[ale] Defective MoBo?

[Michael Trausch]

This is precisely what's wrong, with everything.

--
Sent from my HTC Vision (G2), running Gingerbread.
That is, a phone-like mobile device. :)
On Jan 22, 2011 8:07 AM, "Tom Freeman" <tfreeman at intel.digichem.net> wrote:
> Mike
>
> I will respond at the top to the question at the bottom.
>
> Many (most?) companies are in business to earn money (you already knew
> that!). Selling stuff gets money. Supporting stuff costs money. As an
> oversimplification, if they keep the money they win. If what they do
> encourages you to go away, they keep the money.
>
> Support is a cost center, but not a profit center.
>
> But again, you already knew all of that.
>
> With everybody already lawyered up, about the only offense the consumer
> has left would be, as pointed out already, the Better Business people and
> publicity of the slashdot and TV type.
>
> IMHO, of course
>
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 22:17 -0500, Scott Castaline wrote:
>>> Sorry for using bandwidth on this, but I again asked Gigabyte if I
>>> could
>>> just RMA the board and here is their response:
>>>
>>> "Since Linux is open source we are unable to verify it, we suggest
>>> testing with Windows based OS. It does not need to be Windows 7"
>>>
>>> I've already informed them that I don't have Windows and really can't
>>> afford to buy it just to prove or disprove that this board is bad.
>>>
>>> Any comments?
>>
>> Right, because it is ever so much easier to "verify" an opaque binary
>> blob.
>>
>> I seriously question the knowledge of the people behind some of these
>> companies. They are making hardware, which is by definition neutral of
>> an operating system in particular. Being that they are creating
>> hardware (or at least, creating boards that use hardware that they
>> supposedly have the specs for), it should be relatively easy for them to
>> create a driver for any operating system; particularly one that is "open
>> source" because there are so many people who are able to work on the
>> bloody thing *and* the whole API is actually available in (somewhat
>> readable) source code form.
>>
>> For fuck's sake, it would not be *all* that hard to build a minimalistic
>> framework built around the Linux kernel (or for that matter, any member
>> of the BSD family, if they're worried about being forced to commit
>> indecent exposure) and provide a disk that boots up the kernel and loads
>> a minimalistic program that can validate that all the hardware is up and
>> running correctly and operating within specified parameters. They used
>> to do similar things with DOS-based boot floppies and CDs, and that was
>> a much more difficult task.
>>
>> Is there such a thing as a hardware manufacturer that knows what
>> supporting their product *actually* means? I mean, seriously. You'd
>> think that motherboard manufacturers were in the business of selling
>> illicit drugs, not selling and supporting their own hardware.
>>
>> --- Mike
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20110122/5465fbb0/attachment.html