Bios

[hh]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Both Dell and HP/Compaq clearly list the enhancements/fixes that a specific
BIOS update provides. This also is the case with most motherboard mfgrs, at
least I've found this to be true with those I've used, including Asus,
AOpen, Giga-Byte, Epox and Shuttle. As you point out, however, if no such
info is provided, avoid the update.
HH


"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40A5A3DF.CB0B375F@hotmail.com...
> Exactly why a BIOS manufacturer lists change or correction
> for each BIOS Revision. The only relevant information freely
> provided by manufacturer and still is not provided. In most
> cases, BIOS changes don't affect the computer user. And so
> again: without that manufacturer's Revision list, then no one
> can rightly recommend a BIOS be upgraded. We can speculate
> that since BIOS correction for something critical rarely
> exist, and since computer boots just fine; then why fix
> (endanger) something that ain't broke. Either get the
> manufacturer's list of what each revision fixes - or leave a
> working computer as is.
>
> "Thomas G. Marshall" wrote:
> > /WHY/ is being 7 revs behind on the BIOS particularly bad? /IF/
> > the OP doesn't seem to be having problems, then it seems like
> > tempting fate to flash to the latest flavor. If there is
> > something in the BIOS that might be going wrong without him
> > knowing it, say it slows down his system without his knowing it,
> > if you blindly flash routinely you must take into account that
> > the new bios(es) might make it worse.
> >
> > ...[slash]...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall" wrote:
>> /WHY/ is being 7 revs behind on the BIOS particularly bad? /IF/
>> the OP doesn't seem to be having problems, then it seems like
>> tempting fate to flash to the latest flavor. If there is
>> something in the BIOS that might be going wrong without him
>> knowing it, say it slows down his system without his knowing it,
>> if you blindly flash routinely you must take into account that
>> the new bios(es) might make it worse.
>>
>> ...[slash]...

> Exactly why a BIOS manufacturer lists change or correction
> for each BIOS Revision. The only relevant information freely
> provided by manufacturer and still is not provided. In most
> cases, BIOS changes don't affect the computer user. And so
> again: without that manufacturer's Revision list, then no one
> can rightly recommend a BIOS be upgraded. We can speculate
> that since BIOS correction for something critical rarely
> exist, and since computer boots just fine; then why fix
> (endanger) something that ain't broke. Either get the
> manufacturer's list of what each revision fixes - or leave a
> working computer as is.

Yep, BUT: feature creep, feature enhancement, bug fixes, whatever you
call it, is in the territory of the following worries, in order of
severity:

1. regression
2. regression
3. regression

I'd consider a

4. regression

....but I'm not sure of it yet. The first three are enough.





--
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity. You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it. Just say no.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

S.Lewis <stew1960@mail.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall"
> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:9Capc.31038$vz5.28147@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
>>
>> Aw c'mon I'm serious. What would be so catastrophically difficult
>> about it?
>>
>> In a world of disaster conscious computer consumers (even
>> grandmothers these days know what a "crash" is), it seems like a
>> fairly cheap no brainer.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
> Note the dates. I have no idea how EFI is progressing, but this is
> some decent general information:
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-7337-5131787.html
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-7339_3-5111993.html?tag=st_rn
>
> A quick scan of both also seems to show little info. w/regard to
> recovery if at all needed.


I'm not sure I understand the "guts" of EFI.

So long as any such technology treats what I've been saying as a
possibility, or perhaps even a "protocol stack" of revisions, such that
you can easily by jumper roll back whatever, then I'm for it.


--
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity. You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it. Just say no.