Slashdot Mirror


Swedes Show Intel Sandy Bridge Running BIOS-Successor UEFI

An anonymous reader writes "SweClockers.com has gotten it hands on a Intel Sandy Bridge motherboard running Unified Extensible Firmware Interface, the long awaited successor of age-old BIOS. Among the differences is a significantly more user-friendly interface, the ability to boot from drives larger than 2 TB and faster boot times. Check it out, on video, in Swedish." Here's an Google's translation of the article.

47 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. UEFI has been around for years. by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have a three year old "Intel Desktop Board" that can boot via UEFI, boot to 2TB+ drives, etc.

    It's not exactly new. (And I have a server from 2001

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
    1. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by __aardcx5948 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not new, but not very common. I suppose that it's mainly the large harddrives that push for this to get out to the mainboards..

    2. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by gilesjuk · · Score: 2, Informative

      EFI has been in Macs ever since they went Intel. Pretty common.

      Of course, you don't get to play with it, but then why would you need to?

    3. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Informative

      UEFI is extremely common. Modern laptop makers use it as a way to have a modern BIOS (e.g. InsydeH2O) instead of the horrible cesspool of 16-bit code that are traditional BIOSes. At least Acer and Sony seem to be using this kind of setup for all of their recent laptops for a few years now, and I'm pretty sure quite a few other manufacturers are doing the same.

      Unfortunately, most of the time the EFI features are completely inaccessible to the user and OS. They just add in the usual BIOS emulation layer, the boot process is designed to resemble a ye olde BIOS, the Setup menu is modeled after a ye olde BIOS, EFI services are unavailable, there's no EFI console or boot from EFI media. Sadly, the goal seems to make it easier for them to make the BIOS, not to make it more useful to end users.

    4. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by Nerdfest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What's going on with OpenBIOS? It showed a lot of promise ...

    5. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by joib · · Score: 3, Insightful

      NIH?

    6. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course, you don't get to play with it, but then why would you need to?

      The only boards that are worth having are the ones that validate my opinion of myself as an ubergeek. My entire self worth springs from my ability to adjust pointless hardware parameters through a poorly designed interface cobbled together by Korean sweatshop developers.

      I will never buy a motherboard that doesn't allow me to set the Clock Phase Skew to 0.25, or and the Memory Overdrive Voltage to 1.79. Those are the correct values. If your Apple motherboard doesn't have a byzantine boot menu that allows you to set them, then you're being kept in a walled garden. If you allow Steve Jobs to be an authoritarian control freak who prevents you from setting your memory timing to 4-3-3-2, then why don't you just an iPad and a Wii, and the rest of us will use the real computers.

      Now if you excuse me, I need to change the fuel injectors in my car. It's getting near winter, and as the air density increases I need to change the fuel air mixture. It's important that you stay on top of this. Only sheep leave it the same year round.

    7. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by Cyberax · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We use EFI to boot a Linux image loaded into EFI flash. So it takes less than a second to start the kernel (around 500 milliseconds - we haven't timed it precisely).

    8. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OpenBIOS is an implementation of OpenFirmware, which is an independent IEEE standard implemented by multiple vendors. It was, therefore, completely inappropriate for an Intel platform.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Informative

      You may be joking but you'd be surprised how many times I have had to tweak BIOS because the defaults are frankly lame. I've seen them with Speedstep/Cool&Quiet disabled, RAM timings on the absolute lowest the RAM is rated for, all the legacy ports nobody uses turned on, etc. Personally I don't think I'd want a machine where I had no ability to ensure the defaults were sane, because in nearly every BIOS I've seen (haven't dealt with EFI yet) the defaults are ultra conservative. I didn't pay all this money to have a quad and 8Gb of RAM just to have the performance hobbled by bad BIOS settings. I have yet to see a BIOS that gives you decent defaults for most hardware.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    10. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not really.

      While I wouldn't change the fuel injectors based on a seasonal change, I have changed them based around performance limitation of stock setups.

      I have also changed out the breathing system to take advantage of less restrictive airflow. I have added performance spark plugs and ignition systems in some cases too.

      The point is that it's not uncommon to modify the mechanics of a car to obtain some objective. Increased fuel injector size allows quicker/more responsive, and in some cases, more delivery of fuel. Of course you probably wouldn't see much of an improvement if you didn't alter other things too.

