention of ever changing back to XP or Vista. As
a result, I use both OS's on a daily basis and have concluded that linux
is the better product, and not by a small margin. If the company I work
for wants to continue to use an inferior product, well, that is their
business decision that they'll have to live with.

As for the "features" of Vista that bother you so much, just wait, and
somebody will post somewhere how to disable or otherwise fool them.
AFAIK, the activation (not the smallest of those "features") has
already been cracked. ;-)

But that is the very point about Vista. It shouldn't be necessary to
wait on a crack to deactivate some of the more unsavoury "features".
The in-built spyware and other "features" should not be there in the
first place! If the source code had been available, MS would not have
been able to sneak these "features" in.

As much as I'd prefer to stay away from Vista, eventually I'll have to
surrender because such will be the requirement of my then-current job.

It might be necessary to use it in work if the business you work for has
made that decision (as I do), there is no necessity to use it at home!

It's your right to shun Vista or MS in general, but eventually most of
the businesses will transition to Vista, and you will have to walk
away from many prospective jobs because of that. Last time I looked,
there were plenty of jobs requiring skills in one MS product or the
other, and quite lesser demand for Linux-based stuff.

I'll not be walking away from any job. As I said, if a company makes a
decision to use an inferior product, that is a decision they will have
to live with. I will still use the MS products in work, out of
necessity, but I will NOT be using them at home!

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 03:38:41 +0000, wrote:

The ability to go to the source code and edit it to one's pleasure has
long been touted by Linuxoids as main advantage of Open Source.
Quoting the OP: "...somebody else could go into the source code and
discover the problem and fix it again." If, as you say, it is not
necessary, then what is the advantage of Linux?

These are the main advantages that I care about, in no certain order.

Design was for a secure multiuser protected kernel system.

It's open source available on almost all known cpu platforms.

It, and most apps for it or free.(if it weren't I'd still use it over MS)

It's not MS. It has no agenda. MS does. They want to lock you into their
OS and also want to control the hardware you use and everything to do with
any technology you use. AFAIK, the Linux developers have never been
convicted of piracy. MS has been many times, in many countries.

I want a choice of user interfaces. I get that with linux. I don't run the
most popular desktops (KDE and Gnome) on Linux.

The main reason is stability. It's not often a runaway app will halt a
Linux system. Can't say the same for MS.

I also use it because MS will and has gone to criminal lenghts to try and
force companies not to support it. I will not use MS products because I
refuse to support anything BG has anything to do with. Just as I would not
support any company that uses unethical and illegal tactics given a choice.

While I've used MS products. I've never purchased any except for the
original MS basic, which was so bad, I used a different one. About the
only product they had that was decent was MS-Dos, and if you know how it
was aquired, you know they didn't write the original.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

"Carlo Razzeto" wrote in message
...
"YKhan" wrote in message
oups.com...
Anyways, it was all a bit mysterious, but it looks like a bit of light
is finally being shown on it: it's Microsoft's fault. The Vole has
very quietly dropped support for ACPI 1.0 tables in BIOS, without
letting anyone know. The ACPI tables are queried by the OS to see if a
particular CPU has support for power management or not. So even with a
BIOS update, they may have still kept ACPI 1.0 tables, and Vista
simply and quietly ignores it. ACPI 1.0 was good enough for XP, so I
have no idea why it's not good enough for Vista.

People in wait state for AMD C'n'Q Vista driver
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38132


While I'm usually a big fan of backwards compatibility, in this case I'd
say hardware manufacturers are at fault. If you desgin your products such
that it requires "undocumented features" to work then you get what you
deserve, burned (which has started happening more and more on the Windows
platform). On the whole I'd say what Microsoft is doing is probably a
positive thing. Let's face it, backwards compatibility is a source of many
of their greatest troubles... i.e. allowing third party apps to patch the
kernel, take over critical functionality the list goes on... While it's
annoying now, in the end it'll probably ensure a better more secure
project going forward. I guess I should say I'm writing this being in the
uniquly lucky position of A) having a modern system (I"m an enthusiest),
and B) have an MSDN subscription which was paid for me (I'm a developer).
So I"m now running Vista ultimite. I have to say over all it's a great
expereince.

