Slashdot Mirror
Phoenix BIOSOS?
jhfry writes "In an interesting development by an unexpected source, Phoenix Technologies is releasing a Linux-based, virtualization-enabled, BIOS-based OS for computers. They implemented a full Linux distro right on the BIOS chips, and by using integrated virtualization technology, it 'allows PCs and laptops to hot-switch between the main operating system, such as Windows, and the HyperSpace environment.' So, essentially, they are 'trying to create a new market using the ideas of a fast-booting, safe platform that people can work in, but remain outside of Windows.'"
The Geek in me says: "awesome" The Hacker in me says: "jackpot"
So is this fundamentally different from Asus putting SplashTop on some of their netbooks and motherboards?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Imagine that, a mere 10 years after LinuxBIOS (now CoreBoot) first provided a full linux version on the BIOS (with near-instant booting into the OS of your choice), Phoenix gives us with this remarkable invention (complete with the standard idiotic fawning by Rob Enderle).
Bioii
Anybody want my mod points?
Lately BIOS has become the slowest process of booting.
I hope they won't increase bloat inside BIOS.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
But if you look at the back of the clock, it always says "MADE IN CHINA."
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Hyperspace is an extremely fast booting (approx 4 seconds) Linux based mini OS. It is available in two flavors. On PCs without the Intel's VT extensions it is just a fast booting OS, but you can only dual boot it.
On PC's with VT, the bios loads a hypervisor which then boots both Hyperspace, and windows. (It may defer starting windows until hyperspace has loaded). The result is that within for seconds you can begin using the computer, doing things like browsing the web while windows. Once Windows is up, users can instantly switch back and forth.
In theory there should be little reason why other OS could not be used instead of windows, although the system may be installing special drivers in windows to help mitigate some issues.
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
DOS was a BIOS based OS. It passed a large number of its calls directly to the BIOS. We all know how well that worked out.
That said, I would rather have a read-only, default, fallback, usable OS in the system firmware. You know, something that could be used for:
The PC is one of the few platforms where the hardware is actually useless to the end user without an installed operating system. Reflashable BIOSes further compound the problem by allowing a software command to render the hardware unbootable and unrecoverable (that is, unless you happen to have a FLASH programmer and another computer lying around...). The PC has perhaps the worst architure and implementation of any major platform, and it's about time they did something to fix that.
In fact, with the falling prices of flash, why not just flash a Linux kernel into the BIOS?
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Or this will shoot such issues down.
This idea of putting Linux itself into the BIOS is okay if and only if the chip containing the BIOS is replaceable. In other words, the chip should not be soldered to the board.
You're joking, right? Right????
Because if not, read this then flagellate yourself 20 times with an RS232 cable.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Yes, because no one would ever think to update by flashing. Why would it have to be replaced, again?
Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
What about updating the kernel or compiling in new drivers? Do you have to flash the BIOS every time? Risky.
Virtually? It's called a hypervisor. How do you think any VM works?
Why don't they just start to work on coreboot? The piece of code shipped currently as BIOS could be so much better. There is an excellent Google Talk about coreboot's improvements.
It's high time the old unflexible piece of crap BIOS died.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
I'll forgive your lack of experience on this matter but I have to answer your implication that driver absence is a Linux problem.
There is a problem with manufacturers who decide to keep their hardware specs secret and so make it difficult to have device driver support under Linux. It is true. It is a lot less common, but still true.
But this is not a problem that is exclusive to Linux. There are many devices that are older and will never have support for WindowsXP or Vista or Windows 7. The devices are considered old and outdated by these same manufacturers and do not want people using them any longer and so they don't pay to have people write drivers for more current versions of Windows. It happens. This problem also happens with Mac OS X. Recently, I upgraded my wife's machine to OS X 10.5.x and her Canon scanner does not and will not have drivers for 10.5.x even though 10.4.x and prior are still supported. All I could get were weak apologies from support but there is no intention to change from their position. They recommended that I buy some software from a 3rd party that costs twice what the scanner costs today in stores. (It is pretty weak that they actually display the MacOSX compatible logo on the package and it is no longer completely true...)