      Perhaps the person who changes bios settings to tweak them out is the same type of person who would soup up a car to get the most performance possible from them.

    11. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Informative

      Every Intel brand motherboard since 2007 has had EFI. From what I can tell, this motherboard is an Intel brand, too.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    12. Re:UEFI has been around for years. by znerk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At least Acer and Sony seem to be using this kind of setup for all of their recent laptops for a few years now, and I'm pretty sure quite a few other manufacturers are doing the same.

      That's all I needed to hear...
      Sony:
      The same people who have no qualms about adding a rootkit to your windows-based PC if you have the audacity to put an audio CD in your drive.
      The same people that make the VAIO, which is one of the most ridiculous machines to have to work on if any of the hardware fails (and it does, repeatedly and often).
      The same people who sold a product, then removed half the features in the name of anti-piracy... causing the pirates to start hacking the DRM on their games, instead of playing with OtherOS.

      and

      Acer:
      The guys who make laptops with an average life expectancy of about 30 days past the warranty period.
      The guys who make laptops that you can't work on without a complete tear-down in order to access anything more than the RAM.

      Both of these shining beacons of industry say this is good tech? That's a fantastic recommendation (in my eyes, at least), for why we should avoid it like the plague. Who knows what kind of nasty bugs it will add to your system? What's to stop them from logging everything your system does, and/or phoning home constantly?

      Seriously, you people should read more Shadowrun and Cyberpunk rulebooks, there's "history" in there that seems to be coming true in the real world.

      --
      Disclaimer: I have no idea what I'm talking about.

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  2. Drivers larger than 2TB! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's pretty big for a driver. It would take me months to write something that big.

    1. Re:Drivers larger than 2TB! by cashman73 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's ironic. I heard that's about the size of the new kernel for Windows 8!

    2. Re:Drivers larger than 2TB! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Clearly you have never used an HP printer.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Drivers larger than 2TB! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      We don't call them printers, they are Ink sale Enablement Devices, or IEDs.

    4. Re:Drivers larger than 2TB! by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes,almost the entire 2GB of the windows kernel is a graphics driver.

      That's correct -- Microsoft optimizes their video driver by pre-rendering every possible graphic in advance, and including all of them as resources in the driver binary. That way they can display anything via a single lookup into the displays-table.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  3. Drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    > boot from drivers larger than 2 TB

    Just what we need, more and bigger drivers!

  4. drivers larger than 2 TB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    When will the code bloat stop? What are they doing, including a look-up table for every memory address?

    1. Re:drivers larger than 2 TB by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you need to re-read the title of his post. I'll even highlight the relevant part for you:

      drivers larger than 2 TB

      Make sure to read that emphasized words a few times for the joke to finally sink in.

  5. Kerma vhureeng by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Funny

    Uneeffied Ixtenseeble-a Furmvere-a Interffece-a nemed heur tu tudey's beseec inpoot ooootpoot system thet elloos intrunce-a in iernest veet zee loonch ooff Intel Sundy Breedge-a et zee ind. Bork bork bork! UEFI kun leeknes feed itt nedbuntet oopereteefsystem sum öferkummer många ef de-a begränsneenger sum feenns i det uråldreega BIOS. UEFI is leeke-a a sceled-doon oopereteeng system vheech oofercumes muny ooff zee leemiteshuns ooff zee ege-a-oold BIOS.

    Noo in UEFI

    * Ebeelity tu mudern grepheecel interffece-a
    * Uppstert från legreengsenheter större-a än 2 TB Buut frum sturege-a defeeces lerger thun 2 TB
    * Snebbere-a uppstertsteeder Fester buut teemes
    * Flexeebel uppstert från oobegränsed mängd källur Flexeeble-a buut frum un unleemited fereeety ooff suoorces
    * CPOo-ooberuende-a erkeetektoor CPOo ercheetectoore-a independent
    * Foollt utbyggd prugremmeeljö Foolly fledged sufftvere-a infurunment
    * Stöd för dreefrootiner Sooppurt fur dreefers
    * Stöd för 32/64-beeters meennesedressering Sooppurt fur 32/64 beet memury eddresseeng
    * Efuncered säkerhet inklooseefe-a kryptereeng Edfunced secooreety incloodeeng incrypshun

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re:Kerma vhureeng by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... but how easy is it to recover when it gets bork, bork, borked?

