
Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems - robin_reala
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/44694.html
======
Hydraulix989
Their spin that it is "our super advanced Intel RAID chipset" really plays in
their favor, given that their BIOS uses a single goto statement to
intentionally block access to the ability to set this chipset into the AHCI
compatible mode that the hardware so readily supports, as evidenced by the
REing work and the fact that other OSes detect the drive after the AHCI fix
using the custom-flashed BIOS.

So, why are they reluctant to just issue their band-aid patch to the BIOS --
after all, it's really the path of least resistance here?

Yes, there has been some deflection of blame here. The argument that every
single OS except Windows 10 is at fault for not supporting this CRAZY new
super advanced hardware doesn't make much sense.

"Linux (and all other operating systems) don't support X on Z because of Y"
doesn't really apply when "Z modified Y in a way that does not allow support
for X."

To state it more plainly, this "CRAZY new super advanced hardware" has a
trivial backwards compatible mode that works with everything just fine, but it
is blocked by Lenovo's BIOS.

~~~
windexh8er
Is this really true of all Lenovo systems? I recently bought a P50 (new
workstation class laptop) and I could switch the BIOS to AHCI from what I
recall. That being said the crap Lenovo pulled with other hardware made me
ditch the laptop (of which I tried to return and Lenovo would not take it
since I installed an alternative OS and I had to sell it outright for a loss).
Things such as disabling the ability for the integrated Intel GPU from driving
more than one display at a time was a deal breaker along with downright
horrible performance.

I'm going down a new, yet unfortunately similar, path with Dell on a 5510.
First unit I had would shut off if you picked it up. Dell decided to "upgrade"
my purchase because they didn't have any more 5510 with FHD displays in stock.
What I got back was a "better" machine with a 4k display. I've been arguing
with Dell support since...

~~~
dman
I would buy it in a heartbeat if they didnt insist on selling it with the
numpad. I find it upsetting that it is virtually impossible to find a 15 inch
laptop now that doesnt have the numpad (macbook pro and dell xps15 are the
notable exceptions). Not having the spacebar centered and having the numeric
keys off center is hard for me to adjust to.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Personally, I haven't had nearly of a hard time adjusting to off-centered
keys/touchpad as I've had trying to move to Apple-esque chiclet keys (or the
resultant cheap inferior copy-cats on all of the Windows 8 touch screen
ultrabooks).

To each their own, I guess.

------
raesene9
Also worth noting Lenovo's official statment on the matter
[http://www.techrepublic.com/article/lenovo-denies-
deliberate...](http://www.techrepublic.com/article/lenovo-denies-deliberately-
blocking-linux-on-windows-10-pcs/) confirming that they have not blocked the
installation of alternate operating systems.

It was a shame to see the initial posts this morning hit the top of the page
without any more evidence than a single customer support rep. who was unlikely
to realistically have inside knowledge of some kind of "secret conspiracy" to
block linux installs by Microsoft.

~~~
captainmuon
That's just nitpicking. They blocked the enabling of a setting which allows
Linux to see the hard disk. They went out of their way to make a firmware
change that has the effect that you cannot run Linux - unless you flash your
BIOS or you write a driver. In my book, they effectively blocked the
installation of Linux.

Now, there are two options. 1) to support this hardware correctly, you'd need
to make complex changes to the driver. In this case, I cannot see how it is
the Linux' developers' "fault" that this doesn't work. It would be great to
have a driver, but it depends on information that Lenovo doesn't give out. Or
2), it is trivial to make a driver, e.g. you just have to look for a certain
ID. In this case, I would also blame Lenovo or MS, for there would be no
reason to bock AHCI to "ensure a good customer experience" etc.

Whether this situation has come from malice or not, I don't care very much.
Anyway, I think it is up to Lenovo to provide a solution (a BIOS update, a
Linux driver, or information neccessary to write a driver).

Now, is it a conspiracy or not? I'd say the most likely option is
carelessness. Maybe this happenend: "Shall we set this to AHCI or RAID?
Currently it is set to RAID and works fine." \- "Do we need AHCI?" \- "Nah,
Windows 10 runs fine, maybe for some older OSes" \- "We don't care about
those, just leave it on RAID. And while you're at it, comment out the AHCI
option."

Did MS give any instructions to Lenovo to block Linux installs? Maybe not
specifically, but we have to remember this is a "Signature" edition laptop.
(There was the accusation that this only effects the signature edition and not
other editions, which would be particularly damning btw..) I wouldn't be
surprized if there was an agreement like. "The partner (Lenovo) shall install
any crapware on Signature edition laptops. They shall not not preinstall other
OSes. And they shall not offer support on installing other OSes." \-- Which
would be entirely reasonable for a special "Windows Signature" edition laptop.

