Foxconn deliberately sabotaging their BIOS to destroy Linux ACPI

[SeraphNox]

Found this on Digg and I figured I'd share it with you guys.
LINK (http://ubuntu-virginia.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=869249)

EDIT:Hah, I never was big on the whole conspiracy thing but in the Iowa antitrust case: Comes vs. Microsoft, Bill Gates, himself, said:One thing I find myself wondering about is whether we shouldn’t try and make the "ACPI" extensions somehow Windows
specific.
If seems unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the result is that Linux works great without
having to do the work.
Maybe there is no way to avoid this problem but it does bother me.
Maybe we could define the APIs so that they work well with NT and not the others even if they are open.
Or maybe we could patent something related to this.
LINK (http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf)

[thideras]

Oh wow...

Linux and FreeBSD do not work with this motherboard due to it's ACPI configuration, using a disassembler program, I have found that it detects Linux specifically and points it to bad DSDT tables, thereby corrupting it's hardware support, changing this and setting the system to override the BIOS ACPI DSDT tables with a customized version that passes the Windows versions to Linux gives Linux ACPI support stated on the box, I am complaining because I feel this violates an anti-trust provision in the Microsoft settlement, I further believe that Microsoft is giving Foxconn incentives to cripple their motherboards if you try to boot to a non-Windows OS.

Other link (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/25/1150218)

[CGR]

:shrug: dont use Linux ;)

[grimm003]

Honestly, I am not surprised about this coming from Microsoft, but from Foxconn, I am. I am not a Microsoft hater, but they are a business and the quote from the first post seems like a valid concern, although this is not the way to address it. I have never purchased a product from Foxconn, but I won't be buying any of their products now, ever. It would be one thing to not put the resources into developing the correct DSDT tables for Linux, but to point Linux to a shotty table when the same one that works for Windows works for Linux, that's giving a big FU to Linux and open-source users.

[CGR]

Just because he says that doesnt make it true.

And frankly, when i see chat like his threats to Foxconns support, makes me even less likely to believe the posted. No one says every motherboard MUST be linux supported.

And I also dont believe Foxconn intentionally did anything wrong.

[thideras]

I have never purchased a product from Foxconn, but I won't be buying any of their products now, ever.Have you ever bought a motherboard before? Most likely, it was made by them. They make most of the motherboards out there.

[grimm003]

Just because he says that doesnt make it true.

And frankly, when i see chat like his threats to Foxconns support, makes me even less likely to believe the posted. No one says every motherboard MUST be linux supported.

And I also dont believe Foxconn intentionally did anything wrong.

You're right that it doesn't necessarily make it true. I could easily see that it wasn't intentional, except the fact that whatever worked for windows also worked for Linux so why use two different ones? I'm not saying that does make it intentional, but it certainly makes me raise an eyebrow. Also what affected my comment was in the second post it says "...Linux ACPI support stated on the box...". I have not seen the box, but from that wording it sounds like it claims Linux ACPI support.

Have you ever bought a motherboard before? Most likely, it was made by them. They make most of the motherboards out there.

I didn't know they made other company's motherboards. I have only bought ASUS motherboards, are those made by Foxconn? I certainly hope not because I have never had a problem with ASUS, and that is why I stick with them.

[thideras]

I didn't know they made other company's motherboards. I have only bought ASUS motherboards, are those made by Foxconn? I certainly hope not because I have never had a problem with ASUS, and that is why I stick with them.Yup, pretty sure since there are foxconn labels on it ;)

Check the CPU pin protector, various plugs on the board, etc. At least my P5E3 Premium, P5Q Deluxe and P5K Premium do/did ;)

[Old Thrashbarg]

And I also dont believe Foxconn intentionally did anything wrong.

Except for the fact that there seem to be multiple checks in the code to assure that the system is in fact running Windows, so you can't spoof the ID either. Also consider, they specifically ID Linux in the BIOS, even though it's supposed to be unsupported? If it was unsupported, why wouldn't they just leave out the Linux-specific stuff?

