digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Foxconn deliberately sabotaging their BIOS to destroy Linux

ubuntu-virginia.ubuntuforums.o… — All thanks to The Ubuntu Comunity and TheAlmightyCthulhu

show profanity settings
expand all
  • ethana2, on 07/25/2008, -14/+403We've been through this before with web sites useragents.
    You screw with us, we lie to your face.
    You piss us off, we turn on you.

    Let hardware be hardware, dangit. Have it behave one way and one way only. This is insane.
    • mikelieman, on 07/25/2008, -0/+67I love the way he diagnosed and patched the problem ( excepting suspend/resume -- which, I've never used IRL, myself, so for me that wouldn't be a critical issue ) and then poked them with a stick about adhering to Intel's spec.
      • shadus, on 07/25/2008, -0/+37My real question is (as a computer builder) why would anyone ever buy foxconn mobo in the first place? They're known for being a cheap POS mobo that frequently needs RMA'd. In some other industries they put out some stuff that I've not personally had trouble with, but in the computer building industry you're screwing yourself to buy their product.
      • sexybobo, on 07/25/2008, -0/+35@Shadus
        Foxconn sponsored a "Computer Olympics" event when i was in high school (yeah extra credit).
        Foxconn gave 45 Mother Boards to the competition 17 of them didn't work. (Nvidia Intel Corsair and Raidmax also gave 45 items each and only 1 Raidmax case was missing the screw pack every thing else worked great)
        Foxconn MOBO are crap.
      • vat0r, on 07/25/2008, -1/+30@sexy & shadus
        They don't have con in their name for nothing.
      • schestowitz, on 07/25/2008, -0/+19Not surprising at all.

        http://digg.com/linux_unix/Newly_leaked_Antitrust_ ...

        Thanks to TheAlmightyCthulhu.
      • wuxia, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6This apparently is actually a VERY old known issue. I found this on google:
        "[LinuxBIOS] Foxconn BIOS won't boot Linux"

        Thu Jul 20 21:12:03 CEST 2006
      • lbdinh, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1@vat0r

        Sounds like a bad Metal Gear Solid character.
      • ommadawn, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0He did disassemble the table, but it turns out it's a misunderstanding. Linux eventually is not given the allegedly bogus table, but the Vista one, cause since 2.6.24 Linux identifies itself as Vista. Most likely there was no sabotage. Please read on before burying
        http://digg.com/linux_unix/Foxconn_Deliberate_Linu ...
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -0/+146Standards are the holy grail of computer hardware. Nothing is more pleasing for a system builder than to have a machine built from components from a dozen different companies work without incident.

      Companies that decide that compliance is a scale and not a yes or no question should have their managers sodomized.
      • diggduggjoe, on 07/25/2008, -28/+6I would just like to add that users should not assume there is malice on the part of FoxConn. They may just be a lame company without the resources to make a decent motherboard for Linux.

        I recently turned down an offer to upgrade a PC for some family. I have had issues with FoxConn years ago, so when they said they wanted to upgrade a PC for gaming by buying the cheapest stuff they could find on newegg, including a FoxConn MB, I declined. I tried to explain it is better to find items with great reviews over looking only at price. When the crap doesn't work or blow up the parts they are trying to recycle, I will look bad even if it is not my fault. I continued that PCs are not that expensive and getting a new one and upgrading to a great video card would be the best option. I never heard from them after that. I can't say I cared at that point either. Cheapskate clients make puppies cry and business owners, too.
      • mentor, on 07/25/2008, -2/+25Yes, sounds like incompetence rather than malice.

        However, I can see that you've missed the point there. They don't need to work on Linux 'support'. All they need to do is conform to the relevant standards, and document any other stuff. Linux can take care of itself quite happily.

        Unfortunately, it does seem like ACPI is somewhat deficient WRT feature versioning; see http://mjg59.livejournal.com/85923.html
      • aAnaRchY, on 07/25/2008, -38/+3diggduggjoe: what are you talking about?? WTF???? I think you don't have that half of brain you mentioned before! Foxconn are horrible quality??? Foxconn produce the electronic boards for most of the electronics you use every day! Read on to learn a few things(from wikipedia): Foxconn (åOEå£å) is the trade name of the Taiwanese firm Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. (Ltd.) (LSE: HHPD). Foxconn is one of the largest manufacturers of electronics and computer components worldwide, and mainly manufactures on contract to other companies. Although sometimes referred to as an original equipment manufacturer, Foxconn would be more accurately described as an original design manufacturer. Among other things, Foxconn produces the Mac mini, the iPod and the iPhone for Apple Computer; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer retailers Dell, Inc. and Hewlett Packard; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo;the Xbox 360 for Microsoft, cell phones for Motorola, and Amazon Kindle.[1][2] [3] The company was founded in 1974 as a manufacturer of plastic products (notably connectors) by Terry Gou, who remains its CEO. It has been listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange since 1991. It is Taiwan's largest private company, with a revenue of US$13 billion in 2004 and US$40.6 billion in 2006.[4][2] Foxconn mainly manufactures in China; in 2007 it employed 450,000 people there and was China's largest exporter. The company opened its first manufacturing plant in China in 1988, a factory in Shenzhen that is now the company's largest, with more than 270,000 employees.[2][5] Beginning in 1994, Foxconn purchased development centres in the United States and Japan. The years 1998 and 1999 saw the establishment of additional manufacturing plants in the UK and the US. As of 2007, the company and its subsidiaries owned plants in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Mexico, Brazil, India and Vietnam.[2]
      • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -1/+27@aanarchy

        Giant walls of text are impossible to read.
      • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -1/+30@aanarchy

        If you're going to c/p from Wikipedia, take care to either remove citation numbers or include the citations or just link to the Wiki article itself.
      • petrikigor, on 07/25/2008, -3/+20I don't think it's that they didn't have resources to make a linux compatible bios. From what I understand, the company deliberately went out of their way to give linux operating systems a non-APCI compliant DSDT, when the proper one that it feeds to windows would have worked much better. If that is the case it is malice on the part of FoxConn.
      • shadus, on 07/25/2008, -1/+16@aAnaRchY-- Well that explains a lot... 360 red circle, ps3 issues, and the issues with early imac minis. Thanks! You've confirmed my choice to never buy a foxconn product that I can avoid.
      • diggmaddy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+11The way to deal with such companies is pretty straightforward. They show malice, and lose our business as a result. Foxconn is now in my blacklist. I am on the verge of order components for my new computer, so this new info comes in handy.
      • magusat999, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7There are a lot of companies who do great work FOR OTHER COMPANIES, but turn around and sell crap to consumers - look at Motorola. They have reliable chips in just about everything, but what do you get when you, as a consumer, buy a Motorola product? A cheaply made piece of crap. ***** makes the insides of just about everything electronic - but does anyone have a *****... anything? They tried to sell their own brand some time ago and just couldn't cut it. SO-oooo - just because Foxcon makes quality stuff for Apple doesn't mean they can deliver quality on their own. Evidently, they are a company that needs to be supervised and directed (and Apple supervises the ***** out of you) - because if left up to them they tend to take the cheap, shortcut route.
    • CryptiniteDemon, on 07/25/2008, -19/+3You know what's sad? I read this story at 3 other sites before I read it on digg and not once did I get the impression they were "sabotaging" the bios. They just don't officially support it or care.

      Digg people, you need to quit sensationalizing every story into something it's not. A lot of you are like fox news always blowing ***** out of proportion.
      • GenericNumber1, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3I was SO close to clicking the digg up button before I saw your last paragraph. It really seems to be quite the hypocritical comment to me.

        Yes, it's possible that people are blowing it out of proportion, but if it's so easy to get it working, why don't they fix their own bios instead of making people fix it themselves?
      • magusat999, on 07/25/2008, -0/+8In order for Linux not to work with your hardware - you HAVE to make your bios "lock it out". They have to be sabotaging it if Linux, or any other OS cannot speak to it. A BIOS is supposed to be an open book, to be conformed by whatever OS you put there. That's why the first word is "Basic". Its just supposed to be the interface to the PC's hardware - but now you get companies with their "agendas" and alliances putting all these extra layers on it, which does nothing make make the system more unstable.
      • dhVyse, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1You obviously haven't a clue about how big an issue this is. I've seen Foxconn boards in businesses that run Linux, they would obviously purchase these again not knowing that it no longer runs properly on Linux.
      • feignNU, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Anyone who says this "isn't a big deal" doesn't understand the issue. As has been pointed out several times, the problem is not so much that it doesn't support linux, but that it doesn't conform to open industry standards (and yet it claims to do just that). Now, oddly enough, it only fails to conform to standards when it detects Linux on the computer. Even more odd, there are multiple locations throughout the code that do not conform to standards (but only when Linux is the OS it finds). And oddest of all, none of the broken parts of the code look as though they are broken due to simple programmer oversight.