~~~
mjg59
> They blocked the enabling of a setting which allows Linux to see the hard
> disk.

Or, alternatively, they removed a firmware setting that makes their hardware
work less well and didn't think about Linux at all.

~~~
seba_dos1
Removed the option from BIOS menu? Okay, stupid and annoying, but well,
there's always EFI shell where you can edit variables by yourself...

Writing a piece of code that resets that one particular variable on each boot?

Sorry, but that's just nasty. There is no reason to do that if the goal is
just to provide best experience on supported OS.

Although I agree that it's unlikely this was targetted specifically against
GNU/Linux and other OSes. The most important thing would be that Windows 7, 8
and older won't boot anymore.

~~~
Whitestrake
> There is no reason to do that if the goal is just to provide best experience
> on supported OS.

I don't believe it's accurate to say there's "no real reason", it seems like
enforcing this behaviour is very much aligned with the goal you've posited.

This is under the assumption that this was indeed done for the purpose of
ensuring Intel specific drivers are used for power management purposes.

~~~
seba_dos1
There is no real reason to write code that goes out of its way to prevent you
from switching into AHCI mode even if you know what you're doing (like in EFI
shell).

Hiding the option from BIOS menu is absolutely enough to "ensure Intel
specific drivers are used for power management purposes". It would be
annoying, but workaroundable. There is no real reason for anything more, aside
of being able to get months of complains about not releasing a one line fix
allowing your customers to use your hardware.

~~~
rlpb
> Hiding the option from BIOS menu is absolutely enough to "ensure Intel
> specific drivers are used for power management purposes".

It absolutely is not enough, because I can come up with a single contrary
case.

If this change was made in a BIOS update, simply hiding the option would leave
some users stuck in the "wrong" setting forever. So one might write some code
to flip it back at the same time.

This is the simplest way of fixing the problem. It doesn't need any assumption
of maliciousness or incompetence. It's just unfortunate for Linux users, since
they clearly didn't get any consideration when this fix was written, that's
all.

~~~
seba_dos1
The change wasn't made in BIOS update, only newer physical models had this
change applied and they shipped right away being blocked.

Aside of that, this couldn't even be a change made in BIOS update, because
every OS installed earlier, including preinstalled Windows, would stop booting
without being provided with Intel driver.

------
pdkl95
There has been a disturbing level of contempt for the people that were
_concerned_ about the future of Free Software. There has been a major shift
towards more locked down platforms for years ever since iOS was accepted by
the developer community. With Microsoft locking down Secure Boot on ARM and
requiring it for Windows 10, it is prudent to be extra _vigilant_ about
anything strange that happens in the boot process. The alternative is to
ignore _potential_ problems until they grow into much larger problems that are
harder to deal with.

Obviously vigilance implies some amount of false positives. It is easy to
dismiss a problem once better information is available. It's great that this
Lenovo situation is simply a misunderstanding about drivers, but that doesn't
invalidate the initial _concern_ about a suspicious situation.

~~~
youdontknowtho
Wow. Man, come on.

The disturbing level of contempt is almost the sole property of the "Linux ==
Freedom" crowd. I mean seriously, the level of outrage about systemd alone is
off the rails. Bring up Microsoft and I'm somehow complicit in oppressing
people because I use their software? (But somehow the rare earth minerals in
devices and the contributions to modern electronics of the defense budget
don't somehow make us all culpable of far more. I mean, yeah the GPS in my
phone was built for the military but how dare you not give me a compiler!)