My point is that when drivers are not open sourced and/or the hardware specs are not openly available, your hardware is limited by the willingness of the hardware maker to support it. This is true of Windows, Mac OSX and Linux alike. This is NOT a Linux problem. It is a Manufacturer-with-their-heads-up-their-asses problem.
Yup, that's all the GPL says they have to do.
In fact, providing a web form is being generous.. they could accept requests only by dead tree.
How we know is more important than what we know.
He could boot your OS with a Swiss Army Knife, some duct tape and and old pop top, drawing the electricity needed from a box of old compasses. I guess he's retired from Phoenix by now, though...
The Admin and the Engineer
Even the absolute worst flash memory can be written hundreds of times without any issues.
At a reasonable update schedule of once a month, that would be no less than 10 years. You would almoste certainly be able to update once a week for 3-4 years. And this is worst case...I would be surprised if you would really even want to use the computer anymore (due to performance issues) by the time the flash wore out 15-20 years down the road.
Not without getting arrested, this is a PC world, ya know.
Does this include Linux code in the BIOS itself, or only load it off disk and use it. If the former, did they publish the source?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
... but an unlimited number of morons !!!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Stop sounding stupid.
I've tried this with people before, and it never works. Never fear - I have a plan!
sudo Stop sounding stupid.
People will be able to distinguish between "my computer has crashed" and "Windows has crashed" because, when Windows dies, they will be able to hot-key to the still-running BIOS OS.
That's a very nice innovation. I look forward to buying a mobo which can do this.
A driver missing on an OS isn't the OS developers' fault, but it is their problem. There is a difference. They're not responsible for making the drivers, so its not their fault. Users still don't want to use an OS where they can't use their electronics, though, so it is a problem for the OS developers.
The solution to that problem may be intractable in some cases (a manufacturer refuses to divulge drivers under any circumstances, and no-one is willing to put in the effort to reverse engineer). However, Linux has done remarkably well, and things are only getting better driver-side.
But you're right its not a Linux-exclusive problem. My current printer doesn't work with my Mac, and older equipment may not work with newer versions of Windows.
I've tried this with people before, and it never works. Never fear - I have a plan!
sudo Stop sounding stupid.
beav007 is not in sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
DOS was a BIOS based OS. It passed a large number of its calls directly to the BIOS. We all know how well that worked out.
Let's just call this a gross oversimplification and be done with it, shall we?
Why bother having a separate OS when the kernel could fit on the firmware?
For security reasons. Your firmware OS might have exploitable privilege escalation bugs, so you don't want to run untrusted software under it directly, only in a protected virtual machine environment. That virtual machine environment must have its own OS, and that would be a disk-based OS which is easier (and safer) to update in the event that security holes are found. It's preferable if the whole boot environment is as near to possible as read-only, just to reduce the possibility of malicious exploit. It shouldn't even be possible to re-flash the system without physical intervention (such as changing a jumper).
With kernel drivers *in the hardware itself*, one would never have to worry about getting the correct driver, etc...
This is true for the flash-based OS and the built-in hardware, which is why you can boot into a usable system so long as enough of the hardware is integrated on the motherboard. Don't forget plug-in cards and external peripherals, though. There's no avoiding the need for those drivers, in general.
proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
How many FOSS drivers must I mention before you admit Linux does have a problem?
More specifically: how many FOSS drivers *which are not maintained in the kernel tree* must I list?
1. MTP008 temperature sensor was removed from 2.6 (was in 2.4).
2. Peracomm USB ethernet (stopped working while in kernel tree)
3. DIB0700 (and many, many other) based DVB cards - the manufacturer helped making the driver but it still (after over 3 years, in 8.10) is not up-to-date/maintained in the kernel tree.
