Jump to content

Intell and Microshaft


Pzatch
 Share

Recommended Posts

Found this at ZDnet. I suspect it will only be bad for us linux users.

 

I'm posting the whole artical so ZDnet doesn't get the idea its popular now.

 

Will a Linux Bios need to be writen in the future? And just how safe will M$ version be?

 

 

News Software

 

Writing an end to the bio of BIOS

By John G. Spooner

CNET News.com

December 30, 2003, 4:00 AM PT

Add your opinion

 

Forward in Format for

 

Intel and Microsoft are gearing up to move toward the first major overhaul of the innermost workings of the personal computer--the boundary where software and hardware meet--during 2004.

 

The companies will begin promoting a technology specification called EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) as a new system for starting up a PC's hardware before its operating system begins loading, a process that kicks in every time a PC is switched on or restarted.

 

The pair will establish a forum to promote the specification as a standard. If EFI-based software is accepted broadly, it could prompt the first changing of the guard in preboot software in the history of the PC industry--even though some critics say the transition may take a while or may not happen at all.

 

Right now, the task of getting a PC's hardware ready to accept the operating system is handled by software called BIOS, or basic input/output system. While the BIOS was once relatively straightforward in its design, over the years it has morphed into a figurative bowl of spaghetti as it's been changed and updated to accept new technologies.

 

Advocates say EFI would make it simpler for companies to add improvements, while also enabling PCs to boot up faster.

 

"We've been through four OS generations and multiple bus generations (a system bus helps move data around inside a PC), but we're still on the first version of BIOS," said Mike Richmond, manager of platform software in Intel's Software and Solutions Group. "It's become, increasingly, a barrier to innovation in the industry."

 

The first EFI computer, a Gateway PC, went on sale in November. Others are expected to appear in 2004, with ever greater numbers coming in the following years. But not everyone is jumping on the EFI bandwagon. PC makers have been historically reluctant to change as their customers, especially businesses, often prefer stability. Hence the resilience of the floppy drive, despite many efforts to kill it off.

 

One of the largest BIOS software companies, Phoenix Technologies, says it's in no hurry to adopt EFI. The company, whose BIOS software is used by most of the world's largest PC makers, says it won't consider EFI until it becomes a standard. Meanwhile, Phoenix has developed its own potential BIOS replacement, dubbed Core Management Environment, for notebooks. It plans to add similar software for servers and desktops in 2004, company executives said.

 

EFI does have one thing going for it. Many industry players agree that something needs to be done, and soon, if PC makers want to continue to easily make transitions to new technologies.

 

"Realistically we're using a BIOS that consists of patches upon patches and extensions that go back to 1982. Something needed to be done to clean things up and to add functionality," said Dean McCarron, analyst with Mercury Research.

 

EFI for dummies

The EFI specification is essentially a preboot environment that allows a PC to conduct activities such as scanning for viruses or running diagnostics. Intel has used EFI to create a preboot software framework that can supplant the BIOS. The framework, called Platform Innovation Framework for EFI and sometimes referred to by the code name Tiano, allows PC makers to write preboot software modules, which are similar to Windows drivers, designed to get a PC's hardware up and running before handing off control of it to the operating system.

 

Intel and Microsoft will promote EFI as an industry standard by establishing a forum to assist others in adopting the specification. The forum will be officially announced within the next 90 days, Richmond said.

 

Intel believes promoting the specification as a standard will ultimately help PC manufacturers and please PC users by making computers start up more quickly; by improving the ability to manage PCs and servers remotely; and by helping hardware makers cut manufacturing and support costs--EFI PCs will be able to run diagnostic utilities, for example, before loading their operating system.

 

"We think, in the long run, we can bring boot time down, because (the EFI framework) only has to touch the things it needs to boot. It also helps the overall reliability of the computer," Richmond said. "In the PC world, we put up with that stuff, and we shouldn't."

 

Intel and Microsoft will also promote EFI by supporting it with their products. Microsoft will support EFI in Longhorn, its next version of the Windows operating system. Intel will support the technology in future chipsets--chips that move data inside a PC. The chipmaker has also been licensing its EFI framework to third parties, including BIOS software companies.

 

Despite the efforts of Intel and Microsoft, there's no doubt that EFI, BIOS and potential competitors, such as Phoenix's Core software, will coexist at first.

 

Starting up

The speed of any transition should have a lot to do with how quickly EFI is adopted as a standard. Over time, Intel believes, EFI will be broadly adopted because of its potential benefits and also because of a shortage of skilled BIOS software engineers, Richmond said.

 

One Intel EFI licensee, Insyde Software, has already created an EFI-based product, called Insyde H20, that PC makers can use to write preboot software, said Jonathan Joseph, the company's president. H20 simplifies writing the software for customers who are short on BIOS engineers.

 

"It's a dramatically better development environment than assembly language BIOS code," Joseph said. "It's a better way to make BIOS than BIOS."

 

Gateway, which uses EFI in its all-in-one Gateway 610 Media Center desktop, said it chose to do so because EFI proved a more efficient way to code preboot software and can also help to improve the product from a long-term development perspective, a company representative said.

 

Still, some companies might see EFI as a way for Intel and Microsoft to push their own ideas for the future of PC design, McCarron said. There are "some concerns that it's being used to enable features that customers don't want," he said.

 

Intel says such suspicions are unfounded--companies that decide to go with EFI will be able to use it any way they like, by picking and choosing different features. EFI users don't necessarily have to work directly with Intel, either. They can gain access to the technology by working with companies like Insyde, or eventually use technology developed by the forum, once it gets started.

 

Even Phoenix indicates a willingness to evaluate EFI, once the technology becomes an industry standard.