I used to be such a hard core Linux fan when I was younger. Man I hope I
wasn't as breathlessly shrill as the people I'm seeing today. There is so much
wrong with the world that people complaining about this really make me think
that we are all so isolated in our little worlds...

~~~
pdkl95
> The disturbing level of contempt is almost the sole property of the "Linux
> == Freedom" crowd.

That's patently incorrect and you know it. FYI: You're showing that kind of
contempt right now. My point isn't even related strongly to Free Software; it
was an observation that a lot of people don't like early warning systems,
which is bad for _security_. Shooting the messenger when they bring a warning
of a _possible_ threat is a terrible idea if you want to continue to receive
warning messages. Deciding if that was the goal for some people is left as an
exercise to the reader.

> I mean seriously, the level of outrage about systemd alone is off the rails.

Off topic and irrelevant, though if you actually read the real, substantive
complaints against systemd they tend to focus on forced upgrades from
unnecessary tight integration between components and disruption of working
code. The contempt in these arguments is usually from the people that try to
shut down any discussion that isn't blindly accepting systemd.

> Bring up Microsoft and I'm somehow complicit in oppressing people because I
> use their software?

I never said anything of the sort. Pretending to be a victim is unbecoming.

> [stuff about rare earth minerals, the defense budget, GPS]

If there is a point to this word salad, I am not parsing it. It seems off
topic?

> I used to be such a hard core Linux fan when I was younger.

Some of us still believe it's a bad idea to sacrifice your principles for
convenience and a few shiny baubles.

> people complaining about this really make me think that we are all so
> isolated in our little worlds

The future will be shaped by those that control computation and the internet.
This means defending computation and communication that isn't controlled by
one entity is one of the most important tasks of this generation. In the
future, everything is a computer. Some of us think it's important to fight for
freedom _now_ , before that happens, because the problem is only going to get
harder.

If you've given up that fight, that's fine. Just please stand aside because
other people are still trying to fight for a free and open future.

~~~
youdontknowtho
Some of us believe its a bad idea to sacrifice your principles...

You don't know me friend. That's not the kind of thing that I would ever say
to someone lightly.

Your last line reads like some manifesto from the 90's. it's naïve in the
extreme. The future will be controlled with force. Just like the past. How do
you think the materials that make the computers are mined, extracted, and
turned into the parts that make your shiny toy? Force.

The idea that you are a freedom fighter is so laughable. Jesus Christ, that's
so pathetic that I'm having a hard time thinking that you aren't trolling.

~~~
pdkl95
> That's not the kind of thing that I would ever say to someone lightly

That's _your_ claim, not mine.

> Jesus Christ, that's so pathetic that I'm having a hard time thinking that
> you aren't trolling.

Ok, I'm done with you. You're either trolling or simply a naive apologist.
Either way, I have better uses for my time.

~~~
youdontknowtho
Riddle me this Morpheus...in your dystopian cypherpunk future, how are the
employees of Foxconn or the miners of rare earth minerals in Africa going to
compute their way out of their conditions?

Naïve apologist? I'm telling you that your efforts on "protecting freedom" are
a way for you to feel superior about yourself while still participating in the
same system as the rest of us. You put nothing on the line, and arguing with
people who disagree isn't a sacrifice. (It's a privilege.) Believing this woo-
woo is a trick that you play ON YOUR SELF to feel like you have some measure
of influence on things that you know...and you do know, deep down...that you
don't and this is all bullshit. VIM or EMACS don't make anyone actually more
free. It's so fucking insulting that you think by being a shrill know-it-all
on a message board that you are personally involved in the struggle for human
freedom...AND I'M NAIVE?

------
AdmiralAsshat
The moral of the story is that you shouldn't trust a low-level support
engineer as a source for official company policy.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Or the uncritical tech press or the rubes on reddit, etc. Its obvious to me
that we're living in a time where rumors, falsehoods, and purposeful
misdirection are easily monetized and that's what our tech press has
degenerated into. Critical voices just get downvoted away for being "shills"
or somesuch.

