Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Core Duo Power Sapping Bug is Microsoft Issue

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the explore-all-possibilities dept.

illusoryphoenix writes "A few weeks ago, Tom's Hardware noted a significant reduction in battery life of the Core Duo processors it tested when USB devices were inserted. Intel claimed that Microsoft had a bug in their USB drivers, while Tom's Hardware was unable to reproduce the same result for any of the other Pentium M microarchitecures. This issue has finally been publicly confirmed by Microsoft to be a USB driver problem which keeps the processor from entering advanced sleep states."

109 comments

  1. Oh My God! by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 4, Funny

    There's a driver glitch with brand new hardware!!! It's already been two weeks and they haven't fixed it yet!! What does this mean for the computing landscape? Is this Wintel's downfall? Will Apple return to their days of prominence? The implications could be enormous!

    --
    Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    1. Re:Oh My God! by Agent00Wang · · Score: 0

      Seriously. At least it's just a driver issue and not a hardware issue.

      --
      NINJA SPIRIT - The Ancient Art of Insanity
    2. Re:Oh My God! by dlZ · · Score: 2, Funny

      There's a driver glitch with brand new hardware!!! It's already been two weeks and they haven't fixed it yet!! What does this mean for the computing landscape? Is this Wintel's downfall? Will Apple return to their days of prominence? The implications could be enormous!

      Didn't you hear??? Apple is switching to MS Windows, I heard it from a reliable source! And Linux costs just too much to run, we're all out of alternatives!

      --
      rm -rf ./evidence @ punkcomp
    3. Re:Oh My God! by evilgrug · · Score: 5, Informative

      "There's a driver glitch with brand new hardware!!! "

      Actually it affects Pentium Ms as well, according to Anandtech.

      "It's already been two weeks and they haven't fixed it yet!!"

      Microsoft first identified the issue and published a Knowledgebase article July 12, 2005. That's a little more than 2 weeks.

      In fact, the regedit quickfix they're recommending was also published on that date ... meaning they still haven't resolved it 7 months later.

    4. Re:Oh My God! by tpgp · · Score: 5, Informative
      I know that you're joking, but I have to reply to the serious parts of your post.

      There's a driver glitch with brand new hardware!!!

      From the TFA
      When a peripheral device was connected to a USB (universal serial bus) 2.0 port, the notebook's battery life plunged at a greater rate than would normally be expected from the use of a peripheral such as a mouse or storage key.
      Nope, not new hardware. USB is not new. The core duos just made the problem more obvious.

      It's already been two weeks and they haven't fixed it yet!!
      From the TFA
      Microsoft published a Knowledge Base article on the subject in July 2005, but made that information available only to PC vendors and partners, a company representative said in a statement.
      So, its actually been over six months and they haven't fixed it yet.

      As usual, Microsoft waits for an issue to become public before bothering to fix it.
      --
      My pics.
    5. Re:Oh My God! by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Looks like someone needs their joke-o-meter re-calibrated

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    6. Re:Oh My God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it will take them 6 months to fix it.

    7. Re:Oh My God! by cloudmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

      From the TFA

      Don't you mean "From the TFA article", or maybe "from the friggin' TFA article"? :)

      FYI information, this post is courtesy of Windows XP, based on NT technology, and transimtted using NIC card features to get the message posted as ASAP as possible.

      just becuase I've nothing more to contribute (except that Tom's Hardware sucks)

    8. Re:Oh My God! by tpgp · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean "From the TFA article", or maybe "from the friggin' TFA article"? :)

      *heh*

      AER Redudancy surrounds us.

      --
      My pics.
    9. Re:Oh My God! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 4, Funny
      There's a driver glitch with brand new hardware!!! It's already been two weeks and they haven't fixed it yet!! What does this mean for the computing landscape? Is this Wintel's downfall? Will Apple return to their days of prominence? The implications could be enormous!


      John Dvorak, is that you?
      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    10. Re:Oh My God! by Disavian · · Score: 1

      If only I had some mod points...