  6. Microsoft by cashman73 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I heard Microsoft is already working on a competitor to UEFI. It's called UFIA. ;-)

    1. Re:Microsoft by hedwards · · Score: 2, Funny

      Really? I would've thought it would be FUIA.

    2. Re:Microsoft by PaulMeigh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And it really does load 2TB drivers.

  7. Diagnostics, system configuration, etc by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are plenty of reasons to want BIOS/UEFI access. The problem with having a totally inaccessible one like Apple does is that if anything goes wrong or you need to change something, well then you are fucked. Apple "just works" until it doesn't and then it can often be more of a problem to fix. I am reminded of a Douglas Adams quote: "The difference between something that can go wrong and something that can't possibly go wrong is that when something that can't possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair."

    So simple tasks that the BIOS/UEFI/other firmware provides are things like checking the RAM configuration and hardware monitors. In the event there's a problem with the system you can see things at a lower level, like which RAM slots are acknowledging what RAM or if there is a temperature or voltage problem. It can also be used for configuration tasks. Some mundane, like turning off integrated components (sound, net) if they aren't needed, some complex like overclocking.

    There's good reasons for access to it. Most people probably never need it, but it is good to have it there for those that do. All the functions are there, might as well have an interface so people can control them if required.

    1. Re:Diagnostics, system configuration, etc by techmuse · · Score: 4, Informative

      OS X will tell you all of this stuff in the system profiler. In fact, if you install RAM in a non-optimal configuration in a Mac Pro, it will automatically detect it and tell you how to correct the problem for best performance. In the laptops, there is no "wrong" configuration, unless you put the wrong type of RAM in, in which case that RAM slot is disabled or, in the worst case, the system won't boot (in which case UEFI wouldn't help you anyway).

    2. Re:Diagnostics, system configuration, etc by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe Mac Pros also have LEDs near the RAM slots that will indicate problems.

      --
      September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    3. Re:Diagnostics, system configuration, etc by Princeofcups · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are plenty of reasons to want BIOS/UEFI access. The problem with having a totally inaccessible one like Apple does is that if anything goes wrong or you need to change something, well then you are fucked.

      Actually, you take it to the nearest Apple store, and they usually fix for the cost of parts. I've never seen the need to tinker with a PC myself. And yet my jobs usually have me in the guts of a Sun Enterprise or an IBM P series server.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  8. Eufi is not a BIOS, by Snufu · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's just a Swedish cooking term.

    "Eufi deufi, peurfi dur." means "Add meatballs and simmer for 20 minutes."

    Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY_Yf4zz-yo

    1. Re:Eufi is not a BIOS, by mikael_j · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, "Add meatballs and simmer for 20 minutes" would translate to something like "Lägg i köttbullar och låt sjuda i 20 minuter.".

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  9. What happens if the OS does run? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you've never encountered a system with OS troubles all that means if you've not diagnosed many systems. We have a host of tools, including info in the BIOS, to diagnose systems that don't boot when checking things like hardware errors. Like in the case of a disk that won't boot. Is the data messed up, or is it a disk failure? If so how bad? Well one thing the BIOS can tell you is if it can see the disk. If it shows no data, or corrupted data, you know it is really bad. On the other hand if it shows up fine, then it is time to move on to bootable diagnostics.

    As I said I'm sure for normal users, access is not necessary. That doesn't mean it is never useful. To me it is like saying "Weld the breaker box shut, why would you need to get at that?" Well true, most people don't, I think a great many people never open a breaker box. Doesn't mean you shouldn't have it accessible should it be needed.

    1. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can get some information by booting verbose, by holding down the V key, which causes the computer to boot with a text console. That may give you some information about what's going on.

      If the boot process is failing partway, you might be able to boot into single-user mode by holding down the S key, which gives you a root console. From there you can use unix tools to look around and/or fix things.

      There are other keys you can use, like the option key to choose between boot devices, or 'n' to boot from a netboot server. Insert the computer's installation DVD, and hold down the 'd' key during boot, and the computer will boot from a diagnostic partition on the disk, which I assume would be useful.

      You can also set an EFI password, and lock down these things.

      --
      September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    2. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by Hylandr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amen to this.

      Just to get my two cents in, it's also useful when all you have is damaged hardware to start with, Having access to that bios means I can lower certain speeds or increase wait states until things work again. CPU got a little too hot and BSOD's windows? Slow it down until it's stable. Ram going bad? Increase CAS and or RAS Serial Ports bad (Yea who uses them anymore right? ) Disable them, add a card and get the equipment hooked back up.