Now, there is always the possibility of staggering incompetence on the part of the BIOS coders screwing up the tables unintentionally, but that still doesn't make it acceptable since it's supposed to be an ACPI compliant board.

I agree that the guy did not handle the communication with Foxconn with much tact (and that seems to be pretty common amongst the Linux zealots, unfortunately), but I will give him credit for at least bringing the issue to light for other people to investigate it and discuss it more civilly.

As the evidence stands now, Foxconn is in the wrong no matter how I look at it... whether it was deliberate or not, and one of the following should happen: they should fix the Linux-specific code so it works, they should remove the offending code to allow for workarounds if people want to, they should state specifically in their specs that the board is not Linux (or ACPI) compatible, or they should get reamed by a mass boycott and investigated by whatever applicable regulatory agencies. I don't really care which way they choose, but they do need to do something.

[CGR]

Except for the fact that there seem to be multiple checks in the code to assure that the system is in fact running Windows, so you can't spoof the ID either. Also consider, they specifically ID Linux in the BIOS, even though it's supposed to be unsupported? If it was unsupported, why wouldn't they just leave out the Linux-specific stuff?

Now, there is always the possibility of staggering incompetence on the part of the BIOS coders screwing up the tables unintentionally, but that still doesn't make it acceptable since it's supposed to be an ACPI compliant board.

I agree that the guy did not handle the communication with Foxconn with much tact (and that seems to be pretty common amongst the Linux zealots, unfortunately), but I will give him credit for at least bringing the issue to light for other people to investigate it and discuss it more civilly.

As the evidence stands now, Foxconn is in the wrong no matter how I look at it... whether it was deliberate or not, and one of the following should happen: they should fix the Linux-specific code so it works, they should remove the offending code to allow for workarounds if people want to, they should state specifically in their specs that the board is not Linux (or ACPI) compatible, or they should get reamed by a mass boycott and investigated by whatever applicable regulatory agencies. I don't really care which way they choose, but they do need to do something.

Again, you are taking all this as proof just because he said it. Now, if more and more people have the same problem, which I have yet to see, then its more believable.

[Old Thrashbarg]

Again, you are taking all this as proof just because he said it.

The board seems to already be known not to work in Linux. At least from what little I could find that wasn't in the Foxconn hatred threads that are rapidly spreading. It doesn't seem to be an entirely uncommon issue, other boards (even from other brands) have troubles as well... except:

This guy posted a reasonable explanation as to why, with supporting evidence, as well as a workaround that (at least partially) solves the issue.

If someone comes up and shows one of those boards working in Linux without the guy's workaround, I'll take back what I said in my previous post. Until then I have no reason to disbelieve it.

[SeraphNox]

Perhaps someone could disassemble the bios like this guy did and see for themselves?

Also, does anyone know if the said board actually states whether it's 1) Windows compatible only 2) ACPI compliant or 3) WQHL compliant only? I've tried googling it but with this story spreading as it is, it's hard to discern propaganda from fact.

I do believe this whole thing is a bit odd though. If the board is truly ACPI compliant then why the problems with Linux? If it is designed for Windows only, why even target linux in the code? At any rate, I think I'm going to withhold any further judgment until this whole thing develops further. Who knows, this may be the next big scandal or just one big mishap. Either way, it's certainly going to be interesting to read about.

[Mr.Guvernment]

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=571479

[TangoGrandma]

Funny topic and thread
It's since been proven and backed up IN PERSON by foxconn reps that they have absolutely NO interest in providing or making support for ANY open-OS's besides microsoft.

so the REAL question isn't about "right" or "wrong" or some moral dilemma we can all have an opinion about, but simply SMART BUSINESS- is that smart of them, or will time prove that their behind-the-scenes deal with MS was a good choice or one that helped cripple their sales?