We live in a time where likes and upvotes control what we see and informed
criticism being censored away by downvotes and flagging. As someone who often
goes against the grain, its god damn obvious our communication infrastructure
has degenerated into something horrible where only echo chambers and
groupthink rule. Stuff like this will continue to rise to the top until
there's some kind of reform. I don't see reddit, HN, or Facebook changing how
they rank items up to encourage dissenting opinions, because ultimately
dissenting opinions aren't as profitable or 'community minded.'

~~~
FullMtlAlcoholc
As far as forums go, I find that HackerNews has one of the most civil and
thought provoking discussions on the internet. This is most likely due to
responsible moderation where differences of opinion are not only accepted, but
respected. In fact, this forum practically moderates itself as I've seen many
times a post gets downvoted into oblivion for making personal attacks or ad-
hominem arguments. Perhaps this has to do with our (HackerNews users)
disposition as engineers, researchers, and entrepreneurs. I may be blowing
smoke here, but my perceptions has been that to be successful in those
professions, one needs to accept failures/imperfect solutions and admit their
mistakes more than others. For example, when I graduated from uni and entered
my first developer gig, I completely wiped out a production database that
hadn't had a backup run in over 2 years. I almost cried because I thought I
was going to blow a great opportunity my first week on the job. After the wave
of emotion finally washed over me, I realized that other departments had the
data. It was just up to me to analyze the business processes, figure out where
we fit into the flow, and work backwards to restore all the data. Most of us
have been humbled by a superior dev at one point or another in our career and
if we look back at code we wrote two years ago we realize just how much there
is to learn. In addition, I've found that many brilliant engineers have
impostor syndrome and there are far fewer in STEM fields that succumb to the
Dunning-Kruger effect.

On the other hand, as Reddit has grown in popularity, the tyranny of the
majority has reared its intolerant head. It truly is a hive mind. All the
posts at the top are agreeing with each other (the dreaded circlejerk) or are
a series of puns. Arguments are considered fallacious if there is a spelling
or grammatical error, not ever considering that English may not be the posters
first language. And when Reddit gets a hard-on for justice, it is so certain
of its findings that it accuses innocent people of terrorism.
([http://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-
sunil-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-sunil-
tripathi-of-boston-bombing-2013-7)). I don't know if this is due to its surge
in popularity and/or that it became the site of choice for those who outgrew
4chan.

There was a TED talk
([https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_b...](https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en))
that warned of the dangers of tailoring services to match our personal tastes.
I hoped that the internet would expose people to ways of thinking that were
just not available in their own localized social milieu. Instead, online
filter bubbles/echo chambers promotes even more speculations, rumors, and lies
even though there has never been an era where it's been easy, if one were so
inclined to seek the truth. It's just sad that many of the social media sites
encourage this behavior.

~~~
xyzzy123
The sane perspective on the db drop experience that you described is that you
were simply the innocent victim of a major organizational failure.

Companies with a solid engineering culture will look at the process and fix it
without blaming an individual - regardless of if the data are recoverable or
not.

------
WhitneyLand
There was way too much rush to judgement here. Suspicion and skepticism are
great, let those fires burn. But let's not condemn or blame until the issue
has been aired out from all parties.

\- MS shouldn't be blamed based on what the CEO of Lenovo says, let alone what
a tech or BB rep says.

\- MS shouldn't be blamed for new crimes based on past behavior

Why care about MS or any other megacorp? Because this salem witch trial shit
is toxic and should not be condoned against anyone.

Rush to suspicion and demanding answers is great. There is no downside to
saving blame for after the facts are in.

------
rbanffy
Wasn't Lenovo the company that shipped unremovable malware with laptops?
Considering the almost impossible to disable Intel management stuff is also
there, I can only imagine the kind of parasite living on these machines.

Why would anyone buy their stuff?

~~~
Sanddancer
One of the parts of the MS Signature Series agreement is that there is no
crapware, that what you get is pretty much the same if you installed a direct
from microsoft copy of Windows. The signature series is probably the only line
I would get from lenovo, because it's guaranteed not to need hours of futzing
to get it working decently.

~~~
farcical_tinpot
So get a vanilla install disk from Microsoft's site, install and reuse the
license.

------
hermitdev
For what it's worth, I've had issues with Intel RST under Windows as well in
mixed-mode configs. My boot device is an SSD configured for AHCI and I've a 3
drive RAID array. On a soft reset of my PC, the BIOS won't see the SSD. The
completely nonobvious solution? Make the SSD hot swappable. Not a Lenovo PC,
either. Been going on for years. Had to do a hard reset every time I had to
restart for years before I found a solution to this.

~~~
christogreeff
Also have this on an older Lenovo. I use it as a small server now.

------
facorreia
> Rather than be angry at Lenovo, let's put pressure on Intel to provide
> support for their hardware.

~~~
dandelion_lover
Like a petition?

[https://puri.sm/posts/petition-for-intel-to-release-an-me-
le...](https://puri.sm/posts/petition-for-intel-to-release-an-me-less-cpu-
design/)

------
NikolaeVarius
Standard culture of outrage before actually taking more than 5 seconds to
think about something and consider other possibilities.