      Mac? I had to support a Mac only environment for the past two years, on to a better job now thank you. When a Mac dies, there's no options. Power supply? $200+. Power supply for a PC ? $50. Mac lovers can worship their shiny white ... equipment... The reality of the professional working world is the Mac is eye candy, and only useful for performing work the same way a cooper mini is useful for hauling lumber. It's compact and cute, but don't expect to move much in it.

      - Dan.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    3. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by LordLimecat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pardon me, what happens if there is a controller error with the CD drive? How exactly would you diagnose this?

      For that matter, what if the bootable CD runs into an error that it is unable to cope with-- perhaps the hard drive is acting funny, or refusing to read back block X, or whatever...

      And if you try to claim that THATS impossible, then im sorry, I agree with GP-- you havent troubleshot many computers.

    4. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most of the stuff you mentioned (at least the first half of your post) are reliant on having a functional OS to begin with. If you have a working OS, you wouldnt be tinkering with the BIOS at all (as tools from the OS tend to be more useful anyways).

      All the mac users here claiming that "youd never need that" probably either havent done much serious troubleshooting, or have a lot of disposable cash (and thus can replace the mac when something goes awry).

    5. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by node+3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Once you strip out the pretentious apple worship, what's left is the same old 'it can't break...' until it does fallacy.

      "Pretentious Apple worship"? WTF? The only thing that even remotely matches that is when I called out Yet Another PC user who thinks his PC knowledge applies to Macs. This is no different than a Windows user snobbing about Linux, or yes, Mac users talking about PCs, etc. It wasn't about Macs being superior, but someone talking about something they are ignorant of.

      I wasn't being the pretentious one. I was just calling it out, although probably not terribly tactfully.

      1. you don't use the bios config screen to troubleshoot. you use it to SET boot options.

      I never said you do. In fact, I wrote:

      "On the PC, the BIOS settings program is fundamentally used to set motherboard options."

      apple does not 'create' the hardware.

      Yes, they do.

      No more than HP or dell or any other oem creates hardware.

      Yet Another PC user syndrome strikes again. Apple engineers their hardware far more than Dell and HP do. They certainly don't create each part, and I never said they did. In fact, this is a completely irrelevant sidetrack from my point which is that Apple decides the exact specifications for each Mac, and they write their own operating system, which makes the usual need for BIOS settings entirely unnecessary. You don't have to tweak settings to correct strange boot problems or address stability issues. Granted, you don't have to do this on PCs that much anymore either, but Sycraft-fu's point was that when you *do* need it, it's there, and by your statement that "what's left is the same old 'it can't break...' until it does fallacy", you are continuing it.

      Macs just simply don't break in the way that benefits from those BIOS options. They do break, but never in that way. If you have a counter-example, I'm open to hearing it.

      A user accessible EFI would be a boon to techies who end up having to deal with their nontechnical friends/familys' apple products.

      Not really. But like I said, an example would help settle this instead of simply making vague assertions.

    6. Re:What happens if the OS does run? by node+3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mac? I had to support a Mac only environment for the past two years, on to a better job now thank you. When a Mac dies, there's no options. Power supply? $200+. Power supply for a PC ? $50. Mac lovers can worship their shiny white ... equipment... The reality of the professional working world is the Mac is eye candy, and only useful for performing work the same way a cooper mini is useful for hauling lumber. It's compact and cute, but don't expect to move much in it.

      You were a PC support employee who found himself out of his element when tasked with supporting Macs. Clearly your preconceived notions cannot be false, so therefore Macs can be nothing other than overpriced toys.

  10. death to MBR, death to C/H/S by Snorbert+Xangox · · Score: 5, Informative

    More than a decade after hard drives stopped internally using a fixed cylinder/head/sector geometry, we finally get mass market deployment of a partitioning scheme that completely gets rid of this big, dumb lie.

    All the hoo-haa over new drives with 4kB sectors and the way that DOS-compatible operating systems partitioning tools want you to lay out your disk has actually already been experienced by sysadmins for years, when they attempt to come up with partitioning schemes for those operating systems that align filesystem blocks with the underlying geometry of SSD write blocks or RAID 5 stripe segments.