They think it will help, but who knows why. We look at the linux segment (85% of the servers out there) and the growing user base (+20%) and the problems with a firm that makes a product like Vista and keeps hammering on it with P&R or simply finally dumping it, for a "new project OS" and one can draw some simple conclussions about the intelligence of the people working there- least in a business sense.

Asus and gigabyte and other manu's have all simply INCREASED BUSINESS by helping and supporting the OpenBSD communities around the world (with simple drivers and a few extra employees to stay in touch and represent the community to the firm and the firm to the community- how much does that cost a year in % of their total operating cost and sales and net work, really?)...

Foxconn?
they continue to simply just survive. Maybe this is their smart way to try and keep under big brother's wing, but in the end, what happens to MS happens to them. And MS isn't exactly on top of the heap except by taking out the competition with buyouts over the last 2 decades, and lots of P&R. Eventually, MS will no longer be the main OS, but at best maybe less than 50% of the world will continue to use their products- (not when free ones work better)...

....Time will tell then if the Foxconn reps and decision makers were savy enough to recognize the reality of a growing population. For instance, the OpenBSD community is a bigger community by far than the OC community, and Servers are a huge community and absolutely necessary =at 85% on linux, that's bad news for eliminating a WHOLE chunk of clients which won't be fading away, for simply a few more employees cost per quarter/year and whatever support MS is offering them under the table- which can't be worth it in the long run.

Who wins?
MS again
and the consumers and Foxconn loose.

But that's how it goes when you have non-techs in charge of tech who don't pay attention or listen to their techs or hire someone to translate for them. LOL.



:P

[TangoGrandma]

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjYyMA

if you hunt anywhere on the internet with linux/OpenBSD communities and gear, you'll find more info on the subject. But it is most interesting that the foxconn people themselves have absolutely confirmed it themselves. I mean, short of calling them up YOURSELF, you gotta take it at face value. They read this stuff too (OC forums) and don't contest it anywhere, even in the tech forums (like ZDNET) report on it. They don't even CONTEST IT.

What is the morality of simply messing up someone's gear if they don't listen to some even tiny print or obscure warning when they buy something you've made?
I'd say almost 100% of the business world would agree with Foxconn's business morality, though the end users might be a bit upset. But is that NEW???

How about when has this NOT been the underlying morality in business, least in the last 50-100 years?????

LOL!

Sad but true.
They're protecting their MS handshaking is all. MS wants to kill linux but it can't- nor can it buy "them" out- though they probably tried in the beginning before they understood what linux was (despite that their own techs in redmond ran all their own home servers on redhat for years and no one in MS knew- I've an inside scoop on that one, having worked in the area myself).



Big business and morality?
Hmmmm......





*pondering*

[Mr.Guvernment]

people may not buy foxconn board ssoley, but look at allot of parts on most mobo makers boards - yup, made by foxconn!

you can't "not" buy a mobo and foxconn not be a part of it.

[grimm003]

Yeah, but I doubt motherboards that have foxconn parts have a foxconn bios. Maybe it's time that motherboard makes get supplies from somewhere else. I don't think this controversy has enough force to cause that, but to sit back at say it's okay because they have their name on some part of my motherboard is ridiculous. I don't wish them to go out of business or anything, but as a believer in FOSS, GNU GPL, etc., I'm glad this came out and got the attention that it did because I know to stay away from their products because it could hinder my Linux installation.

[Mr.Guvernment]

mm good point... foxconn uses another companies bios? so in the end this could NOT even be Foxconns fault? or does foxconn just get the blank bios and they program it i assume,..

[rainless]

Is there a PARTICULAR reason there's two identicle threads for this?

[Mr.Guvernment]

ya the other one was posted first and then this person oosted this one couple hours later not searching first to see if it was already posted :)

[TangoGrandma]

Is there a PARTICULAR reason there's two identicle threads for this?
I think it is in case one fails; we can always flash or revert to the backing up to the 2nd one. :beer:

...Foxconn is a Taiwan chipset manufacturer that has branched out into using their own products to make complete items like PC parts, right? I mean I remember opening up my analog cell phone and seeing parts by them over 10 years ago... maybe even 15 years ago. Unless my memory fails me.

