"It seems unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the result is that Linux works great without having to do the work" said Bill Gates in 1999 (pdf). While we don't know if he actually managed to do just that (creating problems to other OSes to work well with ACPI), but if he did, it is a good explanation why ACPI has been flaky on the majority of x86 computers with anything else other than Windows (the older, APM standard, seemed more compatible with alternative OSes).
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: It's a known problem...
Member since:2005-11-11
If it were superior, people would use it over IE - especially given the obvious security problems alone.
Except for that little thing called lockin. Surely you've run across those sites that only work with IE? It's not because IE is superior, it's because MS created a non standards-compliant browser and shipped it with the OS most people use. That allowed web developers to be lazy, only certifying their site to work on IE, and in many cases using the IE only extensions. Lockin is what let the IE team cruise (to the point of not existing for a while), not any superiority of the browser.
Attempting to conflate popularity with quality is something that won't get you anywhere. Opera is an amazing browser, and does what it can against a product that comes with folks' OS and which has become (esp with 7) good enough.
Member since:2007-04-13
Member since:2006-10-12
So IE6's complete ignorance to the published agreed standards didn't make it inferior? The fact that IE7 still isn't on the ball doesn't make it inferior?
Inferior and popular are two very different things.
As a professional web developer, I'm long since past being surprised at people not knowing about the existence of anything besides IE—hell, most of them don't even know that it's IE, it's just ‘the Internet’. On that basis, it should be no surprise that IE's market share is so high: the only, quite frankly stunning, feat is that IE's market share is as low as it is when compared to Windows'.
Member since:2007-02-22
The main reasons more people don't use Opera are they've never heard of it, or they have and are happy with their current browser (usually Firefox or Safari, but not so much Internet Explorer--IE users are usually computer illiterate and are the ones that have never heard of Opera). It has nothing to do with superiority.
If it were superior, people would use it over IE - especially given the obvious security problems alone.
Opera is objectively superior to Internet Explorer in nearly every aspect, from rendering engine (Opera 9.x passes ACID2; IE 7 doesn't even come close) to security (Opera has fewer issues on Securnia than Firefox and IE) to customizability (The toolbars are more customizable, and Opera has skins). The only thing where Internet Explorer takes the cake without a doubt is site compatibility, and that is not Opera's fault per se; Opera better adheres to web standards, but IE is so ubiquitous that some web designers make sites for IE and its quirks and shortcomings.
Member since:2006-03-03
"So AFAIK, Linux claims to be Windows, too. Much alike old Opera claiming to be the - much inferior - Internet Explorer."
flanque, understand that Opera fake the browser identification by ID itself as IE 5. Much like Linux fake ACPI identification by ID itself to the BIOS as Windows...
So it is NOT about IE being inferior. It is about inverior IE version...
Kochise
Member since:2007-04-16
It's definitely Microsoft's fault. There are two compilers available to generate AML (ACPI Machine Language) -- Intel's reference implementation, and Microsoft's. Guess what most manufacturers use to provide ACPI support in their BIOS?
Naturally, Microsoft-generated AML works fine with Microsoft's own ACPI driver.
This is a very severe problem, because on modern hardware ACPI is in charge of things like fan control and CPU throttling, which if not handled properly, could have disastrous consequences for your laptop.. as happened to mine:
http://hircus.wordpress.com/2007/04/14/hp-hp-lama-sabachthani/
One begins to see why HP has been known to refuse warranty claims if the customer admits to running Linux. Though it's entirely the fault of Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers. Unless the ACPI interpreter in Windows does not handle Intel-compiled AML properly, leaving manufacturers with no choice?
I'm never buying a computer with Windows pre-installed again, if only because of this. Give me bare-bones, Linux preinstalled, or a Mac. MS is not getting a single more dollar, even if I have to pay a bit more for that privilege (for a Dell, it's a reasonable $19)
Member since:
2006-01-16
...of ACPI and Linux, that many ACPI bioses don't adhere to the standard.
For example, the standard allows the Operating System to identify itself. There are many BIOSes out there, who just don't talk to any other OS than "Windows".
So AFAIK, Linux claims to be Windows, too. Much alike old Opera claiming to be the - much inferior - Internet Explorer.
While the last one was due to the stupidity of Web developers, I don't know about the first one. Up till know, I assumed it was stupidity of the BIOS vendors.