 

"Everybody is looking to this...But only when it becomes an industry standard will the (PC) industry adopt it," said Tim Eades, senior vice president and general manager of corporate marketing and products at Phoenix. "When it becomes a standard, we will investigate it."

 

Despite its potential benefits, no one--including Intel--expects EFI to appear in PCs overnight. Technology transitions such as the move to USB (Universal Serial Bus) generally take several years for the PC industry to complete.

 

Although EFI may take several years to hit its stride, Intel chipsets will offer the EFI framework as an alternative to a BIOS in 2005, Richmond said. The company's chipsets will support BIOS software for many years to come. However, as time passes, some chipset features may be accessible only via EFI. That's the price of progress, Richmond said.

 

"After 23 years, it was time to start from scratch," said Richmond. "There's a certain life span for every technology. You can expand it and grow it, but at some point you have to start over."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is a good move. It's about time they overhauled the damn BIOS. By now it must really be spaghetti code. They can take a lot of stuff that is no longer used out of the code. I mean, who puts BIOS system calls in their code anymore. All they need is the bare minimum to configure the system and load the boot sector. After that, the OS takes over (at least under Linux :wink: ). Windows may still actually use some BIOS calls but I'm not sure.

 

Glitz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sometimes it just seems like M$ is taking a part in every existing/emerging standard, just to make sure they can use one for their lock-in purposes.

 

I mean:

 

proprietary document formats, DRM, XML, encrypted e-mail(I found out the e-mail that can 'auto-destroy' itself in Outlook will actually be encrypted to do so), bios, ...

 

it would be a mistake to think M$ will ever do anything for the 'greater good' of the people... they're still the predator they've always been. Sad fact, but true. And everyone knows how Intel and M$ went to bed with eachother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft being involved with "standards" is absurd. They have alredy started to work with a former bios manufacturer to make a bios-less computer! Only windex can boot it. All of this is about getting rid of any means to operate a computer without a windex os. And, predictably, Intel has decided to stay with the program. Even Intel can't argue with ms!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as the specs on the chipsets used are public knowledge then anyone can replace the bios with their own. And since there are more than a few companies that would love to take a bite out of Intel's market share I suspect that they will not hide their specs.

 

If worst comes to worst then we simply make a BIOS that will boot LILO and burn that into the flash instead.

 

There's not much you can do make the BIOS inaccessible unless you also make the hardware inaccessible. However, for Intel to do that would mean giving up market share to their competition.

 

Glitz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before I continue, let me say that I don't like MS in general. I don't like their bussiness practices, I don't like most of their products and I don't like their customer service. That being said.....

 

It realy gets tired listeing to people demonizing them. It's like all the anti Wal*Mart crap. Yes, they do bad things. Yes, they sell crumby stuff. Yes, they treat employees poorly. Yes they cheat their competition every chance they get.

 

But you know what? SO does every other bussiness in this God forsaken country. Anyone who believes otherwise is at best, naive. ANd other counties, i.e. England, France, Germany, Japan are all as bad if not worse.

 

The problem with Companies Like Microsoft and Wal*Mart is a problem of scale. All software makers release buggy software full of holes and buggs months or years before it's ready and fail to adequitely support it while trying to sqeaze the nuts of their consumers into buying upgrades. People jsut get pissy about MS becaue they do it on a bigger scale.

 

Look at auto desk, the makers of Autocad. THey charge, depending on the package, between $3000.00 and $6000.00 How much do you think developement actualy costs.

 

 

The people who are dreaming up conspiracy theories about this need to chill out. This is OBVIOUSLY a HUGE leap forward for modern computing. ANything is better than AT BIOS, and this is a long way from AT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not demonising. I'm just paranoid.

 

And with M$ I actually have a reason to be paranoid, because they have the size and power to do certain 'things'.

 

That being said, if it's better/faster and I can still run my Linux on it, I certainly won't complain...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll vote for paranoia! :D

 

But I do not share the pessimism about "all business". In fact , I believe that decent people conduct decent business, or I would have no complaint against micrnobules. There have been too many intelligent companies in the industry that have died, not because of an idea that didn't work, not because of an absence of "standards", not because their product wasn't popular, but because of unethical and immoral business practices from ms.

 

(statement of paranoia) They are a business demon!! (end of statement of paranoia)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright. For those that think letting the internet do your bios updates for you is fine because it might make the computer boot faster should first think.

Just how long does it take for your computer to get past the boot strap and onto the OS loading? 10 seconds at most? Are you willing to let some one pass a bios viri to you for an extra 2 or 3 seconds on the boot?

if thats really bothering you then you have more problems than the computers bios.

Who has trouble booting their computer now that they will need an automatic bios update in the next week to access their own ports and hardwar? If it didn't work out of the box from the manufacturer then you got robbed.

 

Personally please leave my untouchable bios alone. I'm fine with a 10 second boot strap.

Edited by Pzatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My propblem with the bios isn't the 10 second boot time. IT's the rotten way in which bios's function. It, like most of the AT standard, is reaching the end of it's potential. Computers, according to most experts, are getting close to the fastest and most powerful they wil ever be able to get under the AT (now ATX form factors) I see this change in the BIOS, as more than jsut a 3 second decreas in bot time and 10% increase in performance, but as a first step in moving away from the AT family to something with more potetial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree that the method of booting a computer is antiquated, and that there is no doubt an idea for improving it. I even think that standards can be a good thing. I really want to see more of the industry involved in the development of a new bios. Bios vendors of the past specialized, and were dependent upon the rest of the industry. Microsoft wants to remove spcialization and do it all. By their marketing strategy, forcing almost everyone to buy windex with their pc, they don't even have to rely on the public. They can take the whole show.

 

I wish the old days of people looking for more potential were still around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...