Motherboard for SuSE 9.3
I've got an athlon 1.1 system (obviously a few years old), and I think that the ASUS motherboard is on the way out. I've use SuSE 9.3. Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid? Is there any performance (or other) problem if I have one HD on the IDE bus and a new one on SATA? Would that arrangement confuse YaST? If I was GOING to go with one drive on each interface (haven't tried it yet, haven't got the board yet... just asking), is there a preferred distribution of the filesystem? That is, between two such drives, where should /root, /var, /usr, /home and swap go? Or would it make no difference? Kevin The information contained in this electronic mail transmission may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer without copying or disclosing it.
mlist@safenet-inc.com wrote:
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Avoid buying hardware from any manufacturer with an anti-Linux attitude: http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux04/Asus_Sucks_Story-01.html
Is there any performance (or other) problem if I have one HD on the IDE bus and a new one on SATA? Would that arrangement confuse YaST?
Linux pretends SATA is SCSI, which might confuse anyone not used to using SCSI, maybe you. -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
Felix Miata wrote:
mlist@safenet-inc.com wrote:
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Avoid buying hardware from any manufacturer with an anti-Linux attitude: http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux04/Asus_Sucks_Story-01.html
I recently bought an MSI board because I read good things. But I sent them a question about the integrated VGA and their response was "we only support Windows", so MSI might be another one to avoid. FWIW, the board is a K8M Neo-V. So far, it seems to work OK with SuSE except for an annoying screen flicker which was the subject of my question to them. I see there's now a V2 of this board :( Don't know what the difference is. Cheers, Dave
On Tuesday 19 July 2005 3:02 am, Dave Howorth wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
mlist@safenet-inc.com wrote:
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Avoid buying hardware from any manufacturer with an anti-Linux attitude: http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux04/Asus_Sucks_Story-01.html
I recently bought an MSI board because I read good things. But I sent them a question about the integrated VGA and their response was "we only support Windows", so MSI might be another one to avoid.
FWIW, the board is a K8M Neo-V. So far, it seems to work OK with SuSE except for an annoying screen flicker which was the subject of my question to them. I see there's now a V2 of this board :( Don't know what the difference is.
Cheers, Dave
I use the MSI K8T Neo board and it has worked well with SuSE. Only issue early on was a faulty temp reading which was remedied by a BIOS upgrade/update. Perhaps I spoke with a different technician. My guy said they were only able to supply official support for Winbloze because that was what they were all trained in, but he was very interested in my experiences with the board as he was using linux at home with his, said he was "gently" trying to encourage more awareness "on the job". Maybe all is not lost. Richard
Hello everyone: I'm running SuSE 9.3 (and 9.1 before) in 64-bit mode on Asus motherboards - one in a desktop, the other a laptop. Other than a needed BIOS upgrade for the desktop during the initial install (14 months ago), both are working fine. The laptop is new but the 9.3 install went without a hitch so I guess the BIOS is OK. Not sure how much this helps. Good luck. Cheers, Mike On Tuesday 19 July 2005 12:28 pm, Richard wrote:
On Tuesday 19 July 2005 3:02 am, Dave Howorth wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
mlist@safenet-inc.com wrote:
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Avoid buying hardware from any manufacturer with an anti-Linux attitude: http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux04/Asus_Sucks_Story-01.html
I recently bought an MSI board because I read good things. But I sent them a question about the integrated VGA and their response was "we only support Windows", so MSI might be another one to avoid.
FWIW, the board is a K8M Neo-V. So far, it seems to work OK with SuSE except for an annoying screen flicker which was the subject of my question to them. I see there's now a V2 of this board :( Don't know what the difference is.
Cheers, Dave
I use the MSI K8T Neo board and it has worked well with SuSE. Only issue early on was a faulty temp reading which was remedied by a BIOS upgrade/update. Perhaps I spoke with a different technician. My guy said they were only able to supply official support for Winbloze because that was what they were all trained in, but he was very interested in my experiences with the board as he was using linux at home with his, said he was "gently" trying to encourage more awareness "on the job". Maybe all is not lost.