        The bottom line is that special exception is made for Linux in the BIOS of this motherboard, and this exception is the *only part* of the BIOS code that doesn't conform to the industry standards that Foxxconn claims the board conforms to. Now add to this the fact that there are e-mails from Bill Gates himself suggesting that microsoft actively attempt to prevent linux from working with certain hardware, and I ask you, how can this *not* look deliberate?
    • Chamunks, on 07/25/2008, -4/+1Did Someone Say CoreBoot???
    • dhVyse, on 07/25/2008, -2/+5Foxconns reply is what really got me. "TRY IN VISTA". I almost laughed, but then I almost cried. I filed a complaint on the site, I'll be sure to never buy any Foxconn products in the future, as well as informing others not to as well.
    • OscarKoeroo, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4Try this, part of the Postbank website doesn't function when using Firefox 3. The error message explained that, Windows XP using IE5.5 through 6. was supported. This was preceeded by all Windows version upon Windows 95. On the OSX side, they claimed support for the combination (get this...):

      10.2 and 10.3 with Firefox 1.0.

      I mailed them, that this is silly, especially since it all works fine and the browser/platform checks are silly and useless (I was a happy Firefox 2).

      So the explanation that I got told me that there is no support for anything besides Windows. For my OSX they recommended to upgrade(!) to 10.3 and upgrade to Firefox 1.0... In addition they also 'helped' me install Java 1.4 on my machines. I looked it up and Java was shipped natively with OSX since late 10.3 (or 10.4 even).

      Argh! It just a bloody webform! W3C anyone? I was furious and it re-boils my blood when I think about it. Go Postbank.nl
    • spritom, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3"You piss us off, we turn on you."

      For those that wish to do a review on the G33 Foxconn mobo's in question:

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
      http://www.epinions.com/Foxconn_G33M_Socket_LGA775 ...
      http://www.amazon.com/FOXCONN-G33M-1xPCIex16-4xSAT ...
  • Snuxoll, on 07/25/2008, -17/+300It should be up to the god damned os to handle ACPI correctly, if it doesn't like the DSDT tables it is given then too bad. There's no reason to have it hand out different ones to every OS...
    • amirman, on 07/25/2008, -6/+47i dugg you down but then i realized what you were saying. d'OH!
      • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -0/+45So now you can digg him up by clicking the thumbs up icon twice. Thank Digg for the new feature :D
      • strictnein, on 07/25/2008, -0/+17And you can also click on the "+115 diggs" (or whatever it's at now) and see how many other people have buried his comment. Another great feature.
      • Culyt, on 07/25/2008, -3/+7ohh handy.

        Now if I could only find who did what then go around to the houses of people who buried me and pee on their couch.

        ☢
      • cesclaveria, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2@Culyt,

        may be on the next version?
    • ivazquez, on 07/25/2008, -5/+119It is reasonable to use different DSDTs for each OS, to work around the OS's "issues". What's not acceptable is giving one particular OS a flagrantly bad DSDT.
      • computershack, on 07/25/2008, -59/+6But the Linux loonies keep telling me how easy it is to fix bugs so surely someone will have coded a workaround before their coffee got cold.
      • ToadLeg, on 07/25/2008, -1/+30@computershack

        RTFA: the whole point is that they've fixed a bug that was intentionally inserted by Foxconn into their hardware for Linux.
      • DemonWasp, on 07/25/2008, -0/+36@computershack: He did. Read the first post in that forum - he fixed a large part of the problem (not all of it, but he can't do that without a whole assload more "fixing"). The point here is that he shouldn't have had to do any fixing in the first place; their product is marketed as ACPI compliant, but isn't - that's illegal.
      • Sihing, on 07/25/2008, -0/+14Dugg DemonWasp. Your point is good.

        I shouldn't have to disassemble anything if they claim it's supposed to work out of the box. I'm not getting paid by the company... I don't need to clean up after them.
      • EntropyFan, on 07/25/2008, -24/+1@computershack, illegal how? In their response, they clearly state
        >> This board was never certified for Linux. It is only certified for Vista.

        And that is their call. They are under no obligation to support Linux. As long as it works with what they certify it to, it is not illegal.

        Having said that, anyone who feels this is an important point should vote with their wallet and not buy their stuff.
      • ArthurArchnix, on 07/25/2008, -0/+35Entropy: They claim compliance with ACPI, which is a standard. It is not microsoft's standard. If they were to claim, Microsoft ACPI compliant then the guy wouldn't have a leg to stand on. But they're claiming compliance with a OS neutral standard. Thus, false advertising, thus illegal.
    • niczar, on 07/25/2008, -25/+7You are really stupid, if you tried to RTFA, you'd understand that the BIOS goes out of its way to specifically give a fscked up ACPI table to Linux, and a correct one to Vista.
      • DiggNazi2, on 07/25/2008, -0/+16That is his point. Read the last sentence especially.
      • dougle, on 07/25/2008, -6/+1Snuxoll is wrong though, he sides with Foxconn until the last para, then comes to his senses.

        Well done Snuxoll, i've now got a headache.
    • psyjoniz, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3sure there is. money. lots and lots of microsoft money.
    • algaeturd, on 07/25/2008, -0/+0I'm more concerned about my TCP/IP connection but whatever.
  • ethana2, on 07/25/2008, -12/+506I gotta be honest here, I would just love to see a Digg story screw a company's sales into the dirt overnight, I think that would be hilarious-- especially when they had it coming.

    Sadly, I don't think we have that much power..
    • SQLserver, on 07/25/2008, -4/+119yet.
      • HoratioHellpop, on 07/25/2008, -18/+5ever. You place waaaaaaaaaay too much faith in web 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, ....
      • t3rmv3locity, on 07/25/2008, -0/+19*maniacal laughter*
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -6/+145Isn't Foxconn like Asus, Gigabyte, etc in that they mainly sell boards directly to individual / small-time system builders? If so, then Digg has a tremendous amount of power. I'm a system builder and half-assed standard compliance makes me see red.
      • tgunner, on 07/25/2008, -0/+26Foxconn is the OEM for most intel boards and has been a primary supplier to HP and Dell in the past.
      • DickBreath, on 07/25/2008, -0/+30@tgunner

        Very interesting. Intel, Dell and HP support Linux, to varying degrees, in the order I listed them.

        I believe Intel in particular would not be happy about their OEM sabotaging Linux. I don't think Dell would be happy either. Dell, in fact, mandated all their hardware suppliers to have Linux drivers within the year.
      • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7@tgunner

        Yeah, I half remembered that - don't they also make chipsets? I think the two network ones on my nVidia board are from them.

        In any case, its definitely more fuel for the hatefire.
      • DestroyFascism, on 07/25/2008, -2/+7Someone needs to Email HP and Dell to warn them.
      • cenarta, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4That's why it's ASUS for me almost every time, and now that they are supporting Linux on the eePC and instant boot, that solidifies my feelings even more.
      • GaryChalmers, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4Foxconn also makes Apple's stuff - so if you want to boycott don't forget about them.
      • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Foxconn makes the 3G iPhone, too.
      • fcukthisgame, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1From my time in a repair shop I can tell you, almost every Dell that I ever saw had a Foxconn board. HPs usually had an HP-branded (probably OEM foxconn) or ASUS board.

        I'm not so sure that Dell desktop is Foxconn- exclusive, maybe with the exception of the XPS series.
    • neFariou5, on 07/25/2008, -0/+73The closet it would have come to that was when Creative ***** over the guy writing/modifying drivers and it turned out Creative were deliberately crippling their drivers just to sell new hardware to Vista users.
      • boobsbr, on 07/25/2008, -0/+32that was epic! creative got some really bad press there, no more creative or foxconn for me, or for anyone i can tell these stories.
      • sturmgiest, on 07/25/2008, -0/+13Digg was powerful enough that Creative reversed their entire stance on the issue in just a week or two.
      • jparkinson, on 07/25/2008, -0/+21Lets not forget Rick-rolling an entire baseball stadium...
      • DyceFreak, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6Creative still makes you pay to get EAX emulation working in Vista... horse *****...
        Creative is a ***** horrible company, but sadly they have the markey by the balls with the best product...

        Foxconn on the other hand just has general, ***** products... So much for the "idle threat"
      • Psythik, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6"Creative is a ***** horrible company, but sadly they have the markey by the balls with the best product..."

        My Asus Xonar would like to have a word with you...
    • Elranzer, on 07/25/2008, -2/+31"Sadly, I don't think we have that much power."

      Not Digg...... but Slashdot might (in matters like these).
    • Frost9999, on 07/25/2008, -0/+9It depends how Digg users apply themselves. Slashdot has had a few examples of the community organising themselves within the comments to carry out a certain action. This kind of thing could work if the action is appropriate. For example - a letter writing campaign to buyers of these BIOS's might actually make a difference. With the sheer number of Digg users, it's feasible that someone would create a website, start listing buyers and sellers of this hardware, and start allocating people to write and phone them.