------
rburhum
What is crazy to me is that Lenovo is usually the brand that people recommend
for Linux laptops. They are shooting themselves in the foot here. They may
think that the number of people on Linux is too small, but I bet it is bigger
than they think. It is just that there is no easy way to accurately census the
amount of Linux users on their HW.

~~~
captainmuon
I used to recommend Lenovo (and before that, IBM) unconditionally for both
Windows and Linux use. We called them the "Volvo of computers" because of
their longevity, their performance, and their repairability.

Now I'm writing this on a Yoga Pro 2, which is nice in principle, but it's
slowly starting to get wobbly, screws are falling out, the color is peeling
off the keys, and I can't use Linux because the color yellow is replaced with
fricking MUSTARD if you don't load a specific Windows only driver.

I actually poked a bit around in the drivers, and Lenovo fixes the problem by
sending a few bytes to the Embedded Controller (a microcontroller on the
motherboard). Lenovo doesn't give out the neccessary information, but I could
reverse engineer it by kernel-debugging Windows. But the only way to do that
on this Laptop would be via a special crossover USB3 debugger cable, which is
out of sale. Before I soldered my own, I just gave up, and am now using
Windows...

My next PC is going to be an Asus or a Dell (who would have thought a few
years ago...).

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I have heard nothing but rave reviews for the XPS laptops which come
officially supported with Ubuntu out of the box.

------
guelo
> Why not offer the option to disable it? A user who does would end up with a
> machine that doesn't boot

The modder that flashed the custom BIOS was able to boot linux on his first
try.

~~~
mjg59
But which wouldn't have run the pre-installed OS any more

~~~
farcical_tinpot
It would run Windows though ;-).

------
guelo
Without any comment from Lenovo or Microsoft this guy is speculating the same
as everybody else.

~~~
jsmthrowaway
"This guy" is relatively known for hacking on Linux laptop drivers and a long
relationship with Intel hardware and power management in particular, so I'll
stop short of appealing to authority and just say I value his speculation even
if it is that. (Which I don't think it is.)

~~~
guelo
This guy is so knowledgable that he says

> Why not offer the option to disable it? A user who does would end up with a
> machine that doesn't boot

But the modder that flashed the custom BIOS was able to boot linux on the
first attempt.

~~~
teraflop
That comment was clearly referring to the common case of ordinary Windows
users, who could easily render their existing systems unbootable by changing
the driver mode after Windows was already installed.

~~~
michaelmrose
Random joe user should probably not be messing around with his bios or should
at least be smart enough to know what he changed or at worst reset his bios to
default.

If not use the tech support you pay for.

------
seba_dos1
Pushing Intel to provide the drivers or at least documentation would be the
best solution - the BIOS lock would become irrelevant.

However, I don't agree with conclusion that Lenovo isn't to blame. They went
out of their way to ensure that even power users playing with EFI shell won't
be able to switch to AHCI mode.

I don't care about Microsoft here. Lenovo showed its bad side and I probably
won't be buying their devices anymore - which is a pity, as I'm writing this
on my Yoga 2 Pro, with my company's Yoga 900 (fortunately older, unblocked
revision) nearby and I liked those devices.

------
rukuu001
I'm surprised at the incredulity expressed here, given MS's history of dealing
with OEMs. See
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_of_Microsoft_Window...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_of_Microsoft_Windows)

------
StreamBright
Somebody should notify the guys who went really deep condemning Microsoft of
cutting shady deals.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12545878](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12545878)

------
huhtenberg
Yeah, sure, Microsoft is now all white and fluffy. Best friends forever.

How about we pay some attention to the second part of:

    
    
        Lenovo's firmware defaults to "RAID" mode and 
        ** doesn't allow you to change that **
    

Power savings or not, but locking down storage controller to a mode that just
happens to be supported by exactly one OS has NO obvious rational explanation.
Either Lenovo does that or Windows does. This has nothing to do with Intel.

~~~
13of40
Why doesn't Linux support it? Is "RAID" mode based on some spec that was only
provided to Microsoft and kept secret from everyone else?

~~~
mjg59
Windows only supports it if you use the Intel storage driver - even Microsoft
don't ship a driver that supports it.

~~~
farcical_tinpot
> even Microsoft don't ship a driver that supports it.

.....and why do you suppose that is? Fake RAID drivers and hardware are shit
that's why. It's an option that is hardly used, if ever, and I never thought
I'd see the day when a system had it as its default.