    Next time you buy an SD card or thumb drive, stick it into a box with a decent formatting tool and look at the actual start sector for the partitions. You will find that the manufacturers have quietly been using sane partition start sector values (i.e., power of two, not "first sector of second track of cylinder 0") because they know that the performance of the device would be horrible if almost every VFAT cluster write spanned multiple flash write blocks.

    And all this stuffing around has been forced upon us because Microsoft never had the balls to say, "you want to rock out with Borland Sidekick or Netware 3.0? Sure, use a frickin' VM, or use a new version of DOS that speaks native LBA to the BIOS. Those are your choices."

    All the brainpower and effort that has been wasted on workarounds for the effects of the brain damaged MBR partitioning table could have been much better used actually improving how computers worked, rather than treading water.

    --
    -Snorbert, somewhere in the antipodes
    1. Re:death to MBR, death to C/H/S by Snorbert+Xangox · · Score: 2, Informative

      Linux fdisk or GNU parted - change the units to sectors and you can then print the partition table out in raw sector LBA offsets.

      There's another gotcha for FAT filesystems on SDHC, in that the filesystem metadata at the start of the partition has no natural power-of-two alignment. If you look into the FAT filesystem that a digital camera puts on an SD card when you format it, I suspect that you'll see a bunch of reserved sectors as padding before the FATs, to ensure that the first data sector lines up nicely with a flash write cell.

      Wikipedia gives this lovely formula in their description of the FAT filesystem:

      Clusters are numbered beginning after the root directory with cluster 2. The following formula will convert the file start cluster (X) in 0x1a to the number of sectors from the beginning of the partition using the Boot Sector fields:

      For FAT32

      FileStartSector = ReservedSectors(0x0e) + (NumofFAT(0x10) * Sectors2FAT(0x24)) + ((X 2) * SectorsPerCluster(0x0d))

      For FAT16/12

      FileStartSector = ReservedSectors(0x0e) + (NumofFAT(0x10) * Sectors2FAT(0x16)) + (MaxRootEntry(0x11) * 32 / BytesPerSector(0x0b)) + ((X 2) * SectorsPerCluster(0x0d))

      The reserved sectors field is 2 bytes, which allows padding of the alignment of the start of the data clusters to NAND flash write blocks, or even possible an erase block if that would somehow help. (erase blocks on a cheaper Intel SSD are 512kB, not sure about the sizes on SDHC cards or thumb drives).

      --
      -Snorbert, somewhere in the antipodes
  11. Drivers? What about the 9-irons? by zooblethorpe · · Score: 3, Funny

    And just how far can someone hit a ball with a 2TB driver? Are they PGA-approved, or will the club kick me out if they find me using one? Hmm...

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  12. Translated transcript by Hazelfield · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hello and welcome to Sweclockers! Today we're looking at UEFI, the boot software that is the successor of the old but still very popular BIOS. UEFI has become a hot topic recently as it's going to be used extensively in the next generation of Intel processors, codenamed Sandy Bridge. So let us have a look at what it has to offer.

    The biggest difference between UEFI and BIOS is that UEFI gives motherboard manufacturers much better possibilities of implementing their own software. Our test motherboard comes from Asus, and the Taiwanese manufacturer has put in several exciting new features. To begin with you can use your mouse, which wasn't possible in BIOS, and there's also the possibility of running in several different modes. For example, there's this simplified mode that greets you when you enter UEFI. Here you can choose between power saving, normal setting or some kind of optimal setting. All settings are then adjusted automatically and you don't have to worry about it. Then there's this simple drag-and-drop system to choose boot order and some panels are available that show fan speeds and the like. Very simple and absolutely enough for anyone without any desire to dig into it.

    There's also a more advanced mode available through the menu here, and now it looks more familiar compared to BIOS. It works more or less the same way except the graphics are updated and there are more options. There are several menus available where you can change language, security settings, and there's this "AI Tweaker" where you can overclock the processor, just as you're used to from BIOS. The usual advanced settings for integrated components such as the processor etc. are there, and they work just as usual. The monitor settings where you can see temperature, fan speeds, set fan profiles and so on, also work just as in BIOS except it looks better and you can use your mouse which makes it easier to navigate. The boot settings contain some new features, for example you can just click one of the alternatives and the computer boots from that device, you don't have to enter a special menu or anything. Finally in the last menu, there are some tools, Asus' flash tool to update the BIOS, which itself is also updated with new features. You can easily use your mouse to pick a BIOS version from hard disks or USB storage that you want to use on your motherboard.