Richard
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 16:04 -0400, mlist@safenet-inc.com wrote:
I've got an athlon 1.1 system (obviously a few years old), and I think that the ASUS motherboard is on the way out.
I've use SuSE 9.3.
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Is there any performance (or other) problem if I have one HD on the IDE bus and a new one on SATA? Would that arrangement confuse YaST? Not at all, just be careful which way around your BIOS sees them and
If I was GOING to go with one drive on each interface (haven't tried it yet, haven't got the board yet... just asking), is there a preferred distribution of the filesystem? Assuming the sata disc is the newer generation with 8mb cache and NCQ,
Yes, avoid buying another ASUS. I bought a A7V880 which is sorely regret. I have to underclock both memory and cpu to get it to be stable, It detects the CPU (2004+ which predates the board by about a year) as 1800+, it has problems with 8x AGP and ATi Radeon cards (both windows and linux), and their support doesn't reply at all. In contrast, the few questions I've had (wasn't even support questions, merely curiosity about things, like if I buy this board, will it work with my gear) were all answered thoroughly by Gigabyte support, and the board I bought myself (and all the ones I had clients buy) has serverd me very very well, and is now doing time for the parents. So I would always recommend Gigabyte. I'm shopping for one right now. that you don't switch them around in the boot sequence. But seeing as linux sees sata discs as /dev/sd... and IDE as /dev/hd... it won't be a problem. put your busier filesystems on it - /var /tmp swap ect. and the ones that don't work as hard on the slower disc. This really depends on your usage. On my workstation /var works very hard, while on my box at home, /home is where the heavy lifting is done. -- Kind regards Hans du Plooy SagacIT (Pty) Ltd hansdp at sagacit dot com
I've got an athlon 1.1 system (obviously a few years old), and I think that the ASUS motherboard is on the way out.
I've use SuSE 9.3.
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Is there any performance (or other) problem if I have one HD on the IDE bus and a new one on SATA? Would that arrangement confuse YaST?
If I was GOING to go with one drive on each interface (haven't tried it yet, haven't got the board yet... just asking), is there a preferred distribution of the filesystem? That is, between two such drives, where should /root, /var, /usr, /home and swap go? Or would it make no difference? I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Stay away from ASUS. Their support for Linux doesn't exist. In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is
trying to get off the phone. Downright rude. As far as the board is concerned, I haven't had my ONE and only ASUS board since my 32 bit days, but I recall never getting the board to see the correct processor speed, despite the supposed support for the processor. The most annoying part was that the computer froze up at times that looked to be completely random, requiring a hard reset. I was always doing a reiserfsck --rebuild-tree on the drives. Computers can lock up for a lot of reasons, but my problem disappeared the day I trashed the ASUS board and installed a Gigabyte. Since then I've moved to 64 bits on two desktops, Gigabyte boards, and nary a problem. -- The modern child will answer you back before you've said anything. -- Laurence J. Peter
** Reply to message from Tim Hanson <tjhanson98@comcast.net> on Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:01:26 -0700
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Stay away from ASUS. Their support for Linux doesn't exist. In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Downright rude.
Kid stuff. For real insight into rudeness and provinciality, try telling them that you are running OS/2. The point is that Bill Gates's terrorism (like most terrorist campaigns) has paid off big-time, and the whole industry, being interested in maximizing efficiency and the bottom line, has become one immense Windows shop. Examples: 1) When I call my ISP's support line, the first question is: "Which Windows do you have". 2) When I had the telephone company install ADSL, and the question defined in (1) above was asked, I answered that I don't have Windows, which caused the rep to give me the kind of look usually reserved for 6-year-old idiots, and to say "every computer has Windows". It isn't an anti-Linux attitude. It is simply recognition of a statistical fact. -- Stan Goodman Qiryat Tiv'on Israel "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice." -- Proverbs 24:17 The Terrorist Credo: You can make friends by exploding bombs in public places, and the more people you kill, the better they will like you.