------
youdontknowtho
Its amazing that Linux can so thoroughly have won in the device world and yet
MS is still every fan boys favorite boogeyman. This is such a non event.

------
fenomas
Meta: It seems really odd that this has been relegated to page two,
considering that "MS and Lenovo secret agreement" headlines sat on the top
page most of yesterday, largely unsubstantiated.

I could be crazy, but HN's algos seem much too aggressive about hiding
articles due to flags. It often feels like the most interesting articles are
to be found 2-3 spots into the second page.

------
gnode
It sounds to me like it would be quite trivial to run Linux on this laptop,
just by treating the "RAID" mode PCI ID like AHCI and employing the regular
driver. I believe Linux supports forcing the use of a driver for a PCI device.

------
sqldba
Click bait. It's one interpretation masquerading as the truth while decrying
the other interpretation.

Until Lenovo issue a proper, detailed, official statement we need to keep the
pressure on.

Self aggrandising posts like this don't help.

------
savagej
Why would anyone ever buy Lenovo? It's malware, spyware, and harmful to users.
I buy HP or Samsung laptops to run Fedora. Just accept that Lenovo is not IBM
hardware, and that it is lost to us.

~~~
sndean
> I buy HP or Samsung laptops to run Fedora.

Recently, which models? (I was thinking of getting a new Thinkpad... but maybe
I should look at HP or Samsung)

~~~
savagej
Currently, I run on a pair of Samsung Ativ Book 9 Plus with 8G mem. It looks
like they've moved on from the Ativ line. The 3200 x 1800 display works well
with awesome+gnome. It also drives an external 1440p display simultaneously
(at 30fps).

------
aruggirello
I repost here the 39th comment, which gives a possible explanation of the
issue:

    
    
      Storm in a teacup
      Date: 2016-09-22 09:17 am (UTC)
      From: [personal profile] cowbutt
    

"Intel have not submitted any patches to Linux to support the "RAID" mode."

Such patches are unnecessary, as mdadm already supports Intel Rapid Storage
Technology (RST - [http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/architecture-and-
te...](http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/architecture-and-
technology/rapid-storage-technology.html) ) for simple RAID (e.g. levels 0, 1,
10) arrays, allowing them to be assembled as md or dmraid devices under Linux.

However, it would appear that the version of mdadm in shipping versions of
Ubuntu (at least - maybe other distros too) doesn't support the Smart Response
Technology (SRT - [http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-
tech...](http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-
technology/smart-response-technology.html) ) feature that's a part of RST and
is used by Lenovo to build a hybrid one-stripe RAID0 device from the HDD with
a cache on the SSD (I'm sure Lenovo have a good reason for not using a SSHD).
Dan Williams of Intel submitted a series of patches to mdadm to support SRT
back in April 2014: [https://marc.info/?l=linux-
raid&r=1&b=201404&w=2](https://marc.info/?l=linux-raid&r=1&b=201404&w=2) .
Perhaps now there's shipping hardware that requires them, there'll be the
impetus for distro vendors to get them integrated into mdadm, and their auto-
detection in their installers to use the functionality provided sanely.

\---

I should add that mdadm is not present in Ubuntu live images by default - one
has to pull it in by issuing "sudo apt[-get] install mdadm". BTW, I don't know
if mdadm would detect the RAID controller/disk immediately upon installation,
or it would require a reboot. In the latter case you may wish to use a USB key
with enough spare room to save the system status and reboot. I'd use
UNetBootin to prepare such a USB key.

The main issue here is, a user who doesn't even see a disk, probably wouldn't
know to go as far as installing mdadm. IMHO, given the broadening diffusion of
NVMe and RAID devices, Debian, Canonical, REDHAT, Fedora etc. might wish to
make mdadm part of their live images by default (and eventually strip it from
the installed system if it's unnecessary).

Edit: clarified

------
youdontknowtho
Of course they aren't but how can I feel morally superior with that fact?

------
bsder
The setting is almost certainly because of Microsoft. It is almost certainly
part of their license agreement to block installation of anything older than
Windows 10.

The fact that Linux got caught in it is just collateral damage.