      Feedback from those contacted could then be requested, and posted to the website as evidence that it's making a difference. The offending company would soon take heed and issue a press statement and probably change their practices.
    • c0un7d0wn, on 07/25/2008, -1/+13Remember this? http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.o ...
    • Cerialthriller, on 07/25/2008, -1/+15yeah but most people who know anything about hardware wouldnt buy a foxconn product in the first place
      • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Foxconn has made a lot of Apple hardware in the past, some of their products are actually pretty good. They're comparable to most all hardware provided by OEMs used by the likes of Dell, HP, etc.

        Its not like they're PC Chips. *gag*
    • Bilabrin, on 07/25/2008, -1/+10A search on google brings up the slashdot story first and then links 4,5 nad 6 discuss the story as well as this very digg entry. I think we do have a little bit of power here. We shall see how this developes but I know for a fact that Syndrome had it right in the incredibles when he said:

      "See? Now you respect me, because I'm a threat. That's the way it works."

      Now maybe all these arrogant corporate pricks who sluff us off with polite ***** will take notice and start being respectful instead of condescending and dismissive.
    • innovati, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5well, not that I've ever bought their products before, I tend toward gigabyte and asus, but they will never get a penny from me, and since my friends ask me for computer building advice they won't get any money from my friends.

      Now that I know this I can't, in good conscience, recommend sub-standard hardware to a friend, even if they only intend to use windows on it.
    • twertyto, on 07/25/2008, -0/+8Is that a challenge?
    • fas2, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Frost9999: Yeah, sounds good, but who got the time?
      • RSterkenburg, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Here on Digg, we have something called a "Reply" button, which alleviates the need for directing comments to individuals through a graphical hierarchy system.
      • fas2, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Sorry, I thought I already reached the deepest level of hierarchy.
    • Carobu, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3Perhaps we should try phone calls, letters, emails, word of mouth. Spread the word to everyone you know, and send messages to Foxxcon themselves. As long as we the consumer base turn on them they will feel it, and maybe then they'll stop the BS "non supporting" of linux stuff. As the end user, the product should be tailored to OUR requests, and specifications, NOT theirs.
    • rhapsody1447, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6Hey we managed to get a poor kid his xbox back right? Don't underestimate the power of the internet.
    • Jpesci, on 07/25/2008, -0/+8Don't forget that we did rickroll the Mets.
    • emmet, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6it's not even about power. everybody here is ranting about how they will never buy foxconn products again but what all of these people apparently fail to realize is that their beloved iPod, iPhones, MacBooks etc. are in fact manufactured by foxconn. and you all know that the inherent coolness of owning that iphone means so much more to most diggers than this. so at the end of the day this purported "boycott" of foxconn and foxconn products really doesn't mean *****.
  • gletob, on 07/25/2008, -8/+129if the entire community digged it that might work
    • praptak, on 07/25/2008, -1/+20"if the entire community digged it that might work"

      As of now, it seems that "***** pelican eats a pigeon" is more newsworthy to the entire community.
      • dood, on 07/25/2008, -2/+8It might be because at least the pelican doesn't come off as a douche.

        "Yeah, well, I allege that you guys thoroughly suck."

        13-year-old angst in full force here.
      • oneoverzero, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2It's also been up for longer (I think), with any luck this will get just as many diggs in the long run.
    • MorfiusX, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Foxconn makes way more than motherboards. A good portion of their revenue is derived from sales to OEMs. Unless you can convince people like Dell and HP to drop them, your fight will be futile...
    • PixelEater, on 07/25/2008, -0/+10Dugg for "digged".
  • frup, on 07/25/2008, -6/+251Absolutely disgusting. This should be illegal, actively sabotaging something that should work to make it not work can't have many ethical grounds.
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -1/+26Am I weird because its the non-compliance to the stated (and advertised!) standards that pisses me off, not the apparent sabotage?
    • jamesLankford, on 07/25/2008, -58/+2
      • MacEnvy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+28The complaint is that it's marketed as ACPI compatible, when it clearly (and provably) is not. Just because you didn't understand the issue doesn't mean there isn't an issue.
      • realityiswhere, on 07/25/2008, -0/+15You're getting dugg down because you don't seem to realize they are intentionally sabotaging it. The point is, it's certifiable for Linux, but they're making it uncertifiable by changing things they shouldn't in the first place.
      • boobsbr, on 07/25/2008, -0/+19are you being paid by foxconn?

        ACPI is a standard. there is no compliance level or OS compliance. either it is ACPI compliant or it is not.
      • Pittance, on 07/25/2008, -0/+11Buried alive for stupidity.
      • ToadLeg, on 07/25/2008, -1/+9They put the equivalent of
        "{if os == Linux; crash}" into their hardware. "not certified" is very different from "deliberately sabotaged."

        FTA part of the actual code is:

        If (MCTH (_OS, "Linux"))
        {
        Store (0x3, OSVR)
        }
    • sirhomer, on 07/25/2008, -1/+48This is class actionable. They are advertising ACPI compliance but it is clear they aren't ACPI compliant. So false advertising, and also possibly anti-trust.
      • DestroyFascism, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4Have to agree there. Free hand in court case, returns possible of 1000% of investment, American business model...
    • kh99, on 07/25/2008, -7/+2I think you may be giving them too much credit - they may just be incompetent. I kind of doubt that there's any MB manufacturer who wants to do anything to limit their sales. There are bigger manufacturers, what good does it do for one smaller company to do this? In any case I don't really get all the outrage, just buy a different brand.
      • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -0/+14They're competent enough to sabotage Linux by pointing to corrupt/wrong DSDT tables. This is a willful act, not an oversight.
      • kh99, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4I don't know anything about DSDT tables or ACPI, so I'm only going on what's said in the article and comments. If I understand correctly, they didn't need to treat different OS's differently at all. But if the person writing that code didn't know that and was told not to bother supprting Linux, they may have just made a bad decision (through incompetence) to handle it by not allowing Linux. If you read the comments here, you'd think they were on a mission to destroy Linux, which makes no sense.
      • evillawngnome, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5I don't know if i agree with your "incompetence" claim, but GODDAMN i agree that we can all vote with our dollars. +1 from me.
      • hozelda, on 07/25/2008, -1/+0kh99, why would you specifically create something different for Linux? Why put up a different Linux entry? If they receive any benefit whatsoever directly or indirectly from Monopolysoft for creating a special entry, I see the EU bringing on more fines against Monopolysoft. And the only one to suffer might be Monopolysoft if they were negligent with their specs or recommendations. They are Big Boy and have to go the extra mile. Sloppiness leads to leveraging of their monopoly. Sloppiness won't cut it for them.

        To put it more clearly, Monopolysoft needs to at least make clear to vendors that there are certain things they cannot do when it concerns nonMonopolysoft OS's.

        IANAL
      • kh99, on 07/25/2008, -0/+0OK, I don't understand it very well, maybe I'm wrong. And I didn't realize that they make a lot of stuff including Intel branded MBs.
    • nbpengo, on 07/25/2008, -9/+2I must have woken up on another planet today..

      Look, chances are that Foxconn didn't do this deliberately. Think about it -- how many motherboards do they make a year? It would cost them a fortune to do a ground-up rewrite of the ACPI firmware for each motherboard, so it's probably derived from a different model, which in turn came from a different model, etc. you get the idea.

      So the likely scenario is this:

      Foxconn comes out with new motherboard, copies old motherboard firmware, tweaks it to pass WHQL testing, and ships it. The Linux support hasn't been sabotaged, it has bitrotted.
      • TomFrost, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7Not only were the checksums invalid, they set MUTEs on memory addresses that would destroy ANY system because it's in valid memory space. Thing is, Windows completely ignores them (which is bad practice). Linux, however, doesn't. And so it gets destroyed.

        That's fairly irrefutable -- I mean, why else would those MUTEs be there?
      • LucianSolaris, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4@TomFrost

        Most people will deny a horrible truth if they have any opportunity to bail out and 'give the benefit of the doubt'.

        This is why we're getting assrammed from every direction.
      • nbpengo, on 07/25/2008, -2/+0@TomFrost

        Is that the only explanation you can come up with?

        I'm going to assume MUTE is a vendor specific ACPI method call, since it's not in the ACPI 3.0b spec. You said yourself Windows ignores invalid calls to this, have you looked at older firmware releases? It's possible that the code was always this way, and it was changed to meet stricter WHQL requirements. The developer making the change says "I don't have the time to test on Linux, I'll just keep the existing behaviour".