    11. Re:Oh My God! by cnettel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One could argue that keeping USB2 devices plugged for long in a laptop running on battery is a kind of new scenario. The issue is also aggrevated on a dual core machine, as the need for "deep sleep" on one of the cores is actually a quite common scenario there, whereas the effects on a single-core older Pentium M is less pronounced (especially if you're using the system for anything, like playing a MP3, which will prevent your system from going to that level of power saving most of the time anyway).

    12. Re:Oh My God! by PsychoSid · · Score: 1
      See that splat on the wall behind you ?

      Thats the joke that sailed way over your head and smacked into the wall.

    13. Re:Oh My God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill? Is that you?

    14. Re:Oh My God! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      ... meaning they still haven't resolved it 7 months later.

      And Vista won't ship until the end of this year. You do understand how Microsoft works, right?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  2. anandtech test by Dionysus · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to some testing over at anandtech, problem was in the way Windows XP polls USB2 devices.

    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
    1. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this is why Tom's and other tech review sites should always test it with, say, Linux in addition to Windows. They'd have known a lot sooner.

    2. Re:anandtech test by deong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "And this is why Tom's and other tech review sites should always test it with, say, Linux in addition to Windows. They'd have known a lot sooner."

      Funny. In my own independent testing, the Windows USB driver provides about a 30% gain in battery life using Linux as my baseline.

    3. Re:anandtech test by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 2, Informative

      In the Linux kernel Dave Jones also found a power consumption problem with USB, but it seems (to me) that the USB spec is just f*cked up - i wonder if this microsoft issue is related.

    4. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that funny?

      A a comparison of the new chip versus an older one on Linux might reveal that
      the hardware is not at fault (providing that the Linux driver doesn't have a
      similar bug).

      This is nothing to do with comparing Windows versus Linux, you imbicile.

    5. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ironic that you'd call him an imbecile while simultaneously misspelling the word "imbecile".

    6. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not ironic at all, there is a very logical reson for it: I don't have cause to
      use nor see the word very often except on this site, where it is mostly spelt
      incorrectly.

      Secondly, my mistake was a simple misspelling. OPs was a failure of rational
      and logical thought process.

      Bad at spelling I may be, an imbecile I'm not.

    7. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was ironic. You are a creten.
      (ha, ha, I kill myself!)

    8. Re:anandtech test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny. In my own independent testing, an imbecile is about 30% stupider than a cretin.
      (ha, ha, you're still an imbecile!)

  3. This is good news by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That means its fixable with a minor software patch. Much better then having broken hardware.

    At least we know someones QA is still working.. ( and that wouldnt be microsoft in this case )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:This is good news by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The fact that it didn't break until a brand new processor hit the scenes tells me their QA was fine. How do you QA for non-existant products?

    2. Re:This is good news by c_oflynn · · Score: 1

      RTFA.

      It existed already for other Intel processors, it was made more pronounced by the new hardware.

      What's the QA for your post?

    3. Re:This is good news by tpgp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is good news....That means its fixable with a minor software patch. Much better then having broken hardware.

      Good news for whom?

      I agree that it's certainly good for people unfortunate enough to use Microsoft's operating systems - they'll be able to fix a problem with a software patch rather then a hardware patch.

      However, it's certainly not good news for microsoft - the small amount of trust that people have left in MS's QA processes will be lost in the news that they found this bug over six months ago, but didn't bother releasing a patch until it was publicised. (I hope their security QA processes are better)

      --
      My pics.
    4. Re:This is good news by GweeDo · · Score: 1

      This problem is present on your little Pentium M laptop's also. So, sorry, this problem has been around and known about for over six months.

      --
      Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
    5. Re:This is good news by Software · · Score: 1
      >How do you QA for non-existant products?

      That's what code reviews are for. A good code review can often (not always) find problems before they show up at runtime. Several years ago, I was doing a code walkthrough (less rigorous than a review) for a new feature that required the brand spanking new IE 4 to work. The code was written to look for the literal string "MSIE 4" in the User-Agent header; when IE 5 came out, the code would have failed to detect it. This was QA for non-existent products. The engineer later modified the code to pass a test that wouldn't be executed for several years.

    6. Re:This is good news by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      Hopefully, Microsoft will have the patch available as part of Windows Update, maybe in an out-of-cycle update (though I doubt this since dual-core Intel CPU's are still not that common yet on notebooks).