Stan Goodman wrote:
Kid stuff. For real insight into rudeness and provinciality, try telling them that you are running OS/2. The point is that Bill Gates's terrorism (like most terrorist campaigns) has paid off big-time, and the whole industry, being interested in maximizing efficiency and the bottom line, has become one immense Windows shop. Examples:
1) When I call my ISP's support line, the first question is: "Which Windows do you have".
Suggested answers: 1-IBM's (if OS/2 is running) 2-KDE, Gnome, Icewm, etc (whichever is running) 3-big ones, little ones, which kind are you interested in The idea is to elicit the missing prefix "Microsoft", after which one not running felonware responds "We don't run no stinkin proprietary operating systems made by convicted felon monopolists here. We support only open source, which anyone and everyone has access to without regard to income or wealth level."
2) When I had the telephone company install ADSL, and the question defined in (1) above was asked, I answered that I don't have Windows, which caused the rep to give me the kind of look usually reserved for 6-year-old idiots, and to say "every computer has Windows".
You obviously answered the question wrong to cause such a response, since since all personal puters manufactured in the past 12 years or so do have windows. ;-)
It isn't an anti-Linux attitude.
Asus does have an anti-Linux attitude: http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux04/Asus_Sucks_Story-01.html
It is simply recognition of a statistical fact.
If Mozilla.org's Bugzilla is any guide, Israel is the most M$-biased country in the world: http://tinyurl.com/7brb4 -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
** Reply to message from Felix Miata <mrmazda@ij.net> on Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:53:32 -0400
If Mozilla.org's Bugzilla is any guide, Israel is the most M$-biased country in the world: http://tinyurl.com/7brb4
This is true. That is exactly how it comes about that the ISP "knows" beforehand that I am running Windows (what else is there?), and why the telco rep "knows" for a fact that every computer has Windows. My health insurer has a website on which patients can find the results of laboratory tests from the comfort of their own keyboards. I can't, because the website uses MS "enhancements" that make it impossible to navigate except with Intenet Explorer. Complaints to the insurer elicit the reply that they know this, but no changes will be made because virtually all the patients run Windows (I don't even know anybody here that runs any Mac system). I explained to my doctor only last week that I would be unable to get my lab results from the site, so he should do it from his terminal. This got me a lecture on why the majority operatting system governs, as it should; and that this is called "democracy". There is a Hebrew website like Mapquest, but specializing in maps of this country (Mapquest is deficient for Israel). I can't use it, because it functions only with IE. Yet the owners must surely be interested in maximum public access. But "maximum public access" here is compatible with "IE-limited access". Why is this so here? I have no idea. MS has a large software foundry here, in Haifa; maybe they have an enormous budget for taking local webmasters to lunch and giving them free lessons on how to make websites without even touching the HTML standards. But it's appalling. Felix.... Why do you get me started?x -- Stan Goodman Qiryat Tiv'on Israel "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice." -- Proverbs 24:17 Why is lemon juice made with artificial flavor, while dishwashing detergent is made with real lemons?
Stan Goodman wrote:
2) When I had the telephone company install ADSL, and the question defined in (1) above was asked, I answered that I don't have Windows, which caused the rep to give me the kind of look usually reserved for 6-year-old idiots, and to say "every computer has Windows".
I was recently asked if it's legal to install Linux on a computer that already had Windows.
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Â Stay away from ASUS. Â Their support for Linux doesn't exist. Â In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Â Downright rude.