        Writing firmware that is compatible between the Microsoft and Intel ACPI CA implementations is HARD. It's not surprising that if they aren't testing on the Intel implementation, that there are bugs. Likewise for the checksums being invalid.
      • TomFrost, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2The method call isn't MUTE, the method call is Acquire(). Are you seriously going into that argument because I said "set a MUTE" instead of acquire?

        And the REASON this works on Windows is because Windows has a BIOS handler that looks for poorly written firmware. Linux doesn't have this (yet -- it should be in the next kernel release), but regardless this comes into play specifically because Windows has a workaround for it. Linux trusts the standards and relies on accurate instructions and gets burned. It shouldn't NEED to implement Windows-like workarounds.

        Quite frankly, I don't care how hard it is to write compatible firmware. Companies need to comply with standards no matter how hard it is. The ACPI standard doesn't allow for Windows-only support, and this firmware has specific programming in it to only provide valid tables to Windows OSes. If your firmware isn't ready yet, you don't release it. That simple. There is absolutely no excuse for an invalid checksum in a commercially released product.
      • nbpengo, on 07/25/2008, -2/+0Looking back at the original posting, all he did was change the timeout value on the Acquire() call. Why is that causing your OS to crash?
      • nbpengo, on 07/25/2008, -3/+0As far as Foxconn is concerned, yeah it sucks that there's a bug in their firmware. I do a lot of work on NetBSD's ACPI support, so I know how painful these things can be. What I don't believe is that there is bad intent here; it's simply a software bug and in these cases having a whinge about it to a low-tier support guy typically isn't the best approach to getting these things fixed.
    • Bilabrin, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Why would Microsoft play fair when they don't really have to?
    • rlbond86, on 07/25/2008, -6/+2I suspect the reality is that Foxconn just doesn't have good programmers. I suspect they TRIED to get Linux support to work, but they didn't really know how, so they hacked Windows support in and then claimed Linux was an "unsupported OS" without removing their crappy code.
    • hozelda, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1If this is true and if Monopolysoft had anything to do with it, I see a few million euros more in fines from antitrust authorities.
    • DangerCollie, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6This is really stupid. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of Linux users also build their own PC's. If you were a mobo manufacturer, why on earth would you want to hack off that market share? It almost seems too silly to be deliberate.

      I'll just buy a different brand. Asus, Intel...who needs Foxxcomm?
      • Megatog615, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Problem is Foxconn has their connectors/etc on pretty much any motherboard nowadays. IDE ports, memory slots, etc. So make sure you don't buy a mobo with Foxconn parts.
      • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Foxconn's consumer motherboard division is insignificant compared the rest of their business.
  • baron1984, on 07/25/2008, -9/+96@Snuxoll: I wouldn't be complaining if it was equally bad on Windows, but what they have done is deliberate.

    The Windows sections depend on Windows Hardware Error Architecture in order to function, I think it's a thinly veiled way of Microsoft giving kickbacks to Foxconn to support Windows, but nothing else, under the guise of, the BIOS is buggy and Windows is just "correcting it"
    • niczar, on 07/25/2008, -2/+24They probably thought nobody would figure it out.
    • veilrap, on 07/25/2008, -36/+6***** you and your anti-microsoft propaganda. Please take it elsewhere. Complain about MS when it's actually MS doing something wrong.
      • freedomknight, on 07/25/2008, -2/+33http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.o ...

        In bill gates own words.
      • caseycoold, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6Seriously, not the time or place.
      • billyfalconer, on 07/25/2008, -6/+7Hey genius, the problem isn't MS. It's Foxconn lying about supporting a standard. Yes, Foxconn is probably doing it to get some kind of a kickback from MS, but that's secondary. Go back and tweak your antivirus software.
      • danielwsmithee, on 07/25/2008, -3/+20MS is the doing something wrong here. They are giving out a MS certification to hardware that does not meet the standards advertised.
      • fedja, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2Ermmm.. MS is trying to corner the market by having partners cater to their interests. This is fine, thousands of companies do that to some extent (exclusive country sales, gold partner deals, certified vendors....)
        Foxconn, however, deliberately sabotage one of the operating systems without telling the consumer. If the box had a big label stating "Linux disabled", all would be fine.

        Standard compliance is a big deal in the computer market, deliberately undermining it is rude, retarded, and counter productive, not to mention in this case, bordering on fraud.
    • kirwoodd, on 07/25/2008, -1/+19... and learn how to click the "Reply" link.
      digg has threaded comments, use them.

      dingus.
    • jamesLankford, on 07/25/2008, -25/+2
      • daengbo, on 07/25/2008, -1/+17If Linux isn't supported, then there shouldn't be a separate DSDT table for Linux ....
    • LeviTheSmith, on 07/25/2008, -7/+8Baron, USE THE ***** REPLY BUTTON
    • yertthedigger, on 07/25/2008, -3/+1This guy has gotten repeatedly banned from a Windows IRC on Freenode for being an utter troll...

      And now he is on Digg....

      Foxconn writing poor hardware interfaces is Microsoft sabotage, but Nvidia writing poor Vista drivers is Vista sucking? I think the world is a little biased.
  • baron1984, on 07/25/2008, -10/+224To everyone:

    Please complain LOUDLY to Foxconn and the Federal Trade Commission, I have links to both on that post.

    Foxconn makes a lot of board, even for MSI and other 2nd Tier types, please make sure not to buy any of their products.

    If you are considering a new motherboard, please call the distributor and make sure that they did not get it from Foxconn.
    • anylo, on 07/25/2008, -0/+32Maybe you should also inform MSI and others that you're going to vote with your wallet?

      I do.
      • matthewinDRO, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Did MSI engage in this same behaviour?
      • troye, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1It's kind of hard to vote with my wallet. Foxconn put their chipsets in OEM hardware like Dells, Acers, and the like. They also make chipsets like modems, and wifi chips not just BIOS. So if you buy a PC from a major PC vendor (like Dell) then it will ship with Foxconn stuff in it.

        Build your PC if you really want to vote with your wallets and purses. I don't know if Macs have foxconn hardware or not.

        You've been warned.
      • digitalarcanum, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1yeah, macs have foxconn hardware in them. Our datacenter has Apple storage arrays (they were the cheapest available for what we needed them for). one of them had a bad PSU. Attempted to contact apple support to get a replacement. Apple's server-level support is truly *****, but that's a story for another day.

        anywho, Foxconn logos on the connector that connects the PSU to the motherboard, so yeah, at least in their storage arrays, they use foxconn.
      • t0x2c, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1I've never had an issue with Ubuntu on mine or any of my friends MSI boards...
    • Rikm, on 07/25/2008, -0/+31MSI is a fist-tier motherboard maker. Foxconn does not make boards for MSI, at least not in volume.

      Foxconn does (or has in the past and will probably in the future providing it can outbid Pegatron/Asustek) make boards for desktop vendors, including Dell, HP, Acer, Apple, etc.

    • nirvdrum, on 07/25/2008, -3/+19At the risk of being compared to a faction that systematically annihilated a group of people based solely on their religion, might I suggest cleaning up the letter being sent to the FTC? When it looks like you haven't even taken the time to double-check the grammar of your complaint, it's hard to believe you took the time to double-check the accuracy of your statements. Like it or not, that's the mentality of many professional types.
      • TheXuu, on 07/25/2008, -13/+1You Jew!
      • DickBreath, on 07/25/2008, -0/+10Why was the parent dugg down? It is excellent advice. If you write to the FTC, at least make sure you spelling is correct. It wouldn't hurt to check your grammar. If you aren't that good at it, then get someone else who is to proofread your letter. They might even offer useful suggestions. Things you should leave out. Things you should add.

        In particular, do not make an emotional appeal. It should be about facts and business.
      • Necoras, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7Seconded.
      • burnedtubes, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Thirdededed!!
    • lamiaconfitor, on 07/25/2008, -1/+11like I needed another reason to dislike Foxconn, aside from their crap products.
    • jamesLankford, on 07/25/2008, -36/+0
      • rmccs0x, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1you dumb mother *****. if you read the article, you would understand foxconn put in extra code to intentionally harm linux.
    • sirhomer, on 07/25/2008, -0/+9Web contact form:
      http://www.foxconnchannel.com/support/online.aspx

      The company is heavily based in China. The parent company of Foxconn is "Precision Industry Computer Corporation Ltd."