    7. Re:This is good news by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "This problem is present on your little Pentium M laptop's also. So, sorry, this problem has been around and known about for over six months."

      Why wasn't there a pitchfork party over it 6 months ago, then?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    8. Re:This is good news by FireFury03 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A good code review can often (not always) find problems before they show up at runtime.

      In my experience, code reviews only pick up the reasonably obvious problems - your example was an obvious problem that could be spotted a mile off. Code reviews generally don't tend to pick up problems in intricate algorithms.

      Infact, looking at the user agent string _at all_ is a bug, nomatter what string you're looking for. It is the reason that browsers have to fake their UA strings (IE claims to be Mozilla, Opera often claims to be IE, etc) - if you check UA strings then you have to update the site every time a new browser is released. On the other hand, presumably your UA test was to serve up some specific code needed to work around browser bugs - that makes detecting a later version of the browser and serving up the same code to be an invalid thing to do since that later version which hasn't yet been released may not have the same bugs so you're suddenly serving up workarounds that aren't needed and may potentially break.

      That said, as other people pointed out, whilest MS didn't originally spot this bug (whcih may or may not be a problem with their QA procedures), they _did_ spot it over 6 months ago and didn't bother to fix it - that's the bigger problem. I wouldn't complain too much since under existing hardware this didn't affect people much - the real problem is that they also take this attitude with security bugs, and that's more worrying (only fix the bug when it has public attention... usually coz it's being exploited in the wild)

      --
      http://blog.nexusuk.org
    9. Re:This is good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, because it is reasonable to give a vendor some time to fix non critical bugs?

      Moron.

      You'd have been the first to bust out your fork for this very reason if anyone had
      dared to criticize them 6 months ago.

    10. Re:This is good news by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Uh, because it is reasonable to give a vendor some time to fix non critical bugs?"

      Everybody's saying 6 months is unreasonable, so no, I don't buy that. I think nobody noticed until the CoreDuo came out. But gee golly gosh, it doesn't sound so bad that way.

      "You'd have been the first to bust out your fork for this very reason if anyone had
      dared to criticize them 6 months ago."

      Assuming you're still as unreasonable 6 months ago as you're being now, probably yes.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    11. Re:This is good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > "Uh, because it is reasonable to give a vendor some time to fix non critical bugs?"
      >
      > Everybody's saying 6 months is unreasonable, so no, I don't buy that.

      Err yeah, 6 months is unreasonable. And it isn't fixed. Hence the complaints.

      > I think nobody noticed until the CoreDuo came out. But gee golly gosh, it
      > doesn't sound so bad that way.
      >

      Gee golly gosh? Good on you hillbilly, you just made yourself sound like a bigger moron.

      Your first mistake is to assume I just make things up for fun.

      Your second mistake is to make an assumption with no reasons or facts to back it up,
      effectively becoming as "unreasonable" as you had thought I was.

      > "You'd have been the first to bust out your fork for this very reason if anyone
      > had dared to criticize them 6 months ago."
      >
      > Assuming you're still as unreasonable 6 months ago as you're being now, probably yes.
      >

      Why don't you lick my balls, capitan?

    12. Re:This is good news by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Err yeah, 6 months is unreasonable. And it isn't fixed. Hence the complaints."

      Okay so... we waited 6 months to give them time to fix it, but now we're bitching that it took 6 months, even though nobody noticed until the recent CPU release.

      "Gee golly gosh? Good on you hillbilly, you just made yourself sound like a bigger moron."

      Wow did that backfire on you. Ha!

      "Your second mistake is to make an assumption with no reasons or facts to back it up,
      effectively becoming as "unreasonable" as you had thought I was."

      You mean like making claims about what I would have done in an alternate time-line? Heh. Sure sure.

      "Why don't you lick my balls, capitan?" ... and the reason why you're posting anonymously comes into sharp focus. Living in a red state, are we?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    13. Re:This is good news by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      I'm going to take a wild guess here and state that the problem was likely a much more complicated scenario.

      Aside from that, I'm also going to guess that an operating system is a wee bit more complicated than a webapp you reviewed.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    14. Re:This is good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>"Err yeah, 6 months is unreasonable. And it isn't fixed. Hence the complaints."
      >
      >Okay so... we waited 6 months to give them time to fix it, but now we're bitching that
      >it took 6 months, even though nobody noticed until the recent CPU release.