4. Numerous Wifi cards some of which partially work and some not.
5. Webcams (gspca).
Need I go on?
6. EeePCs ... most came with Linux, most drivers still do not work even in 8.10.
Nobody claims this is exclusive to Linux, it is just a lot more pronounced in Linux.
My point is that even when drivers are FOSS and the manufacturer has willingness Linux *users* can and do have problems.
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to find out why and who is to blame.
There are many devices that are older and will never have support for Windows XP or Vista or Windows 7. The devices are considered old and outdated...
In almost every case - they are old and outdated -
at least those devices produced for the home and SOHO markets.
I replaced a old HP printer with a wireless multifunction HP printer-scanner-fax with Vista drivers -
and by old I mean that only the parallel port worked with XP.
The new - refurbished - ink jet cost $99 with a one year HP warranty. It lacks only the color LCD for instant photo printing.
This is NOT a Linux problem. It is a Manufacturer-with-their-heads-up-their-asses problem.
There comes a time when the geek needs to let go. To pull the plug.
Open Source is not a panacea.
Someone still has to sit down and make the decision to write and test a new driver for a fast-fading piece of legacy hardware -
and if he says the hell with it, there is not much you can do.
even mass storage devices can be a pain these days in windows (u3 tools anyone?) and xp doesn't like multiple partitions on a usb stick (had to hack the drivers to make windows think it was a hard drive to be able to access the second partition, even though both partitions were fat32).
If the manufacturers will release the damn specs the geeks write the drivers for them and those drivers get included with every distribution by default.
While that is an interesting argument, there are a few fundamental problems that bother me:
a) The incentive of manufacturers to release said specifications is low. Regardless of money made on the acquisition of a wider user base (often through more hardware sales), such specifications create issues for intellectual property and often serve as an opportunity for any competing manufacturers to digest a well-prepared buffet of the inner workings of hardware and the software that supports it.
b) The incentive of said 'geek' to actually sit down and not only write but actively maintain said drivers is based on demand and free time. This leads to the parent post "now you see it, now you don't" support syndrome.
c) The incentive of a manufacturer to release quality specifications is next to non-existent. In many cases, only the most determined OSS master-mind is capable of both understanding what are often meant as 'internal use only' documents and actually creating a driver. While I have little doubt such people exist, there is only so much time, sweat, blood, and tears that many people are willing to give for results.
Note that I actively contribute to the open source community and use Linux on a regular basis. That said, I don't believe manufacturers are (entirely) to blame.
There comes a time when the geek needs to let go. To pull the plug.
Which is why our landfills are filling up with e-waste faster than they should be. Great example of attitudes in a disposable society.
I'm all for progress and new technology, but why discard something because it just needs a new set of drivers? The reason why manufacturers can get away with this crap is because people don't get pissed off enough and light up their call enters with complaints.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
The "Apple Tax" is more than worth it. OS X is virtually 100% secure, and its worth paying the cost difference to ensure my stuff is on my Mac and Time Machine drive, rather than being sold off to the highest bidder off a server in Tehran.
Bwahahaha
I had most of this in the 70s. It was called the Tandy Model I, and the entire OS was on a chip. There were never any driver problems because you couldn't install drivers. It was instant on (and by instant I mean faster than the CRT/TV it was connected to).
We've come so far .... :P
Oh, and 4K of RAM ought to be enough for anybody. ;)
Put identity in the browser.
OSS is a panacea for people that actually own the device and are geeks.
Or at least pee on it and create a wall of FUD. Their mighty and perfect OS usurped by lowly BIOS - and a BIOS running Linux. How totally non-elegant !
Its a great idea and I would actually have a reason - a real reason - to upgrade my hardware. But I can see M$ telling Dell - HP - etc. if you want to put Windows a BIOSOS system ... no OS discount for you !
However I would love to see the industry find a way to shove this down Balmers throat.