      Chinese (main HQ) phone number:
      +86.800.830.60999

      US Phone number:
      +1.714.871.9968

      Austria Phone number:
      +43.1.6628860
    • DestroyFascism, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1I only use Nvidia Chipsets and some Intel, it saves me the hassle. AMD + Nvidia + Giel. Nice combo...
    • renesisx, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3I've had too much bad experience with Foxconn boards in the past. Their stuff is usually damned cheap, but it is damned cheap for a reason. I was already no longer buying their junk, and this just solidifies my position.
      • t0x2c, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1They're probably subsidized by Microsoft for this, making it even cheaper.
    • Tahiri, on 07/25/2008, -7/+2The guy who made the article sounds like a real ass. Maybe if he learned some manners the company would have spoke with him properly
      • LingNoi, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3Angry customers that are victims of fraud don't require manners. Pretending that you support ACPI when you infact don't is fraud.
      • rmccs0x, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1are you also angry at america for 9/11?
      • t0x2c, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1I take it you never clicked, since it's not an article, it's a forum post, and the guy has the tone of 'why would you do this' then technical information on how to fix it. YOU sound much more like an ass than him.
  • traverse, on 07/25/2008, -6/+127Logged in just to digg this. I wonder how many other HW manufacturers do this sort of thing?
    • quantumphaze, on 07/25/2008, -1/+55Me too,

      I'm sure most manufacturers don't pull this stuff because there is little incentive to cripple their hardware just for Linux and *BSD users. The general suspicion is that Microsoft have made a shady deal with Foxconn to cripple it. Cash is a pretty powerful incentive.
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -1/+32Crippling hardware for no reason would seem like a terrible idea for companies that sell hardware primarily to individuals or small-time builders. Would you really want a reputation for having your products by randomly compatible?
    • mCanada, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2I think most of the time it's simply the mobo manufactures ignoring Linux on many of their products, even when they are considered "Linux friendly". Take ASUS. I bought a Asus P5E-VM HDMI. Great matx 775 board, but suspend resume under ubuntu would freeze the X server (no apparent reason), any 3d operations would halt the system (perhaps intels buggy drivers fault). No mention of linux on ASUS's site for this board.
      I had asumed that becuse of the EE this board would have had good Linux support. wrong.
      • t0x2c, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Weird... since Asus is now including a small version of linux included on a lot of their new motherboards. What distro/version do you use?
      • mCanada, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1t0x2c: Ubuntu 8.04. I was quite shocked my self. The board is bleeding new, so it may just require time for things to catch up. It's a beautiful board that can OC' amazingly well (Q6600 @ 3.6-3.8 no prob) and I would certainly buy ASUS again.
  • Blade3D, on 07/25/2008, -11/+36Outrageous, spread the word :http://tinyurl.co.uk/rj2d
  • amdlinux, on 07/25/2008, -2/+56If confirmed, please post this news to your local language Ubuntu / Linux forum in order to make users aware of possible problems with Foxconn hardware. Foxconn hardware is being sold all over the world, might be available also in your country.
  • arkanebeats, on 07/25/2008, -26/+14Does everything that starts with Fox suck?
  • tama00, on 07/25/2008, -4/+213man this guy is pretty smart, i would of just thrown the motherboard away and got a new one.

    props to you TheAlmightyCthulhu!

    dugg for support
    • mstrebe, on 07/25/2008, -0/+11Ryan,

      Making idle treats is not going to solve anything

      Mmmm. Delicious idle treats OM NOM NOM NOM NOM.
      • DestroyFascism, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1You are either with us or against us.....
  • cantormath, on 07/25/2008, -5/+97Bill Gates Thought of this first
    http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.o ...

    Typically ubuntuforum moderators to shut a post down.
    • Phssthpok, on 07/25/2008, -1/+13Wow that is a SMOKING GUN! How can people overlook this stuff when they talk about Bill Gates legacy?
      • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6Hey, a large swath of individuals also think/thought Reagan and Nixon (and even GW Bush) were great presidents. People believe what they want to believe.
    • jturbo, on 07/25/2008, -13/+7Well I think he makes his point pretty well. He's pissed that Linux can just free ride off their, and their partners work.
    • DaveDigga, on 07/25/2008, -4/+6Bill Gates is NOT a nice guy. His Legacy?

      If not for Gates/Microsloth the current state of computing would be light years ahead. Do you really think this is the first time he thought it would be a good idea to sabotage the community to guarantee his own profit? Ever heard of Java?

    • TeraRealm256, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6damn..Gates was up at 845AM on a SUNDAY! Dude was dedicated!
    • hozelda, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Sorry, jturbo, try again. That Gates comment to appear to make things look justified is a red herring.

      Linux does do work; otherwise, ACPI would mean nothing to it.

      Second, Gates may think he is entitled to an exclusive monopoly on partnerships with these vendors, but he is wrong. "Partners" are partners for any OS software that runs on their hardware. To try and give Monopolysoft an advantage or exclusivity is illegal, "partner" or not. This is basic. Gates is a fool if he thought he could get away with that.

      IANAL
    • jturbo, on 07/25/2008, -3/+0Right...that's why this guy is having problems with ACPI...Linux obviously did ***** work, sorry asshat, try again.
  • SQLserver, on 07/25/2008, -11/+132***** Foxconn.
    • Phocion55, on 07/25/2008, -1/+52Is it official? Can we add Foxconn to the ***** list?

      Is there a board that reviews these on a case-by-case basis?
      • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -0/+21I think it would fit nicely between Viacom and Creative.
      • wushu18t, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3close, i was about to buy a foxconn MB. but i do confess my creative zen has been great the past couple of years.
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -0/+17I say they need to be made an example of so that other hardware vendors are afraid to walk alone at night.
      • dazparkour, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5That's the problem - when they are scared to walk along Microsoft will walk with them.
    • uways, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5Amen
    • jparkinson, on 07/25/2008, -4/+10***** THE RIAA!!!
    • c0ncept, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1Their ***** sucks anyway.
  • 1karmik1, on 07/25/2008, -4/+43I've posted an Italian translation of the original article on ubuntu-it forums. Here's the link for fellow Italians that don't speak English :P

    Ho postato una traduzione italiana dell'articolo originale sui forum di ubuntu-it. Ecco il link per miei connazionali non anglofoni :P

    http://forum.ubuntu-it.org/index.php/topic,206711. ...
    • proliance, on 07/25/2008, -4/+8I speak English and still didn't understand it.

      Maybe I'll do better with Italian.
    • dazparkour, on 07/25/2008, -2/+14That's good, props and all but they probably won't be reading a site that is mostly English in the English comments section.
  • MasterPain, on 07/25/2008, -29/+10Foxcon makes ***** motherboards. I really doubt they would do this on pourpose why would they care what OS you install once they have your money. This guy is just some conspiracy theorist crazy Linux users.
    • niksko, on 07/25/2008, -6/+6Because Microsoft may have paid them a whole crap ton of money to make it this way. Or you could be right. But you're probably wrong. There is no way that a large company like Foxcon would do something like this by accident.
      • waydee, on 07/25/2008, -12/+1I think you'd have to be seriously paranoid and delusional to think Microsoft would pay a hardware manufacturer to cause incompatibilities with Linux, especially a motherboard manufacturer.

        Crappy coders trying to write a BIOS for a DESKTOP motherboard make a mistake and introduce a bug that affects a certain operating system - surely that's more likely?

        I'm not saying sloppy code is acceptable but I highly doubt that ensuring Linux compatibility is lead concern when the board isn't even destined for the server market, this is a bug and nothing more.
      • zeebo, on 07/25/2008, -1/+17If Linux wasn't their concern and they weren't targetting Linux users they shouldn't have included a section for Linux at all. Including one that points to a broken table, when working tables exist for other operating systems smells really bad, and is why the conspiracy theorists are getting up in arms. The fact that there exist documents indicating that Microsoft has specifically tried to sabotage ACPI support for Linux in the past also doesn't reflect well on this situation.

        Making products that are defective by design doesn't tend to improve shareholder's peace of mind. If I were them I'd exercise some due dilligence to fix the problem, alienating market segments intentionally isn't good practice especially since they can open companies up to things like lawsuits.

        It doesn't necessarily have to involve pay-offs. It could be as simple as Microsoft making unwritten rules for access, even ones as lame as 'The CEO of company X cannot play golf with Bill Gates unless ACPI support for non-windows operating systems is broken.'
      • archiesteel, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1waydee: it's not being paranoid when Microsoft has engaged in these types of shenanigans before.
    • ProfessorFoo, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Foxconn makes some components for half the motherboards out there and I have one of their motherboards in this computer right now. They are definitely not ***** unless you want to run Linux.
    • swazo, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2thanks for the clarification masterpain - whats is your degree again? not a software engineer who reverse engineered bios with substantiated proof?

      oh... yes i would like fries with that.
      • SupaSolly, on 07/25/2008, -2/+0What a dumb ***** take some fries and shove them up your ass that is where your head must be with comments like that.
  • macmangb, on 07/25/2008, -32/+34Once again Microsoft and their cronies make an effort to screw over Apple and Linux.
    • kahrn, on 07/25/2008, -10/+18Because foxconn ***** up is Microsoft's fault and because it has everything to do with Apple.