      Even if that was the case, why should it be OK for them to take so long to fix it?
      They knew about the problem even if not many others noticed.

      >>"Gee golly gosh? Good on you hillbilly, you just made yourself sound like a bigger >>moron."
      >
      >Wow did that backfire on you. Ha!

      I don't follow your logic.

      >"Your second mistake is to make an assumption with no reasons or facts to back it
      >up, effectively becoming as "unreasonable" as you had thought I was."
      >
      >You mean like making claims about what I would have done in an alternate time-line?
      >Heh. Sure sure.

      Umm no. Moron.

      >"Why don't you lick my balls, capitan?" ... and the reason why you're posting >anonymously comes into sharp focus. Living in a red state, are we?

      Oh wow are you serious? Are the black helicopters in sharp focus too, hillbilly?

    15. Re:This is good news by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Even if that was the case, why should it be OK for them to take so long to fix it?
      They knew about the problem even if not many others noticed."

      I wish they did fix it. But if nobody's noticing, how do you prioritize that against the stupid ass security bugs in Windows?

      "I don't follow your logic."

      Figures. I'll give you a hint: You misread that.

      "Umm no. Moron."

      Mmm hmmm.

      "Oh wow are you serious? Are the black helicopters in sharp focus too, hillbilly?"

      Hehehe. Chicken.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    16. Re:This is good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>"Even if that was the case, why should it be OK for them to take so long to fix it?
      >>They knew about the problem even if not many others noticed."
      >
      >I wish they did fix it. But if nobody's noticing, how do you prioritize that against >the stupid ass security bugs in Windows?

      How do I prioritize that? Or how do you? Answer: we don't, microsoft does. They
      would surely have different people/teams working on the USB stack as those doing
      security fixing and audits. The whole company doesn't need to stop what it is doing
      in order for a minor driver fix to happen. ... [blah blah blah bullshit]

    17. Re:This is good news by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  4. Tom's was wrong by jamesl · · Score: 5, Informative
    AnandTech has an in depth analysis. Like most things, the answer can't be found in a headline.
    http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=269 3/

    We've spent almost the past two weeks performing non-stop battery life testing on five notebooks with up to 4 different USB devices, testing theories, trying to pinpoint exactly what causes this problem and testing Microsoft's fix. What follows is the process that we went through in our labs when faced with this strange bug.

    1. Re:Tom's was wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The correct link

  5. Where's the new logo ? by Potatomasher · · Score: 5, Funny

    Intel with a dropped e ? That's so like 1970 to end of 2005.
    Get with the times Slashdot.

    --
    A million monkeys and this is the best sig they could come up with...
    1. Re:Where's the new logo ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the new logo: http://www.intel.com/homepage/nav/pix/logo.gif

    2. Re:Where's the new logo ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think Microsoft can fix the USB power bug before Slashdot fixes the Intel logo ?

  6. Perish the thought... by squidguy · · Score: 1

    Ok, you can have your choices...
    We can ask Redmond to fix the security vulnerabilities, we can ask Redmond to bring back the Teletubbie Hill with Vista, or we can ask them to fix various USB-related and ACPI power issues. Choose 1.
    Don't be picky.

    1. Re:Perish the thought... by ettlz · · Score: 2, Funny
      we can ask Redmond to bring back the Teletubbie Hill with Vista
      Even the Teletubbies were smart enough to know UNIX was the only solution for the Superdome.
    2. Re:Perish the thought... by Mancat · · Score: 1

      If you're asking the City of Redmond to fix these things, you're not going to get very far. They can't fix a pothole.

      --
      hello dear sirs my name is jamesh i are india (bihar) can u guide me install red had linux 9?
  7. BIOS Fix? by slashnik · · Score: 3, Insightful
    From TFA

    Microsoft outlined a fix that involved modifying the registry key for USB 2.0. However, since then the company has realized that this is an impractical fix for most users, and is working on a new fix that could involve a BIOS update patch


    What! Microsift to patch the BIOS
    Not on my notebook
    1. Re:BIOS Fix? by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Because a BIOS patch is much more pratical for most users? I get annoyed just by having to use a floppy drive to update my BIOS.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    2. Re:BIOS Fix? by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Microsoft outlined a fix that involved modifying the registry key for USB 2.0. However, since then the company has realized that this is an impractical fix for most users, and is working on a new fix that could involve a BIOS update patch

      What! Microsift to patch the BIOS
      Not on my notebook

      Indeed. Microsoft can easily patch their own friggin' registry monstrosity.

