ACPI Forced On & Option Disabled in WinXP-Certified Motherboards

stealth_zipper asks: "I just got off the phone with a rep from Soyo Computer Inc trying to get the ability to change IRQs for the onboard hardware. It turns out that because of a deal to get WindowsXP certification, the Dragon-series motherboard ended up having the ability of Enabling/Disabling ACPI in the BIOS disabled. Now FreeBSD has complications with multiple devices on the same IRQs (especially sound, video, and nic all off the same one). Is there a way to get around this for new hardware? Has anyone else encountered this?" Why in the world does XP need this feature disabled, and are there workarounds to get OSes like FreeBSD working properly with motherboards of this sort?

Comments

Misleading headline / DRM

[quantum bit]

That headline really needs to be changed. It should read something like "ACPI Forced On in WinXP Certified Mobos"

Also, did anyone else notice this little gem on the requirements page?

• Audio devices must implement Digital Rights Management, which is supported by Windows XP. [B3.1.4.11]

Does this mean hardware support for DRM in sound cards?

Re:Misleading headline / DRM

[Alsee]

Audio devices must implement Digital Rights Management

Does this mean hardware support for DRM in sound cards?

This means implementing SAP (SECURE AUDIO PATH). Not only must the hardware contain DRM, but the software must be approved and signed by Microsoft. If the driver is not signed it won't work. Read this Wired article explaining SAP. Wired: "SAP adds 'static' interference to media files that require video and audio cards to authenticate themselves with Windows software before they can be played."

What happens when you take your pefectly good sound card out of your Win98 500mhz system and stick it in your shiny new XP 2000mhz system?

You can't play your windows media player files.

Why? Two reasons.

Number one) It is your sound card that is incompatible. Therefore it is not Microsoft's fault. Blame the sound card manufacturer.

Number two) You are a Pirate. Therefore it is not Microsoft's fault. It is your fault for being a Pirate.

It's just another case of Microsoft leveraging it's operating system monopoly to enforce a new DigitalRightsManagementSystem monopoly. In other words, nothing out of the ordinary. Nothing to see here, please move along...

-

Re:A taste of the future

[phutureboy]

Naturally, though, since the DoJ has dropped the ball on Microsoft, this sort of thing will only get worse. Get used to it, and vote Democratic in 2004.

Not to point out obvious stuff, but if producers of Windows compatible motherboards consistently take longer to deliver product and charge more to cover their R&D and production expenses because of incompatibilities like these, it means that Linux-only mobos are gonna come to market faster and cheaper. In other words, it adds one more reason that it's cheaper and more efficient to run Linux instead of 'doze. That's just gonna hurt MS in the long run. DOJ action is entirely unnecessary.

Re:Soyo Dragon

[Com2Kid]

In general yes, but Abit and Asus are not only middle line as far as quality goes, they are still running off of the steam of past glories.

(woh, did I mix enough metaphors for ya? :) )

Soyo has come out with some rather good boards, and some rather bad boards. Asus and Abit also have come out with some rather craptacular boards.

Hell who knows it may just be one faulty little part that once it is found everybody will be going "Duh!" and slapping their hand against their forehead.

Disabling ACPI does suck though. :)

Especially since anybody who is going to go into the BIOS setup screen and change that sort of settings (which requires reinstalling Windows, at least on 2000 it does, so it is NOT something that you just go ahead and do without a thought for it) aaah screw it.

Basically Win2k (and I am extrapolating for XP here, since it is awfully simular... ) required two separate kernels, one for ACPI, one without ACPI.

I am sure that MS was just getting friggin annoyed with having to support two kernels, not to mention run support for two completely different ways of doing the IRQ thang (WTF is up with backwards support and IRQs? Current x86 OSs support the old way of IRQs to work with current motherboards, current motherboards support it to work with current OSs, WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON HERE FOLKS???? YEESH! Catch(22+(1/0)) --- for you TI calc people out there. ) ).

*NOTE* I read someplace that it is a different Kernel, other places just mention a HAL, either way it must be a pain in the ass to support and I can understand Microsoft not wanting to have to support both ways of doing things, after all, this is the twenty first century, IRQ conflicts should not be a problem. I agree that at times how Microsoft Windows tends to, uh, arrange your IRQs is rather bad, but that piss poor sound quality you hear may very well be a SB:Live, which sucks, horribly.

Turn off Plug and Play OS in your BIOS, as is recommended, if installing Windows2k+. Your PCI slots are most likely already setup to separate a few of them by IRQ, use that if Windows will allow you too. If necessary install devices one by one (recommended in any scenario), yes it is a pain, but it is about the only way of having so many friggin devices installed in a computer at once.

Hell I ran out of IRQs WITH IRQ sharing, I have so many devices that do not like to share IRQs at all. (Dual Head Video Card, TV Tuner, Sound Card, SCSI Card, woh, there goes 4 IRQs already!!! ... needless to say Standby mode is not an option. Hehe. :) )

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion