D
Dave C.
Conor said:How much would you be willing to pay for Windows?
The code is already written, so I don't get your point. -Dave
Conor said:How much would you be willing to pay for Windows?
Then you're an idiot. Just how many millions of possible combinations
of hardware in a PC do you think there is? Windows has to work with as
many as possible.
It involves manufacturers actually sorting the job out properly and it
would take each manufacturer very little time. OTOH option A would mean
many thousands of hours re-writing code to accommodate ****ed up
BIOSes.
IT IS ****ING BROKEN YOU DUMB BASTARD.
Well YOU'RE the one telling us about Joe Average PC user. Joe Average
doesn't have a feckin clue about firewalls.
And I second that! If a person has a working computer and installs SP2
on it and it now won't boot. Then that problem is caused by SP2 and
Microsoft needs to fix SP2. It's not the fault of the computer. The
problem is that Microsoft has been releasing buggy crap for years. And a
lot of people just accept that. Microsoft has screwed up and needs a
great big wake up call. They need to quit worrying how to make more
money and actually fix the crap they are releasing to us.
Thus proving us right and you wrong even moreso.I can guaranfuckingtee you that if you find a million people who have a clue
about firewalls, only a handful of them (at most) will know that you need to
disable L1/L2 cache if SP2 causes Windows not to boot at all. -Dave
And I second that! If a person has a working computer and installs SP2
on it and it now won't boot. Then that problem is caused by SP2 and
Microsoft needs to fix SP2. It's not the fault of the computer.
Why should Microsoft bother pampering to crap taiwanese motherboardOK, I think poorly written is pretty harsh, but I'll concede that point.
Still, as I've posted before, is it easier for microsoft to change a few
lines of code or is it easier to expect dozens of mainboard manufacturers to
reprogram their BIOS so many clueless computer users can risk their
mainboard with a BIOS flash just so SP2 MIGHT work? -Dave
If the CPU core voltage, FSB and pin compatibility are supported thenTalk about side-stepping the question. Explain to me how the computer would
run at all if the BIOS doesn't support the processor it's spec'd to run.
Oh, never mind. -Dave
Yup.Only since 1987, so I guess you are right on that. -Dave
The code isn't written. A checker has been written. A completelyThe code is already written, so I don't get your point. -Dave
No it wouldn't. The program (to check for the microcode) already exists.
****, you're dumb.There would be NO time at all (virtually) involved in fixing SP2. Have
windows update check for the proper microcode. If it isn't there, SP2
doesn't install. Sheesh, how hard was that? -Dave
Why should Microsoft bother pampering to crap taiwanese motherboard
manufacturers?
If the CPU core voltage, FSB and pin compatibility are supported then
it'll fire up.
The code isn't written. A checker has been written. A completely
different subsection of SP2 hasn't been written.
****, you're dumb.
It hasn't fixed the problem, merely prevented you from installing SP2
so you've actually not got anywhere have you as the microcode problem
still exists.
Sadly it is unlikely.You're right. The world would be so much better off if the masses said FU
to Microsoft and switched to linux finally. -Dave
No it isn't.But that's impossible if the BIOS is really broken. -Dave
But the problem still remains. You can't install SP2 and the microcodeOh come on, I know you aren't that dense, so why are you playing it on
usenet? If windows update can check for the proper microcode, nothing else
needs to be written. Just have windows update stop the SP2 install at that
point. Or is that so fricking obvious that you wouldn't recognize it if it
broke your nose? -Dave