      Patching the BIOS of the machine is an outrageously bad suggestion, and a bad precedent.

      How long before MS patches everyone's BIOS into oblivion or DRM hell?
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:BIOS Fix? by ecuador_gr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ok, I might be overboard here, but something does not feel right. MS does confirm that it is their usb driver's fault, but a possible solution would be a BIOS upgrade??? How is not a Windows update able to fix an MS driver bug?
      But if it is not really a driver bug, as the BIOS statement would indicate, why on earth would MS cover for anybody?

      It does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit!

    4. Re:BIOS Fix? by GrAfFiT · · Score: 1

      Bios flashing can be done live on Windows nowadays.

    5. Re:BIOS Fix? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Only on some systems...

      But this becomes useless if the old boot-floppy method gets removed as a result, what if you have another os installed? Or you need the bios update before windows will run?

      Bios updates should be useable from multiple types of bootable media, cd, usb, floppy etc...

      Or the bios itself should have an update function, whereby it can read a FAT or iso9660 filesystem from USB, floppy, CD or HD and open the appropriate update program... DEC's AlphaBios did this very nicely, and giving someone a file and saying "save this file on a cd, usb stick or floppy" is much easier than giving them programs to create bootable floppies, or even worse, requiring they create a bootable dos floppy themselves

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    6. Re:BIOS Fix? by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Well, the actual transition between power states is controlled by both the OS and the BIOS. We also have the interesting fact that the actual time spent in C3 is reported incorrectly by the common way to do it in Windows. This is highly hypothetical, but it would be possible that some code checks "am I running in C3 now, if so, poll less extensively" and that the BIOS is responsible for reporting the C3 state incorrectly.

    7. Re:BIOS Fix? by ecuador_gr · · Score: 1

      Again, if the BIOS implements power saving "as it should", meaning that other OS's with properly implemented drivers don't exhibit the same problem, then we would not have to update the BIOS.

    8. Re:BIOS Fix? by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Technically, I can do a live update from Windows. But Asus doesn't seem to care enough to write decent software, as it does not recognize that mine is an Asus brand.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    9. Re:BIOS Fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct if this is ONLY a software (OS) problem. BUT the real story may be that it is not - it may also be poor BIOS code interfacing with the power management code on the processor/chipset! The full story may be that the final fix will have to be via the BIOS and MS with the proper specs from Intel. Best of Luck, WinTel folks!

    10. Re:BIOS Fix? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      and is working on a new fix that could involve a BIOS update patch

      Try parsing that this way: "and is working on a new fix that could require a BIOS update patch from the vendor".

      What! Microsift to patch the BIOS
      Not on my notebook

      You and Bill need to have a sit-down about whose notebook that is. See section 23.4.2 of the XP EULA.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  8. So predictable. by twitter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Good thing no one made the Critical error of speciously faulting Apple or Linux without testing, that would look like FUD when faced with a typical Microsoft problem.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:So predictable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Twitter, the only thing you post is FUD, so look who is talking. You don't believe in Linux or Open Source or any of that other crap -- you stand for nothing except being a poor caricature of a Anti-M$ Zealot.

    2. Re:So predictable. by m50d · · Score: 1

      My favourite example of this was someone posting "there is NO WAY ON EARTH simply OPENING a jpeg could trigger a virus", about a month before the jpeg buffer overflow vulnerability was found.

      --
      I am trolling
    3. Re:So predictable. by buysse · · Score: 1

      s/could/should/ and I'd agree with that statement. Hell, I could have made it. Buffer overflows should be painful for the programmer.

      --
      -30-
    4. Re:So predictable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Here's another reply to your original post, which you interestingly didn't link to.

      You're welcome.