      (Note: sarcasm -- it has very little if anything to do with Microsoft and absolutely nothing to do with Apple.)
      • Phssthpok, on 07/25/2008, -5/+6Really? How do you know it has nothing to do with Microsoft?

        repost from cantormath from another thread...

        Bill Gates Thought of this first
        http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.o ...
      • kahrn, on 07/25/2008, -3/+4Perhaps I should have clarified before hand -- yes, I have already seen the memo regarding breaking ACPI support in windows. But in this case, I believe foxconn is to blame.

        If it were Microsoft to blame (despite the memos and evidence) then other companies would be just as bad/worse. The parent poster is just finding a way to get at Microsoft, though.
    • daengbo, on 07/25/2008, -1/+17Apple doesn't use a BIOS.
    • Kamujin, on 07/25/2008, -2/+11FIXED - Once again Microsoft and their cronies make an effort to screw over Linux.

      Apple screws itself.
      • ephekt, on 07/26/2008, -3/+1Linux has done a good job of failing all on its own.
      • Kamujin, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1If by "failing" you mean having a huge server install share and a growing desktop install share, then I see what you mean.

        I would have chosen another word though. Something like "growing" seems less confusing.
    • Myonosken, on 07/25/2008, -3/+9Until it's proven Microsoft are doing this, keep schtum.
    • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2Foxconn has made a lot of motherboards for Apple, though.
  • belcorriko, on 07/25/2008, -6/+79Good to know... I'm building a new box next week... I'll make sure not to buy a Foxconn motherboard... I'll be using Linux after all :)
    • eddan, on 07/25/2008, -0/+23Heh. I don't use Linux on my home machine...but next time I get a motherboard I'm positive it won't be Foxconn. This is wrong enough on so many levels...
    • DemonWasp, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7Even if you're not using Linux, it's not a bad idea to boycott their products. This has all the hallmarks of intentional sabotage, which is completely unacceptable behaviour on their part. Hopefully, if they get stung enough by this, they'll get back on the straight-and-narrow of making all their stuff compliant (at least, as compliant as it says it is).
  • hollyminkowski, on 07/25/2008, -3/+31Well, this is certainly disturbing!
    An example must be made of these assholes!
    • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5To the torches and pitchforks!!
    • Vodd9, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1So other companies think twice about intentionally corrupting their own material.
  • dynamited, on 07/25/2008, -4/+90Diggotron.... transform !
  • veilrap, on 07/25/2008, -46/+10I'm sorry but I cannot support this author. Reading his FTC complaint he tries to blame Microsoft for Foxconn's ***** bios. ***** him. If you want to complain about Microsoft then complain about Microsoft. Don't claim that Foxconn's crappiness is a sign of MS anti-trust issues. Buried for ***** retardedness.
    • thetango, on 07/25/2008, -25/+6Well said veilrap ... frankly this was the most bothersome part I read:

      "Foxconn:

      Dear Ryan,

      Making idle treats is not going to solve anything.

      As already stated this model has not been certified under Linux nor supported.

      As you are unhappy with the product- using a non-support operating system nor certified, please contact your reseller for a refund.

      Me:

      Yeah, well, I allege that you guys thoroughly suck.

      Learn how to write a BIOS before you go selling hardware with falsified specs."

      So, let me see if I have this right. This clown is complaining about a BIOS with a broken ACPI table, and complains to the manufacturer. The manufacturer replies back with "Sorry, Linux isn't supported on that HW yet."

      And this guy goes *****.

      He could just boot with 'noacpi' and be done with it.
      • FARMER, on 07/25/2008, -3/+9Yes, you are correct "noacpi" should fix it - but you miss the point LINUX WOULD WORK FINE WITH MS ACPI thus it is compatible with the existing BIOS code - BUT the BIOS GOES OUT OF IT'S WAY TO SABOTAGE LINUX. FOSS developers have put great effort to make LINUX compatible with so much existing hardware - it will be hell to keep adapting software to cope with BIOS induced bugs THAT ONLY APPLY TO NON-MS OPERATING SYSTEMS.
    • xz9925, on 07/25/2008, -3/+11you're Buried for ***** retardedness.
  • waydee, on 07/25/2008, -21/+129If you read the e-mail dialogue he had with Foxconn he's pretty damn rude and doesn't really listen to them... I appreciate he's annoyed but I don't think being unprofessional like that is the way to encourage them to fix the problem? Not to say that they seem very interested in what he has to say either though...

    Seems like a lot of conjecture too, yes it could be a deliberate sabotage or it could just be badly written code?
    • 1karmik1, on 07/25/2008, -3/+65Point is, Foxconn should just implement ACPI and that's it. It's doing wrong just by implementing different sets of quirks for different o.s.
      • waydee, on 07/25/2008, -9/+34I agree but throwing around accusations like "M$ IS PAYING THEM TO DO THIS!11!" just looks stupid and is completely unrealistic.

      • HonoredMule, on 07/25/2008, -3/+13Apparently, waydee, you are unfamiliar with the basic motivation and effect of private (i.e. MS) "certification" schemes.

        Certification for anything other than an internationally recognized and universally supported standard is nothing but incentive--either through direct financial compensation, "license" to sell your own original products without being sued, or increased marketability (i.e. compatible with/made for stickers)--to custom build a buggy system to work specifically with another buggy system either exclusively or at least at a cost to the attention given to supporting general standards. The only organizations that should be legally allowed to issue certification in any form are non-profit standards bodies like IEEE.
      • NJank, on 07/25/2008, -14/+4They hacked a solution together that works for the majority of their customer base. They might have made a half-assed attempt at pushing the same hack to linux, but did so badly. notice they aren't supporting win95 either.

        I call it poor design choices, and a 'good enough to get it out the door' attitude. Not deliberate sabotage. After reading the story on slashdot, I was amazed when this sensationalist, and inaccurate, submission popped up.
      • dazparkour, on 07/25/2008, -3/+17It is Microsoft Certified, the box lies about ACPI compliance and it was built to REJECT linux. Still not suspicious?
      • mudgod, on 07/25/2008, -3/+7waydee: I agree about the it being stupid part but not exactly unrealistic - microsoft has stooped pretty low on multiple occasions in the past
      • dazparkour, on 07/25/2008, -3/+10NJank - NO. ACPI compliance means that they don't need different code for different OS's. GO AWAY.

        What you are spreading is not an informed opinion - it is one that at a glance could seem reasonable but if believed just leads to greater ignorance.

        If there is an issue where you believe greater ignorance would be good then you are probably on the wrong side of the argument.
    • jasonj75, on 07/25/2008, -26/+9So let me get this straight. They make a BIOS, it doesn't work on Linux so they sell it saying, "Only works on Windows." How is this trying to 'destroy' Linux? They seem to be pretty open with the fact that Linux isn't certified or supported.

      I'm not a hard core PC guy, but I was able to just build my own machine and one of those steps was to ensure everything played nice with everything else. What's the point in buying a board that claims it only supports Vista if you're going to install Linux? So they didn't implement ACPI properly, that's a shame, but it's no reason to be an a-hole to their support.

      Buried for being a jerk and a drama queen.
      • 1karmik1, on 07/25/2008, -3/+13It's ok if the hardware you manufacture for whatever unwanted reason doesn't work on linux. Linux is not the issue here. If tomorrow i write a new os that is ACPI compliant.. it won't work on that motherboard because altough they claim compliance with the crucial ACPI specification, they're not compliant at all. This is the core of what TheAlmightyCthulhu is saying.
      • Findeton, on 07/25/2008, -3/+20"So they didn't implement ACPI properly, that's a shame, but it's no reason to be an a-hole to their support."

        That's the reasonof the complaint: They say
        They say they implemented ACPI, but THEY DIDN'T (they implemented their own not standard version of ACPI so it only works with windows).

        Please RTFA
      • paretoj, on 07/25/2008, -2/+6If their claims of not supporting Linux are true, they why is Linux referenced in the DSDT, hmmmmmm? This reference in the table not only doesn't work, but specifically targets Linux into doing errors.

        There's a difference between a product not supporting something, and a product breaking on purpose. They should just implement the standards without referencing Linux at all, let alone in a table designed to create faults for it.
    • MaxIsBored, on 07/25/2008, -4/+42No, it's not badly written code, they took existing code, and sabotaged it not to work specifically with linux.
      Furthermore, they say they DONT SUPPORT linux, not that it doesn't work. Tehy say it's ACPI 1,2,3 complaint, and it is not.
    • AttilaD, on 07/25/2008, -8/+9I get yelled at by customers all the time, and I'm not even a customer service rep. I still don't get to be a dick back to them.

      I know this customer service rep is scared and way out of his league, and I know it's not his fault, he didn't write the code. Still, he did not handle this well.

      I agree that this probably wasn't an intentional sabotage. I think it's way more likely that the programmer was watching too much porn, got way behind, and just copied and pasted some crap from another bios version at the last minute without bothering to test it. Or maybe he used windows virtual pc or something to test.