1) They make chips- electronic stuff, so they have factories that are high-tech, even cutting edge, short of making CPU's (like Intel does down in S. Portland area USA...).
2) They've set up "shop" all over the world, due to the wide use of their chips be so many firms, they have a great situation FOR making their own products and venturing into new territory. SOooo....Of course they have.

I'm still reading about when they started releasing their own complete mobo's (probaby a lot sooner in their primary factory areas than places like the USA).

3) I think that the linux issues are based primarily on certain mobos that use certain chips- most notably the ones exclusively MADE COMPLETELY by foxconn...right?

QUESTION for us: Do their ACPI chips on other more common and typical mobos have linux problems?


ANSWER =possibly I think not. So it's not INHERENT in their gear, just in their motherboards. I mean their chipsets have been non-proprietary for a long long time, and in really wide use, far more wide industrial use than microsoft, (I remember reading about something to do with their chips in airplanes and even parts of the shuttle if I am not mistaken)... so obviously their chips work with other coding languages outside of MS.

I'll bet it is a bit of mistaken info, blown way out of proportion by part of their distribution network/infrastructure (huh?) and simply give it 6-18 months and they'll quietly have fixed it so that there is no longer any problems with openBSD stuff.... I mean really, they're a BIG FIRM that's been around a LONG TIME, and supplying a LOT of parts to a LOT of people.
-Why would they shoot themselves in the foot with their own slice of the mobo economy/market by limiting in something they could fix very easily in one tiny office with a few people (unless it would sabotage a MS insider deal for some kind of MS gains/support).

IT will be interesting to check back in 6-12 months in the linux community and see how many brave (or ignorant) people bought fOxconn mobos and they work with no problems- or if the community will release their own "haxed" versions of foxconn's bios (and what would you gamble on? they're linux coders after all- LOL!) that fix any and all issues with ACPI and whatever happens.

So perhaps the most interesting issue is why a rather LARGE supplier of chips and electronic parts would intenionally neglect EVEN WHEN INFORMED a large segment of server/rapidly expanding communities -one that is even bigger than the customers they aim for the most- the enthusiast OC crowd.... And perhaps we'll never know. But I'll bet there are only less than 1/2 a dozen people who were part of that decision and they spent less time on it than we've so far spend collectively in this thread!

LOL!!!!!!

[TangoGrandma]

Yeah....

Check this out
http://www.foxconn.com/CompanyIntro.html

Essentially it seems like, intentional or not, that the linux community just has found something that, put in there on purpose or not (does it matter? that's for moral discussions or "business ethics" hounds, as if that will matter) creates some big problems, even to the point of rendering their gear non-functional.

That simply means, if you use Linux or any distro, simply stay away from Foxconn's mobo's- not their chips, just their mobos. Perhaps some of their chips are sketchy, intentional or not, but why not just grab an Asus, or Gigabyte or something, which is totally not only supported but might even have linux "built-in"- can't get much better than that.

For those of us who use linux distros on older gear, well, it's for enthusiast learning and function, and of course there is serious troubleshooting. For what? Fun and some savings in money, that most of us would be better off making up for simply in replacing the gear with what it costs us in time (till recently). So old gear will have issues, and that's why we do it often: the challenge of it.

It boils down to this right now:

If you don't want to run into lack of support, don't use old gear and linux.
If you DO want to run into problems, use foxconn's specific mobos and linux!

foxconn will eventually fix it or no linux users, and many windows users, will simply NOT buy their mobos- who wants something that might be incompatible in the future, when other things for the same price are not?

Who cares about policing an international firm? What will that change anyway?
LOL.
Save your life energy and simply buy something else.

[WarriorII]

Double thread. The other one is in Alternative Operating systems.