    5. Re:So predictable. by m50d · · Score: 1

      I know, but I had pointed out that windows had had similar things with gifs before. Heck, libpng had a pretty nasty buffer overflow not so long ago. It's a sorry state of affairs, but assuming any sufficiently complicated piece of software doesn't have security flaws is almost certainly wrong.

      --
      I am trolling
    6. Re:So predictable. by dustmite · · Score: 1

      The problem cropped up on Windows machines, why would anyone fault Apple or Linux in this case?

  9. power sapping bug by revery · · Score: 4, Funny

    Core Duo Power Sapping Bug

    [Starscream holds a press conference]
    Ummmm, yes... we were hoping no one would notice, but it's the fricking Insecticons gathering Energon for Megatron... Again. Microsoft only got involved because they own the North American rights to all acts of evil.

  10. No, it's /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  11. It's not just Microsoft... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can't get into a deep sleep when someone jabs a USB plug into one of my ports, either. Apparently I'm hot, I'm pluggable, but I'm not hot-pluggable.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:It's not just Microsoft... by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 5, Funny
      Inexperienced hot-pluggers often feel this way. First, and most importantly - there's absolutely nothing wrong with you - you are hot-pluggable. Don't let a bad initial experience convince you otherwise.

      The realy problem here is with technique - jabbing is never recommended. You want to firmly grasp the peripheral near its end, then gently slide it into the port. Okay, try that a few times - firm grasp - good! - and gennnntly slide it in. Now withdraw the device, and gennnntly reinsert. In and out, in and out, over and over and over again. Excellent, now you're getting the hang of it.

      Although it's sometimes normal to encounter resistance inserting a peripheral into a brand-new port, this friction should disappear with use. Be extra-gentle in these circumstances, and resist the urge to just jab a device into the slot. Again, slow and easy, gently sliding in and out. Yes...yessssss! Getting frustrated and randomly jabbing with your peripheral is unlikely to result in a successful connection, and can damage your peripheral unit or the slot. Overly forceful insertions have even caused the tip of a device to snap clean off - don't let this happen to you!

      Deep sleep is a separate issue. It's normal not to sleep immediately after a peripheral is inserted - the unit is in active use, and sleeping would be undesirable. Wait until interactions with the device have ceased before entering sleep.

      Hopefully this has cleared up some of your concerns. Remember that hot-plugging is a perfectly normal activity, one which anyone can learn to enjoy with a little practice.

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
  12. Re:It's friggin WINDOWS running on friggin INTEL! by PFI_Optix · · Score: 1

    Umm...

    *shyly raises hand*

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  13. All a bunch of whiners.... by jnadke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Jesus... if Microsoft fixed every little bug to come along, then who would upgrade to Vista?!?!?

    1. Re:All a bunch of whiners.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I think a while ago Slashdot ran a story on how some graphics problem or other won't allow Vista to run on half the computers currently running XP. Could someone check that?

    2. Re:All a bunch of whiners.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but didn't /. run a story a while ago about how due to some graphics thing or other, half the computers currently running XP wouldn't be able to run Vista? If the customers know about that, they might want to get the most out of XP. (could someone check that for me?)

  14. Here's the fix... by altheusthethief · · Score: 2, Informative

    Important This article contains information about how to modify the registry.

    Make sure to back up the registry before you modify it. Make sure that you know how to restore the registry if a problem occurs. For more information about how to back up, restore, and modify the registry, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
    256986 (https://premier.microsoft.com/kb/256986/ [microsoft.com]) Description of the Microsoft Windows registry

    SYMPTOMS
    Consider the following scenario. You install Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) on a portable computer. Then, you connect a USB 2.0 device to the computer. In this scenario, the computer uses its battery power more quickly than you expect.

    CAUSE
    Windows XP SP2 installs a USB 2.0 driver that initializes any connected USB device. However, the USB 2.0 driver leaves the asynchronous scheduler component continuously running. This problem causes continuous instances of memory access that prevent the computer from entering the deeper Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) processor idle sleep states. These processor idle sleep states are also known as C states. For example, these include the C3 and C4 states. These sleep states are designed, in part, to save battery power. If an otherwise idle portable computer cannot enter or maintain the processor idle sleep states, the computer uses its battery power more quickly than you expect.