      Either way, it seems like if they were going to sabotage an OS they would have done a way better job of it.
    • javaroast, on 07/25/2008, -3/+9Because Foxconn was so professional. Foxconn started the rudeness and be careful if you buy this board to use with Windows XP, because that's a non-certified OS as well and therefor according to Foxconn a non-supported OS.
    • kyrios23, on 07/25/2008, -5/+8You clearly didn't get what's wrong here.

      It's not that they didn't implement Linux support!

      What they did is: Oh *****- Linux is running on our hardware. Let's do something AGAINST that.
      • jasmus, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3there's no proof they intentionally did this. They may have not got around to completing the LInux table. Still *****, but I can't see them intentionally killing off part of their market.

        The part about Microsoft paying them to kill Linux running on the board is pure tinfoil-hattery.
      • dazparkour, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1THERE IS NO SUCH THING IS A LINUX TABLE UNDER ACPI. Just one kind of table. Deviating against that is NOT ACPI. Including having separate code for Linux.

        Linux should be using the SAME code, not a Linux version. It's not off the shelf software.
    • mstrebe, on 07/25/2008, -3/+19I read the entire post, and while yes he does get rude, Foxconn is totally blowing him off. They sold the board as ACPI compliant when it is not. It's WHQL compliant. That's a totally different thing. Nowhere on the box does it say "Operating systems besides Vista and Windows XP cannot work with this board because we just copied the ACPI tables from another manufacturer's board and they don't work with this one except for the tables specific to Windows that we fudged until we got things to boot".
      They are selling pigs in a poke and they deserve the backlash that they're getting because of his efforts.
    • ratbear, on 07/25/2008, -17/+11"I will not be terrorized" - I swear, Linux martyrs are the most overly dramatic, self entitled pricks on the face of the planet.
    • fas2, on 07/25/2008, -7/+8I can't believe there are 22 comments above yours and none mentioning that.

      Regardless of whether he is right or wrong, that is just no way to handle it. If you want to achieve something by communication, you just cannot be disrespectful and rude. It's really just immature.
      • javaroast, on 07/25/2008, -5/+3fas2 you are absolutely correct. I'm disgusted at the immaturity and disrespect that the Foxconn support lackey showed a Foxconn customer with valuable insight and solution to a problem in one of Foxconn's products. They should be ashamed.
      • Tahiri, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6Are you retarded javaroast? The employee was many times more polite than the assole linux guy
      • javaroast, on 07/25/2008, -3/+5@Tahiri, yeah I can see from your post that you have professionalism and polite discourse down to a science. How could I ever doubt you.
    • NewPunk, on 07/25/2008, -3/+2They don't want to have to support Linux systems. Plain and simple. The support rep from Foxconn clearly stated that. There is nothing wrong with their product. Simply because you want to use it in ways they don't support you claim they are doing something wrong? Obviously, if you want to run Linux don't get this Foxconn motherboard, or any that don't say they will support Linux.

      On the other hand, if you would like to see Foxconn add Linux support, you have not gone the right way. If you were courteous and told them how you enjoy their products and wish to use them with Linux they may actually listen to your suggestion. If they seem interested, then you may proceed to explain to them what you have discovered and reveal the code to them. They may consider using your code or updating their own code to allow Linux support.

      I really do not believe they are doing anything wrong though. Foxconn controls what their products can and can't do. So if they prefer not to support Linux, that's their right.
      • padraic2112, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6> There is nothing wrong with their product

        Yes, there is something wrong with their product. As mstrebe pointed out: "They sold the board as ACPI compliant when it is not. It's WHQL compliant. That's a totally different thing."

        This is not a matter of "our board doesn't support Linux". This is a matter of "our board is compliant with an industry standard", which is demonstrably not true.
      • Jpesci, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2But from what I gather that's not what this argument is about. They are claiming ACPI compliance when customers are saying it isn't compliant at all.
    • AnotherThought, on 07/25/2008, -3/+3i see why the guy is mad, i mean come on ppl how many coincidental mistakes would it take for you ppl to think that maybe it's not a coincident anymore. If you found out someone is stealing things from you in a very obvious way do you ask them nicely to back away or do you report it and confront them about it? Of course the company will treat it as a honest mistake for reputation sake but many here can see that it's more than that. I dont use Linux but even i get mad seeing this.
  • Kossu, on 07/25/2008, -5/+64Let's see how long it takes before Foxconn ***** their pants, as this story just got popular.
    • sprack, on 07/25/2008, -4/+10Good luck with that. Foxconn is the worlds largest ODM. They produce systems for HP, Dell, Apple, Lenovo and just about everyone else you can think of. Volumes on this don't mean anything to them.
      • terminal157, on 07/25/2008, -2/+19If a bad reputation among tech savvy people doesn't mean anything to them, that's not a sign that they're too big so much as a sign that they're incompetent at business. A digg article isn't going to destroy them, no, but it's just as foolish to say it won't hurt them at all.
      • Kossu, on 07/25/2008, -2/+5They produce such a huge quantities of the Motherboards for HP, Dell, Apple, Lenovo etc etc. That the revenue they get per item barely exsist. The real money lays in the products that tech sawy people buy as there are a lot of us paying a hefty price for a good motherboard. Obviously Foxconn isn't one of the "good" motherboards.
      • uniques, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6The people over at Creative had the same mind set, look what happened to them!
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2so um what did happen to them? As far as I can tell it looks as though they have forgotten about the whole deal already.
    • dima1109, on 07/25/2008, -12/+8Digg users have an exaggerated sense of their own importance. It's just a user-submitted extremely biased collection of one-sided opinion articles from irrelevant websites. Nobody at Foxconn will even flinch at some forum post by a paranoid linux user.

      Who do you think you are, AnandTech? XtremeSystems? Give me a break.
    • uways, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4Keep an eye on Foxconn stocks to see if this has any effect whatsoever
    • max420, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1Seems like Foxconn's stock's have dropped in price....
      • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Foxconn's stock has been going down since late last year.

        Their stock barely moved when it was announced that they'd be making the 3G iPhone, and you honnestly think that something like this would even cause a blip in the stock?

        They closed down 2% today, which is on par with what the Nikkei 225 did today.
  • thecosmicpope, on 07/25/2008, -43/+7If this was happening against Windows Operating Systems then people would be in here giving them credit for it. But because it's Linux "illegal!" is being shouted.
  • solidcube, on 07/25/2008, -5/+31Best medicine for these ***** is to throw a massive stink and boycott, kind of like what we did to Creative. This is a very similar incident.

    There may not be many of us marketshare-wise but our collective voice is extremely loud. We're the bellwethers; that means that the rest of the herd follows our lead. Use it or lose it.
    • CalvinMonk, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Creative crap still has a lot of problems =/
      • solidcube, on 07/25/2008, -0/+8Yeah, but they had a whipping they're not going to soon forget, and others will learn from their mistake.
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1seems like the have forgotten about it.
    • slowbox, on 07/25/2008, -1/+10Yeah after Creative's backlash against that kid who developed a working driver, I'm -DONE- with all Creative products. Audigy 2 card = no longer in my case.
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/25/2008, -5/+2good for you I SO care about the crap your not gonna buy. I will just sit down here enjoying my ZEN X-Fi while you finish ranting and getting a busted artery over a frickin 10 year old sound card not having vista drivers.
    • rameznabel, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1excuse me can any one provide me any link to the creative issue
  • Zyxion, on 07/25/2008, -13/+56Dugg for Ubuntu dragging Microsoft and its allies down in yet another way.

    Long live the penguin.
  • skektek, on 07/25/2008, -7/+55At first I thought this was more of a case of Foxconn being Stupid than being Evil. But after reading their correspondence I can see that it a case of the latter.
  • toecutter169, on 07/25/2008, -8/+132I don't even use Foxconn, but I'll use them less now.
    • AnarkeIncarnate, on 07/25/2008, -3/+6You do realize they are the manufacturers of the Ipod, don't you?
      • EagleRock, on 07/25/2008, -0/+13I guess the "Linux on the iPod" community will be devastated.
    • Domdogg123, on 07/25/2008, -1/+9How can you use them less than none?
    • zarcu, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2Those were my thought exactly. I don't buy products from them, but now I'll be sure to use them even less then I did.
    • al3efroman, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1i bet you do.
    • Amiga501, on 07/30/2008, -0/+1You have already been using products that have Foxxconn parts in them. They have been in business since the 70s are make all kinds of parts, connectors, and ports. Not just motherboards and IC boards.
  • buberfan, on 07/25/2008, -3/+45Thanks for the warning. I was considering buying a Foxconn board for my next budget machine. Now I know not to buy one.
    • CCUboogernjit, on 07/25/2008, -5/+2Since you seem to be a linux freak I will assume your a computer wiz. Since you are a computer wiz you should know that foxconn boards are of the worst quality anyway. Now why would a computer wiz such as yourself purposely buy a foxconn board knowing that it is garbage?

      You weren't gonna buy a foxconn board in the first place were you?
      • tito13kfm, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1Price point gets to everybody at one time or another. I know my Sceptre 42" TV is of ***** quality... but it was half the price of the Sony and I can live with the bugs.
      • carlosos, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1There are always people that make the mistake of buying cheap computer hardware. I once made the mistake with a 2x CD-ROM drive that died after only 2 years and once with a power supply that also didn't last as long as I would expert it to last.
        The most interesting motherboard manufacturer in my opinion is ASUS with the "SlashTop" emended fast boot linux. I'm not sure how much I would use it when I have it but I want it in my next motherboard to play around with it (or from an other manufacturer if they decide to add it)
      • reined, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1Bought a gigabite MB, basic one:46€, on board NVidia sound and graphics, a sempron 1.9 GHz: 32€, and a Gig of DDR2....naw, works(quite!) like a rocket!
  • zemkacz, on 07/25/2008, -8/+3Hm, they closed the thread.
    Also this is terrible and I hope illegal, I would send this article fox5 but they suck too.
    • TritonX, on 07/25/2008, -1/+9The only thing illegal in this is that since the fabulous DMCA and such, I think it is illegal to debug your own hardware in this manner.
      • dazparkour, on 07/25/2008, -1/+11In this country it is illegal to lie in your advertising and packaging. Claiming ACPI compliance when you deliberately made it non-compliant is illegal.
      • TritonX, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Let's see then who got the better lawyers :P.
  • Dylson, on 07/25/2008, -19/+4VERY VERY VERY funny
    • createuniverses, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Surprise, surprise - someone laughs at the indignation and bitching of the freetard community, and gets modded down on digg.....
  • ChayesFSS, on 07/25/2008, -24/+9Damn, Linux crew is gets pissed so easily, I want to be a part of the club... I have ubuntu running on 2 of my computers, am I in?
    • Psi57, on 07/25/2008, -2/+6Hardware vendors must learn to fear our Collective...
    • Myonosken, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1You wanna be in my gang my gang my gang.
  • proliance, on 07/25/2008, -28/+16I work on servers with Foxconn system boards all week long, and a lot of them run Linux just fine. Foxconn makes good money supporting Linux.

    Fell free to complain about a sloppy product, but are the torches and pitchforks really necessary?
    • 1karmik1, on 07/25/2008, -2/+10No they're not and i agree with a lot of people here by saying he wasn't exactly the kindest person to relate with, but what he uncovered is solid enough to pass on the behaviour, at least in my priorities.
    • eddan, on 07/25/2008, -2/+18I think the torches and pitchforks come into play when they're doing something that actively breaks Linux when the OS is booted. I've worked on plenty of systems that have screwed up ACPI tables, you work around them and you're happy. Actively locking a portion of memory that shouldn't be locked...that Windows happens to ignore...is another matter entirely.
      • EricAnderton, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3What I don't get is what business does the BIOS have in detecting what OS is running in the first place?

        I thought the job of the BIOS was to expose hardware support in a way that was more or less independent of what was going on in the CPU. Poking around and asking what you're running, to see what ACPI configuration to use, is a pretty bogus way to go if you ask me.

        Seems like another way to fix this problem is to allow Linux to masqerade as Vista, where the BIOS is concerned.
    • xz9925, on 07/25/2008, -1/+5no.. torches and pitchforks are not necessary...

      but flashlights and baseball bats would be great!
      • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3I've got a pillowcase full of doorhandles... that count?
      • xz9925, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1yea you can come too
    • TheHerk, on 07/25/2008, -1/+5When a company treats customers badly, you should do this exact thing. This is as good as the BBB.
    • Tahiri, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1I see no reason for any company to treat assholes well, this guy is clearly a large *****.
  • fatas, on 07/25/2008, -16/+2With a name like Foxcunn it is understandable
  • MMaster23, on 07/25/2008, -41/+6I doubt the did it on purpose... Windows just gets more attention.
    Go cry linux hippy...

    "I'm sure as hell not going to buy Vista" .. no but you do pirate XP . that's even worse...
    • ChayesFSS, on 07/25/2008, -5/+3If you can't buy something anymore, what are you supposed to do? It's almost like getting an old car handed down to you that you restore. No money went to the original maker but hey, you're sitting pretty with what you want.
    • Feanor, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4They clearly did it on purpose, they would have just left out Linux had they been focusing on Windows support.
    • marx2k, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7"Linux hippy"?
      wtf is that
    • Eruaran, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0Who said he pirated XP ? Or was running any operating system other than GNU/Linux ?
  • m0bilitee, on 07/25/2008, -3/+96Voting with my dollars, Foxconn is off the list for potential new motherboards.
    • CCUboogernjit, on 07/25/2008, -2/+7It never was on your list in the first place.
    • jasmus, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1And that's how you get results. Not buy abusing a customer support rep and never asking to be put in contact with someone that would actually help or know about the situation. Money talks people.
    • tnoy, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Are you going to just boycott their motherboards, or their whole product line?

      They make more things than you probably think.
  • sx66gns, on 07/25/2008, -2/+42That's why I don't buy Foxconn crap , they suck.
    • Gimpishi, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4I know two people recently who bought foxconn mobos that were DOA and the return process alone (it had to be to foxconn and not to tigerdirect) was a royal pain in the ass. Sabotaging hardware is just a new low. I have never bought from them, and certainly will not now.
    • utahnkid, on 07/25/2008, -4/+2Foxconn supplies a lot of Dell and Apple motherboards as well as the motherboards for a lot of gaming systems. They're one of the largest component and electronics manufacturers in the world. They don't suck and more importantly they couldn't care less if everyone here thought they did because they deal mostly with OEM work.
    • j3ff86, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1I bought a Foxconn 939 board about 6 months ago and it required a bios flash (via floppy drive) to even be usable. Probably won't be buying another any time soon..
    • ProfessorFoo, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Ha I'm using a Foxconn motherboard in the computer I just built. Take that, linux!
  • JointVenture, on 07/25/2008, -28/+8Apple does it and people dont seem to get upset.
    • macbayboy, on 07/25/2008, -1/+23Ummm, Linux and Vista installs happily and runs quite well on Mac Intel hardware.
    • bigsteve, on 07/25/2008, -1/+8Yea, that's... completely untrue.
    • reined, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1cuz MacFans never complain!!!!, they don't make waves!, they wouldn't get their yearly MacShow!!!
  • Berkana, on 07/25/2008, -7/+26Follow the money. How much do you want to bet Microsoft is behind this somewhere up the chain of command?

    There is no good reason for them to sabotage the use of an OS; they make money off of people buying their hardware, whether the user uses it for Linux or not.
    • talkingwires, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2I don't think there was any money involved at all. To me, it looks like they reused the BIOS from an earlier motherboard, and it didn't work correctly with the new one. So they enabled a "quirks mode" to support Vista, XP, and 2000 instead of actually fixing the problem. 95, 98, and ME users are just as screwed. Though why someone who knows enough to swap out a motherboard would be running those OSes is beyond me.

      No money. Just laziness and bad programming.
      • magus_melchior, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1No money? A business is all about money, and I doubt Foxconn is any exception. Notice that they insisted that the board was ACPI compliant because they passed the Microsoft hardware certification? At best, this is the result of a penny-pinching manager with more ego than brains, firing his engineers and hiring temp workers to make the BIOS work. At worst, it is a very deliberate attempt to lock in the motherboard to recent Windows only.

        Unless you know what actually happened at Foxconn, your guess (gross incompetence) is as good as mine (accomplice to protecting a business partner's market abuse through quid pro quo).
      • talkingwires, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Touche. I prefer the less cynical option, but wouldn't be surprised if it came out in the end that Microsoft had some influence. But unless this guy's FCC complain goes somewhere, we may never know.
    • magus_melchior, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Notice that few of the Microsoft partner companies who sabotaged ISO were paid. Microsoft bribes with discounts, sweetened licensing and exclusivity deals, and whatever it takes to keep the money off the radar (and outside the EU's snooping eyes).

      Of course, if we can get a whistleblower in Foxconn, that would make a great amicus curiae brief for the EU antitrust hearings.
  • nirvdrum, on 07/25/2008, -9/+79Handled very professionally, on both ends. Grammatical errors, broken English, threats, and dismissals. Makes me proud to be part of such a community.
    • EricAnderton, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7Exactly.

      It read like the BOFH vs some Startup Tech Company.
    • LingNoi, on 07/25/2008, -3/+4Angry customers don't need to be professional when they're getting screwed over.
      • jasmus, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3He's not getting screwed over by that customer support guy, iut's by the managemnt who didn't give whoev