    Well, that's just a quick look on an implementation of UEFI for the next generation Intel platform. With the possibilities offered by this new system we will likely see new interesting solutions in the near future. We at Sweclockers will of course cover this development and report as much as we can until the final release.

    1. Re:Translated transcript by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      UEFI gives motherboard manufacturers much better possibilities of implementing their own software.

      That is not a plus.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  13. Re:BIOS successor? I think not. by DarkXale · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its less about appearance and more about adaptability. UEFI software is not as strict about which motherboard it runs on - and you can implement significantly more functionality into it, helped by the fact that its much easier to code for (C++ rather than Assembly). The fact that its capable of handling more than 64kilobytes of RAM helps for this as well. Its not based on code thats older than quite a number of posters here. Dozens and dozens of difficult (thus costly) modifications have had to be made to BIOS in order for it not to break modern systems. I remember when more than 128gb was unusable on a lot of machines because of BIOS; and frequently forced a complete motherboard replacement because BIOS just could not be reliably updated on a broad scale. The fact that its adaptability also permits greater ease of use is merely a bonus; its not its purpose. And it boots faster too. BIOS has been horribly mutilated and twisted into something it was never meant to do. It should've been replaced years ago.

  14. What EFI is and isn't by pchan- · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every time Slashdot has a story of EFI, we get a thousand uninformed posts about what it is, isn't, what it should do and why it sucks. As someone who has worked on EFI for years, let me clear them up for you:

    1) EFI was designed by Intel as a replacement for BIOS. UEFI (edk2) is the second generation EFI, and is open source (see: http://tianocore.sourceforge.net). Intel delivers all of their boot support code as EFI drivers these days.

    2) EFI is NOT a graphical interface. Some Chinese motherboard makers created terrible graphical configuration applications for it. Apple created a pretty nice boot selector. It can just as easily "post" and give you a console-mode menu like you're used to.

    3) EFI is very common. All Apple computers use it. Most PC (Windows / Linux) laptops use it (your laptop probably does if it was made in the last 4 years). EFI drops into BIOS emulation mode after boot because Windows doesn't support it.

    4) EFI machines generally allocate a small EFI partition on the hard drive, particularly if they use GPT. All Intel-based machines boot from flash memory and would successfully boot without this partition. This partition is for additional EFI firmware volumes or drivers that can be dynamically loaded.

    5) EFI is much better than BIOS. It runs in full 32/64 bit mode. It can dynamically load drivers built into the ROM of your hardware (like a video card) and therefore doesn't have to rely on ancient backward-compatibility modes. It can run "apps", like a safe firmware updater so you don't have to boot your PC with a DOS boot disk to update the firmware. It can communicate a lot of configuration information to the OS and even provide hooks for some low level hardware-specific drivers. It can do things like boot from a network-shared CD-ROM drive or from a disk image stored on a USB stick (without resorting to making bootable partitions and jumping through a bunch of hoops like your average Linux USB stick). EFI can read FAT, NTFS, EXT2, HFS+ filesystems and boot the kernel directly from there (and the initrd image) without involving grub or other second stage boot loader. It can boot your GPT-tagged disks in your chosen order no matter what order you changed them around (take your boot drive, move it to a USB enclosure, boot from it).

    Booting Intel machines is really fucking complicated, and EFI makes it much simpler.

    1. Re:What EFI is and isn't by oxygene2k2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Intel delivers all of their boot support code as EFI drivers these days.

      But not as open source. Tiano is a huge bunch of code, but the really interesting bits aren't in there.

      EFI is much better than BIOS. It runs in full 32/64 bit mode.

      coreboot welcomes you to 1999. Besides that: why is it that EFI exists in "either 32 or 64bit", instead of cleanly supporting both? The additional complexity of thunking libraries can't be it, as tiano already provides a runtime loader to resolve in-flash libraries...

      Booting Intel machines is really fucking complicated, and EFI makes it much simpler.

      Sorry, but EFI is fucking complicated, too. runtime linker - I rest my case.
      It's just that you don't have to care about this complexity when intel provides the closed source components to you to plug in.

      The most reasonable action about EFI over the last few years was the EFI shell effort. Finally Intel admits that they designed an operating system instead of a hardware bringup.