    RESOLUTION
    Warning Serious problems might occur if you modify the registry incorrectly by using Registry Editor or by using another method.

    These problems might require that you reinstall your operating system. Microsoft cannot guarantee that these problems can be solved.

    Modify the registry at your own risk. To resolve this problem, add the EnIdleEndpointSupport entry to the USB registry key.

    To do this, follow these steps:

    1. Click Start, click Run, type regedit, and then click OK.
    2. Locate, and then click the following registry subkey:
    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\USB

    Note If the USB subkey does not exist, create it. To do this, follow these steps:

    a. Select the Services key. On the Edit menu, point to New, and then click Key.
    b. Type USB in the New Key #1 box to name the new key "USB."
    3. Right-click USB, point to New, and then click DWORD Value.
    4. In the New Value #1 box that appears, type EnIdleEndpointSupport, and then press ENTER.
    5. Right-click EnIdleEndpointSupport, and then click Modify.
    6. In the Value data box, type 1, leave the Hexadecimal option selected, and then click OK.
    7. Quit Registry Editor.

    STATUS
    Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed in the "Applies to" section.

    APPLIES TO
    Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2, when used with:
    Microsoft Windows XP Professional
    Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition

    1. Re:Here's the fix... by akac · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you read the article, you'd also see that this "fix" also caused stability issues and didn't work after coming out of sleep.

    2. Re:Here's the fix... by jrumney · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the info, someone needs to mod you up.

      I thought it seemed suspicious that the functionality was there and easily enabled with a registry setting, but disabled by default. The feature was obviously found to be buggy by Microsoft's QA and deliberately disabled for the release. I guess they figured that it was better to let the USB suck power than to have it fail on wakeup.

    3. Re:Here's the fix... by slashid · · Score: 1

      If YOU read the article you would know there is no such 'stability' issues:

      From TFA:

      "Unfortunately, the solution isn't completely ready for public deployment, as there are apparently still some scenarios where it doesn't fix the problem. There may be issues with the problem re-appearing after putting your system to sleep, which are presently being worked on. However, for the majority of situations, this simple registry modification should, in theory, take care of things. "
      :
      :
      "The problem is that the fix isn't exactly perfect yet. The biggest problem that we've seen thus far is that while applying the fix gives you back the vast majority of your lost battery life, it won't remain active coming out of suspend. Once you apply the fix, you are set for as long as that key remains in your registry. However, if you put your notebook into stand-by, and when it comes out of stand-by, the fix will no longer be active. The only solution at this point is to reboot your system, which causes the registry to be re-read, and the fix will continue to work normally. "

  15. Special sleep states by scarlac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Resumed from hibernation - Now entering Zombie Sleep State(tm)
    *deep and sinister buzzing sounds comming from the harddrive*

    But seriously - if there's one thing I really miss, now that i've been using 99% linux for over 1½ year, it's proper power management features. I've tried a few distros and none of them delivered 100% working power management, such as standby.
    I did, however, manage to get hibernation up and running, but apparently the docs on softwaresuspend aren't perfect, and I did manage to be able to hibernate - with the regular nv driver - but the properit...y.. (sorry for my bad english) nvidia driver has some problems with sleep states, making it impossible to stand by using xorg and that driver.

    So to conclude: I love Linux and the freedom I get, but I do miss the "works out-of-the-box" power management features of Windows >=2000.

    1. Re:Special sleep states by ettlz · · Score: 1

      It would help if hardware vendors tested their ACPI BIOSes to check that they work with more than the weird Microsoft interpreter, and played nice with proper implementations such as those in Linux and FreeBSD as well. This is predominantly why the PM features of Windows 2000 et seq. work so well "out of the box".

    2. Re:Special sleep states by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      It tends to work better if you use APM instead of ACPI...

      Linux implements ACPI according to Intel's specs, while most hardware manufacturers implement it according to what works with microsoft's broken and undocumented implementation.