Very simple explanation - you sell new M/B when you no longer support or
produce BIOS upgrades for older boards. This has been a long time coming.
For several years, the picking have been pretty slim at all the mother board
download site after a year or 2 (two). Some of them transfer driver, BIOS
support to Pay-for sites so they can get on to the next, latest, greatest
thing. There is little or no money in supporting old M/B or retrofitting.

Microsoft deserves (earned) a lot our suspicion, but you are way off base on
this one. It's like blame car makers when they changed over to unleaded gas.
Displaced anger, since the real culprits were government mandates, and oil
companies.

As far as any of the "nix Os, when are you guys going to grow up and realize
that the average user is more than happy with Microsoft, they do not want to
learn how or know how to install a distro, or how to custom configure their
system/machine. Most of the regular people that I talk to, have begun to
recognize that MS is much better than it was 10 years ago, and twice as good
5 years ago. Even Vista,...once you quit whining and take the time to learn
it - is not as onerous as you make it seem. every version of Ms windows has
been an improvement (lets just forget about NT 3.5 and Millennium).

Why is it that any, mention of Microsoft ...good, bad or indifferent, seems
to spawn another rebirth of Linux outbreaks, its not like people don't
already know there is an alternative. Face it..they - just - Don't - care!
People are funny that way they: drive to fast,smoke, use recreational
drugs, eat too much, drink, want to hunt or own guns, play video games to
excess - do all manner of things that puritans wish they could outlaw.
Because it is either fun, easy or satisfying. We tried prohibition - in case
you missed it...here's the memo - It didn't work, it was repealed.

beoweolf wrote:

As far as any of the "nix Os, when are you guys going to grow up and
realize that the average user is more than happy with Microsoft, they do
not want to learn how or know how to install a distro, or how to custom
configure their system/machine.

And these same people whose machines are probably riddled with viruses
and worms because "they do not want to learn.... how to custom configure
their system/machine" are usually the first to shout when their mailbox
fills with spam from viruses and worms..... I always find that somewhat
ironic

On Mar 12, 5:25 pm, "beoweolf" wrote:
As far as any of the "nix Os, when are you guys going to grow up and realize
that the average user is more than happy with Microsoft, they do not want to
learn how or know how to install a distro, or how to custom configure their
system/machine. Most of the regular people that I talk to, have begun to
recognize that MS is much better than it was 10 years ago, and twice as good
5 years ago. Even Vista,...once you quit whining and take the time to learn
it - is not as onerous as you make it seem. every version of Ms windows has
been an improvement (lets just forget about NT 3.5 and Millennium).

And let's face another reality: most people don't know how to install
any Microsoft operating system or custom configure it either. They
mainly buy pre-fabbed PCs, with pre-installed operating systems, and
hardware pre-selected to work with it. So there's not much here that
can't also done with any other operating system. The only reason this
doesn't happen already is because Microsoft prevents the OEMs from
trying it, on threats that their discounts will be pulled.

Yousuf Khan

YKhan wrote:

And let's face another reality: most people don't know how to install
any Microsoft operating system or custom configure it either. They
mainly buy pre-fabbed PCs, with pre-installed operating systems, and
hardware pre-selected to work with it. So there's not much here that
can't also done with any other operating system. The only reason this
doesn't happen already is because Microsoft prevents the OEMs from
trying it, on threats that their discounts will be pulled.

I thought that was illegal now, and if not, why? Seem to remember an
anti-trust suit over there in the USA a while back.

--PS

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 21:25:03 GMT, "beoweolf"
wrote:

its not like people don't
already know there is an alternative. Face it..they - just - Don't - care!

A lot of people still don't know there is an alternative. And like you
said, a lot of people don't care, as long as the PC does what they
need it for.

Which means a pre-installed Linux box is just as good, if not better,
for the non-gaming majority, who just want to surf web, check email,
do some office work and chat on IM, as a pre-installed Windows box.
Except they wouldn't have problems with viruses, built-in spyware and
what not "features".


--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself