Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The ASUS "Bay Trail" T100 Is Not Linux Friendly

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by crymsonpheonix View Post
    Also, AFAIK Arch and Gentoo are the only two distros with support 32bit UEFI, and both require someone with linux experience to get them working.
    For Gentoo all you need is time and the patience to follow the (excellent) guides. And the will to resist dabbling with all the options you get and to just choose the default ways ☺

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by crymsonpheonix View Post
      This is really bad advice. Just run a 32bit OS with a 32bit bootloader; it might work to run a 64 bit OS on a 32bit UEFI, but you'll get all sorts of unexpected behavior because you're not supposed to be able to mix and match according to the UEFI spec.

      Also, AFAIK Arch and Gentoo are the only two distros with support 32bit UEFI, and both require someone with linux experience to get them working.
      In a land made of gingerbread coated in sweet fruity icing, with liqourice allsorts and theories made of ideas, having a 64-bit UEFI BIOS that can detect a 32-bit bootloader (which has been proven thus far to be the ONLY method) containing the 64-bit kernel and subsequent 64-bit OS should actually be feasible. On that tasty gingerbread surface, anyway. I feel as if I'm mising something deailish, but yeah. Mmmm, lollies.

      Comment


      • #33
        It has a 32-bit UEFI implementation, and so you'll need a 32-bit UEFI install image. Most distributions don't provide one, because http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/26734.html

        Comment


        • #34
          It's a bad idea anyway to use a 64-bit SO with just 2G of RAM. It would be better with X32, but that's not generally available yet AFAIK

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by mcloud View Post
            It's a bad idea anyway to use a 64-bit SO with just 2G of RAM. It would be better with X32, but that's not generally available yet AFAIK
            I was thinking the same thing. 32-bit still has the (ever-shrinking) upper hand with support currently. Yet it does still consume slightly more resources than 32-bit. And on 2GB RAM, you might as well do the 32-bit thing!

            Asus must be using recycled code and 'forgot' that Bay Trail is 64-bit. I reckon that's what's happened =D

            Comment


            • #36
              I can hear $ secure boot advocates laughing their arses off now.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by moilami View Post
                I can hear $ secure boot advocates laughing their arses off now.
                This has precisely nothing to do with secure boot. Michael tried booting a 64-bit Linux distribution on a system with 32-bit firmware. He'd have exactly the same failure if he tried to boot 64-bit Windows 8.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by crymsonpheonix View Post
                  This is really bad advice. Just run a 32bit OS with a 32bit bootloader; it might work to run a 64 bit OS on a 32bit UEFI, but you'll get all sorts of unexpected behavior because you're not supposed to be able to mix and match according to the UEFI spec.

                  Also, AFAIK Arch and Gentoo are the only two distros with support 32bit UEFI, and both require someone with linux experience to get them working.
                  Then I supose you can use the EASY Manjaro or any of the Manjaro respins

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by mitcoes View Post
                    Then I supose you can use the EASY Manjaro or any of the Manjaro respins
                    Manjaro doesn't ship 32-bit UEFI support.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I wonder, in what state will the notebook endup if you'll claim Windows license refund from ASUS.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Not a huge loss. Bay Trail sucks and is barely competitive with last year's ARM chips anyway. Now that Intel has given up on supporting Mir, too, and given that Mir is supposed to work with Android drivers and is more optimized for ARM chips, it's better off for Canonical to bet their future on ARM chips anyway (perhaps on Nvidia's Denver/Maxwell chips).

                        What does suck, though, is Microsoft's very transparent evil way of trying to block Linux from installing on new "Windows machines", even though they say you only have to switch something off to make it work or whatever, but they try to make it as painful as possible to do it.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Bay Trail is a excellent product, and it has nothing to do with blocking stuff or Microsoft, its just a bios that is only UEFI with lack of MBR bootloader support(something that will be very common from now on, MBR is deprecated stuff) and only support to 32bits UEFI because it ships with 32bits OS and only 2GB, its just Asus playing lazy with the bios, thats all, there is nothing blocking anything. I wish i could say the same about Chromebooks.

                          We have to wait to see if Android BT devices also allows for USB booting.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            "Thank you" intel for gifting us UEFI. Now use a bad template and make it even worse by giving it to vendors who mess it up even more. Still, only important is to have animations of fans spinning in the "BIOS"setup or even have a 3D-"BIOS"-Setup screen. Oh wow.

                            I so want back 80x25 text res. The best thing ever for doing jobs like that. Provide a little text-menu, maybe even in 16 colours, give it a good overview over the options and then let the user configure his/her hardware for startup. Save me the spinning fan animations. (Especially on my passively cooled systems )

                            On another note, well, AMD supports coreboot. Think about it. (Yes, I know that doesn't help a flaky uefi-implementation that comes shipping as firmware on a preassembled notebook but still)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Adarion View Post
                              "Thank you" intel for gifting us UEFI. Now use a bad template and make it even worse by giving it to vendors who mess it up even more. Still, only important is to have animations of fans spinning in the "BIOS"setup or even have a 3D-"BIOS"-Setup screen. Oh wow.
                              UEFI in and of itself isn't bad. Sure it's not as good as Coreboot, but at least it's not nearly as bad as BIOS. What is bad is motherboard engineers having no idea how to implement it properly.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                fucking uefi and secureboot

                                God I hate that crap!! But this is by no mean Linux-only. Try to boot Windows 7 on any of this securefucked machines. Turning it off is a pain in the ass. It always boots Windows 8, fuckin microsoft, I bet my ass they pushed this in order to make really hard to get rid of Windows 8
                                Last edited by TheScorpion; 10-29-2013, 04:32 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X