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having. mine last server ran for better part of a year without any hiccups an only went down when it did because of power outage. my current one is a 64 bit asus mb an preforms just fine. jack
Hello everyone: While I agree than anyone can experience problems with any hardware, regardless of the name on the box, I have had good luck with Asus MBs. My oldest box (now running for 7 years) is an AMD K6 350 Mhz machine and while there have been hardware issues, none of those were MB issues. My two newest machines are both AMD64 on Asus MBs running SuSE 9.3 / 64-bit mode. [In fact, one machine is dual-boot with windoze XP Home.] One has been running without a hiccup for more than 14 months. The other is new but, here again, no problems. As I've never tried to use Asus support, I can't comment on that. But, given my good experiences with Asus / SuSE linux, I would suggest that anyone looking for a new MB should ask around before putting their money down. Yes, I've seen the comments about poor performance but, as I said, those comments can apply to any product. cheers, Mike On July 25, 2005 07:38, Jack Malone wrote:
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Â Stay away from ASUS. Â Their support for Linux doesn't exist. Â In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Â Downright rude.
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having. mine last server ran for better part of a year without any hiccups an only went down when it did because of power outage. my current one is a 64 bit asus mb an preforms just fine. jack
Mike Roy wrote:
Hello everyone: While I agree than anyone can experience problems with any hardware, regardless of the name on the box, I have had good luck with Asus MBs. My oldest box (now running for 7 years) is an AMD K6 350 Mhz machine and while there have been hardware issues, none of those were MB issues. My two newest machines are both AMD64 on Asus MBs running SuSE 9.3 / 64-bit mode. [In fact, one machine is dual-boot with windoze XP Home.] One has been running without a hiccup for more than 14 months. The other is new but, here again, no problems. As I've never tried to use Asus support, I can't comment on that. But, given my good experiences with Asus / SuSE linux, I would suggest that anyone looking for a new MB should ask around before putting their money down. Yes, I've seen the comments about poor performance but, as I said, those comments can apply to any product.
My ASUS Athlon MB has been working well with Linux, for over 3 years. I also, have not needed support.
James Knott wrote:
My ASUS Athlon MB has been working well with Linux, for over 3 years. I also, have not needed support.
The issue is not how well they work when they work. The issue is what happens if they don't. You cannot count on reasonable support from Asus, which is good reason to avoid buying a new one. -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
Mike Roy wrote:
While I agree than anyone can experience problems with any hardware, regardless of the name on the box, I have had good luck with Asus MBs.
Good for you. Most people have good luck with most products. The problem is what happens to Linux users with bad luck with Asus products.
As I've never tried to use Asus support, I can't comment on that. But, given my good experiences with Asus / SuSE linux, I would suggest that anyone looking for a new MB should ask around before putting their money down. Yes, I've seen the comments about poor performance but, as I said, those comments can apply to any product.
Asus is well known for two things: 1-Good products 2-Non-support for users of their products with non-M$ operating systems. It is only the latter that is the reason for the direction in this thread. They're fine when they work, but the problem is what happens if they don't. If you don't want to risk getting stuck with non-support in the event of product trouble, you exclude Asus when making product acquisition decisions. -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
On Monday 25 July 2005 07:49, Mike Roy wrote:
As I've never tried to use Asus support, I can't comment on that. But, given my good experiences with Asus / SuSE linux, I would suggest that anyone looking for a new MB should ask around before putting their money down. Yes, I've seen the comments about poor performance but, as I said, those comments can apply to any product.
Unless things have changed Asus doesn't really provide end user support. You're supposed to get support from who ever sold you the thing. Every Asus board I've seen for a LONG time is Linux certified. Nick
Jack Malone wrote:
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having. mine last server ran for better part of a year without any hiccups an only went down when it did because of power outage. my current one is a 64 bit asus mb an preforms just fine.
Please don't confuse issues. Asus products are fine performers, but all products have defective individuals among product runs. The problem is the support you can't get from Asus if you get a bad one and are not using or attempting to use the convicted monopolist felon's proprietary OS on it. -- "If you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them." Proverbs 13:24 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
On Monday 25 July 2005 07:38 am, Jack Malone wrote:
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Â Stay away from ASUS. Â Their support for Linux doesn't exist. Â In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Â Downright rude.