Its not the years, its the mileage
Typically they're old and outdated BECAUSE drivers aren't released, not the other way around. Webcams don't stop working; they just get forced into obsolescence.
What you don't know won't hurt you. 100% secure, let me know how that turns out for you.
I am the lawn!
No no, he said it's "virtually 100% secure", in the same way that I'm virtually a demi-god dwarf thief who destroys his foes by injecting flaming marshmallows up their ass.
which is totally what she said
Latest example is a webcam that I pulled out of my spare parts box for a project. Windows demanded the driver disk (which I didn't have) and couldn't find anything when I told it to go searching on the web. Ubuntu recognized it immediately and the driver was already on the system... instant joy. Gave up on Windows... another reason to delete Windows on my last remaining Windows computer.
I also hear lots of stories about WiFi not working but I have installed Linux on about 15 laptops (internal and external WiFi adapters) over the past few years and WiFi has "just worked" on all of them.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
You think that the past has nothing to teach us? I suspect, my friend, that your life is going to be one bumpy ride.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
This brings up an important point. There is plenty of incentive for someone to write a web server, a database manager, an OS kernel or thousands of other generic bits of software. There is almost NO incentive for someone to write a driver for an obsolete device. The former can be a source of consulting and employment. The latter can actually work against you.
I mean, if a hardware manufacturer finds out you like to write device drivers for obsolete hardware, they're not going to be pleased. All those people keeping their old printers will prevent the manufacturer from profiting by making new ones. And if you really get creative by making the hardware do all sorts of new tricks it never did before, they're probably going to look for some excuse to get rid of you.
They want to sell new product, not keep the old stuff going. I know it's wrong to say this, but that's how the world's economy is configured right now.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
All your points touch the same subject: incentives. Thus there's only one problem: money. Not the loss of it, but the absence of profit. Truth is business is about relations, and hugging papa Microsoft tightly tends to help vendors getting their products out on the market. Microsoft has no interest in helping vendors that explicitly support their rivals. Call it FUD or whatever bullshit-internet-forum-made-up word you want but the bottom line is that MS, and its affiliates, have great impact on the IT world and if papa says no, then no it is.
I am the lawn!
a) A is a bogus concept. A specification amounts to an interface and really doesn't reveal much of anything about the internal workings of the hardware. With or without a specification you can bet a competitor with a multi-million dollar interest in how your hardware works will acquire that information anyway. So while selling hardware to the technically elite crowd that makes the major hardware purchase recommendations on big ticket accounts might not be a significant incentive to hardware manufacturers there really is no downside.
b) You could make that arguement except that there are no shortage of manufacturers that DO make their specs available and the result is that Linux has dramatically superior driver support for that hardware than any other operating system. Take a system with 10 year old hardware and load up ubuntu on it, everything will work out of the box. The popularity issue is self solving, if something isn't popular its because not many people use it or need it. If it was once popular but is no longer popular then the driver will have stabilized while it was.
c) I fail to see the motivation NOT to release quality specifications. Again specifications are how to communicate with the hardware, not how the hardware actually works. The only reason to misrepresent a spec is because the company is doing something shady like maladjusting drivers to give gains on gaming benchmarks at the expense of overall performance and so forth. If they really want to do this they can just release specs that say those maladjusted configurations are the optimal settings for the hardware. Problem solved. Otherwise, why wouldn't you want your hardware to perform as well as it could on a given system.
Actually since linux remains a tech heavy system, it seems to me that even hardware that is being under driven in software, perhaps to enable the sale of the same hardware at different price points would be best run at full unlocked specs in the linux driver anyway. This will give linux users a very favorable view of the hardware. While linux users may be a small percentage of the market, they are the geeks that make recommendations listened to by purchasing managers and by the early adopters who spend the real bucks.
If say, nvidia graphics cards give screaming performance on my linux box and ati cards suck and both have drivers... guess which cards I'm going to have a high opinion of and recommend to my clients?