      APM works really well on my Thinkpad T42, even hibernation to disk works perfectly (and it uses the bios, not the os, software suspend is very flakey) with one caveat, you have to change to a text or framebuffer console before you hibernate (if you hibernate from X11 it sometimes won't resume properly, but you can make a script to switch to console when you press hibernate and switch back when you resume)

      The only issue i do have, is cpufreq... It has frequency tables for the slightly older pentium-m chips, but not the one in my thinkpad, so it needs acpi tables in order to work.. i really need to look into programming the cpufreq tables for this cpu into the kernel driver

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  16. Tom's hardware, not what it used to be by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    Whelp, if the overwhelming volume of ads at Tom's Hardware wasn't enough reason, now there's bad information up there as well? Does anyone remember when Tom's Hardware used to actually be a useful site that one could actually navigate effectively, and that would load in less than one hour per page? I guess it does still feel like I'm browsing it on a dialup, so they haven't changed *that* part...

    1. Re:Tom's hardware, not what it used to be by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Their big problem is that they're highly incompetent windows dwelling idiots. So there is only so much they can report before they have to make up shit.

      A real hardware site would cover more than custom expensive PCs.

      Like what of servers? rackmountables? cheaper desktops for poorer people? benchmarks of things that aren't games or synthetic? etc...

      All those require them to have two bits of knowledge between the staff.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  17. Similar Problem with Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a pentium M notebook and while USB devices are plugged in, my CPU stays in power state C2 (/proc/acpi/processer/power) literally all of the time. As soon as I unplug all USB devices, it starts to go to C3. Here is a printout after unplugging USB for 1 minute. Previously, C3 was 0. :~$ cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power
    active state: C2
    max_cstate: C8
    bus master activity: fffffffd
    states:
            C1: type[C1] promotion[C2] demotion[--] latency[001] usage[00000010]
          *C2: type[C2] promotion[C3] demotion[C1] latency[001] usage[662174077]
            C3: type[C3] promotion[C4] demotion[C2] latency[085] usage[00127924]
            C4: type[C3] promotion[--] demotion[C3] latency[185] usage[00000000]

  18. Re:So... by rbarreira · · Score: 1

    Well, having RTFA now I see it is indeed - but the /. summary is so badly written that it makes the issue seem irrelevant.

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  19. And yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows + Intel "still equals" Suck
     

  20. I will kick your butt to Taiwan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows + Intel "still equals" Suck

  21. Dupe + Fix link by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1

    This slashdot article is actually a dupe from January; They even link the same article. Anyway, someone posted the Microsoft knowlegebase article with the registry fix in the earlier article thread

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
    1 John 4:14
  22. Re:It's friggin WINDOWS running on friggin INTEL! by packetmill · · Score: 1

    They dont get it. *looks around, slowly brings hands down, takes out automatic rifle*

  23. Re:It's friggin WINDOWS running on friggin INTEL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please leave your slashdot membership card and ID badge at the desk, take all your personal belongings and follow the security officer to the exit.

  24. Sorry, have to do it... can't resist... by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1

    My new MacBook doesn't have that problem! Stupid Microsoft and their lack of teSTTgh347%$#ATH0+0+[NO CARRIER]

  25. cost ineffective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that it was known but wasn't very pronounced until the newer processors Microsoft probably decided it wasn't worth their engineer's time and cost to fix. Lets see... one engineer at like 20-30 an hour to track down an issue, probably a week to track it down and another week to find a solution... another week in QA plus coming back to the engineer for some more work....

    Just because its broken doesn't mean it has to be fixed. It only needs to be fixed if its a major issue which it wasn't until recently.

  26. Thanks, I'll be here next week! by billcopc · · Score: 1

    -Knock Knock
    -Who's there?
    -Zonk.
    -Zonk who ?
    -Zonk the guy who has breaking news about the Intel Core Duo
    -Zonk the guy who's always 2 weeks behind CowboyNeal ?
    -*grunt* Yes, THAT Zonk.
    -Well in that case why don't you fark right off mate!

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  27. Not QA. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    The fact that it didn't break until a brand new processor hit the scenes tells me their QA was fine.

    It was present in the Pentium M as well. So I would say it's their PR dept that's been working fine, not their QA dept.

    1. Re:Not QA. by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      I would say it's their PR dept that's been working fine, not their QA dept.

      Actually, since they're getting bad PR now, but dozens of Random Q Slashdotters are saying that "tells me their QA was fine.", it means their shills are working hard, not that their PR department's working fine...

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."