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having. mine last server ran for better part of a year without any hiccups an only went down when it did because of power outage. my current one is a 64 bit asus mb an preforms just fine. jack
I've had a long series of problems with ASUS boards about 4 years ago. Would put them in a box and they would smoke. Sent them back for replacement and the replacements would smoke. Finally told the vendor to take the next replacement and build a computer around it. Then test it. They did. And when I received it, it smoked out of the box. I've since switched to Intel boards and would never ever buy another ASUS board. Haven't had a single problem since.
On Monday 25 July 2005 07:38, Jack Malone wrote:
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having.
I too have used Asus exclusively for years and always received great performance with Linux. I have never had a reason to contact their tech support. I did write an email once saying that as a long-time Asus user who only uses Linux with my Asus boards I find their apparent anti-Linux stance disturbing and outdated. They never replied. Bryan ******************************************************** Powered by SuSE Linux 9.2 Professional KDE 3.3.0 KMail 1.7.1 This is a Microsoft-free computer Bryan S. Tyson bryantyson@earthlink.net ********************************************************
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 06:38 -0500, Jack Malone wrote:
I do not see why you all say to stay away from asus boards. so what that they do not seem linux friendly. I couldn't care less what they think of my choice of operating systems. I choose hardware that's based on components that I know to work in the software I want to run.
I have had way more better preformance from my asus motherboards with linux then with windows on them. Agreed, but that's true for just about every supported board out there.
I have uses asus mbs for years with none of the problems you seem to be having. As always, there are for every brand lots of units that work perfect. My housemate has an ASUS A8V Delux SE (or something such) Athlon64 board which have given him nothing but joy. Our company has a server with an ASUS P-III board in, and it's been working reliably for a number of years now. I have two Pentium classics at home with ASUS boards, also without any issues.
It's just that ASUS's quality control leaves something to be desired, and some of their models have issues that they aren't addressing. The A7V880, the board I bought, is known to have issues with AGPx8 and CPU detection, and they're simply not fixing it or responding to any customer queries. As it is I have to underclock both the memory and CPU to get the system to run stably, and considering how many posts I've found on the 'net of people having the same problem with the same board, and considering the fact all the hardware works perfectly fine in two other boards, I don't think that I just happened to have gotten a dud. -- Kind regards Hans du Plooy SagacIT (Pty) Ltd hansdp at sagacit dot com
Tim Hanson wrote:
I've got an athlon 1.1 system (obviously a few years old), and I think that the ASUS motherboard is on the way out.
I've use SuSE 9.3.
Is there anything in the way of motherboards that I should really avoid?
Is there any performance (or other) problem if I have one HD on the IDE bus and a new one on SATA? Would that arrangement confuse YaST?
If I was GOING to go with one drive on each interface (haven't tried it yet, haven't got the board yet... just asking), is there a preferred distribution of the filesystem? That is, between two such drives, where should /root, /var, /usr, /home and swap go? Or would it make no difference?
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Stay away from ASUS. Their support for Linux doesn't exist. In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Downright rude.
As far as the board is concerned, I haven't had my ONE and only ASUS board since my 32 bit days, but I recall never getting the board to see the correct processor speed, despite the supposed support for the processor. The most annoying part was that the computer froze up at times that looked to be completely random, requiring a hard reset. I was always doing a reiserfsck --rebuild-tree on the drives.
Computers can lock up for a lot of reasons, but my problem disappeared the day I trashed the ASUS board and installed a Gigabyte. Since then I've moved to 64 bits on two desktops, Gigabyte boards, and nary a problem.
I had problems getting my Asus board to run with Kingston memory, it would get so far in boot then lockup and at times it wouldn't boot. I googled and found a modified BIOS that allowed me to set some memory parameters, since then it's been fine. Amazingly Asus says the board supported the memory, yet their BIOS didn't. I've had 3 of these boards quit on me. I bought a cheap Asrock board for another box ( A friend reckons Asrock and Asus are the same company, just that Asrock is the cheap end), plugged in the Kingston memory and it was up and running with Mandriva LE2005. # dd if=/dev/mem bs=65535 skip=15 count=1 |strings |grep BIOS 65535 bytes (66 kB) copied, 0.001922 seconds, 34.1 MB/s ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe ACPI BIOS Rev 1013 Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG IBM COMPATIBLE 486 BIOS COPYRIGHT Phoenix Technologies, Ltd Phoenix-Award BIOS v6.00PG aXASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe ACPI BIOS Rev 1013mod_2T Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Keen licensed Private Pilot Retired IBM Mainframes and Sun Servers Tech Support Specialist Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks
Hey Sid and Group; I will disagree about ASUS because this motherboard is just like the one mentioned below. And SuSE, Fedora Core#, Knoppix and Slackware all have supported all Nivida parts right out of the box. This include both ethernet ports, sound and all other devices. I did upgrade the BIOS and that was to hopefully solve a problem that is a BIOS problem. It somtimes states it was not shutdown correctly and I need to enter SETUP and simple EXIT.
# dd if=/dev/mem bs=65535 skip=15 count=1 |strings |grep BIOS 65535 bytes (66 kB) copied, 0.001922 seconds, 34.1 MB/s ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe ACPI BIOS Rev 1013 Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG IBM COMPATIBLE 486 BIOS COPYRIGHT Phoenix Technologies, Ltd Phoenix-Award BIOS v6.00PG aXASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe ACPI BIOS Rev 1013mod_2T
Only difference is mine is 1012 and 65535 bytes (66 kB) copied, 0.00206 seconds, 31.8 MB/s With a AMD Athlon-xp +2800
Regards Sid.
By the way folks Mozilla has a new version - upgrade! It fixed the blow up problem. -- 73 de Donn Washburn Hpage: " http://www.hal-pc.org/~n5xwb " Ham Callsign N5XWB Email: " n5xwb@hal-pc.org " 307 Savoy St. HAMs: " n5xwb@arrl.net " Sugar Land, TX 77478 BMW MOA #: 4146 - Ambassador LL# 1.281.242.3256 " http://counter.li.org " #279316
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 22:01 -0700, Tim Hanson wrote:
I have to go along with the other person who replied to your message. Stay away from ASUS. Their support for Linux doesn't exist. In fact, when one tells a support person he is using Linux, from that moment on the rep is trying to get off the phone. Downright rude.
And my problem isn't even linux related - I have the same symptoms in windows too. I have e-mailed their support an number of times, detailing my problem (both in windows and linux terms), explaining what I've tried, and what I think the problem might be. All I asked is that they tell me if this is a known problem, is there a bios update on the way. Heard nothing back. This board is going back. I'm happy to "downgrade" to an earlier Gigabyte model, because I know it will *just work*
As far as the board is concerned, I haven't had my ONE and only ASUS board since my 32 bit days, but I recall never getting the board to see the correct processor speed, despite the supposed support for the processor. The most annoying part was that the computer froze up at times that looked to be completely random, requiring a hard reset. I was always doing a reiserfsck --rebuild-tree on the drives. Sounds like what I'm experiencing.
-- Kind regards Hans du Plooy SagacIT (Pty) Ltd hansdp at sagacit dot com
participants (15)
-
Bruce Marshall -
Bryan Tyson -
Dave Howorth -
Donn Washburn -
Felix Miata -
Hans du Plooy -
Jack Malone -
James Knott -
Mike Roy -
mlist＠safenet-inc.com -
Nick Zentena -
Richard -
Sid Boyce -
Stan Goodman -
Tim Hanson