------
hetfeld
So why i can't install Ubuntu on my Lenovo laptop?

~~~
0x006A
Have you opened up a bug with the new new PCI ID so they can be added to the
kernel?

------
lspears
isn't _

------
farcical_tinpot
Seeing a manufacturer use fake RAID, by default, on a single disk system, then
unfathomably hardwiring this into the firmware so it can't be changed, then
have a Lenovo rep actually admit the reason with the forum thread censored and
then see this kind of defence is downright hilarious.

Garrett should be condemning Lenovo for not making a perfectly configurable
chipset feature....configurable and defending Linux and freedom of choice on
hardware that has always traditionally been that way. But, no, he doesn't. He
defends stupidity as he always does.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Yes, I wholly disagree with Garrett's attempts to redirect (or should I say,
deflect) blame to Intel instead of Lenovo in this case. I've succinctly
outlined my argument in most of my other posts in this thread.

~~~
farcical_tinpot
Garrett has a history of stonewalling and misdirection on these matters. It
was the same with UEFI, Secure Boot and when he and Red Hat tried to casually
shoehorn support for PE binaries into the Linux kernel, hoping no one would
notice.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Why is PE binary support a bad thing? Wine gets us mostly there already. Very
interesting...

------
colemickens
Oh it's funny to see the comments in this thread talking down about people on
reddit when the misplaced outrage was just as loud here. In fact, I got buried
here for pointing out that the claim was BS and unrelated to SecureBoot where
at least Reddit took it thoughtfully and realized it was probably just a
bullshit statement from a nobody rep that got blown out of proportion.

Sorry to be that guy, but the elitism is pretty misplaced anymore...

~~~
farcical_tinpot
It's not Secure Boot - yet. But this is what you're going to find -
obsolescence depending on built-in hardware driver support. Not only are you
not getting Linux installed on here but Windows 7, or any future version of
Windows that does not have this driver built for it. You'll then have to throw
the hardware away.

No, it wasn't a bullshit statement from a rep - it was a very clear statement
from a rep, in black and white, that has not been retracted or clarified by
Lenovo in any way. It's always funny when people choose not to believe
verbatim statements and explanations put right in front of them.

~~~
colemickens
>No, it wasn't a bullshit statement from a rep - it was a very clear statement
from a rep, in black and white, that has not been retracted or clarified by
Lenovo in any way. It's always funny when people choose not to believe
verbatim statements and explanations put right in front of them.

Literally nothing about this sentence is correct.

Support reps know _nothing_ , and nameless support reps that throw out
statements like that with no explanation or link to company policies are even
_less_ likely to have a clue what they're talking about. I can't believe I'm
having to explain this on Hacker News. It's like people on /r/xboxone that
post the dumbest crap from support reps and claim it as Microsoft canon.

And yes, Lenovo has clarified that... as everyone who is paying any attention
already knows... no, it's not some bullshit conspiracy, and it is in fact the
result of switching to faster storage technology that _simply isn 't supported
by Linux today_.

[http://news.softpedia.com/news/lenovo-says-linux-is-not-
bloc...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/lenovo-says-linux-is-not-blocked-on-
its-windows-10-pcs-508509.shtml) (this includes the statement from Lenovo)

Plus, you know, you could read Matthew's blog post (the HN link that we're
commenting on...) that explains this as well.

~~~
farcical_tinpot
> Literally nothing about this sentence is correct.

Sorry, but literally everything about it is correct. What a great adjective.

> Support reps know nothing, and nameless support reps that throw out
> statements like that with no explanation

Errrrr, no. Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear
and precise statements like that unless they're true. This doesn't come out of
nowhere.

>I can't believe I'm having to explain this on Hacker News.

Your working life must be pretty interesting if that's you're attitude to
every crystal clear, unequivocal and precise statement you read ;-).

> no, it's not some bullshit conspiracy

No, it's not. An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to
misinterpretation.

> Plus, you know, you could read Matthew's blog post (the HN link that we're
> commenting on...) that explains this as well.

I have, and true to form, it doesn't. As usual we get someone who wants to
tell us that black is white and that a manufacturer miraculously using buggy
fake RAID drivers is now the done thing. For performance. Or power management.
Or whatever the reason happens to be.

~~~
colemickens
> _" Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and
> precise statements like that unless they're true."_

What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single
sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random
fucking forum is not a "precise statement".

> _" An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to
> misinterpretation."_

So let me get this straight... a nameless employee writing a single sentence
with no explanation or justification... you'll accept as absolute truth. But
the company issues AN ACTUAL PRESS RELEASE describing the technical
reasoning... and you're just willing to completely dismiss and ignore that?

> _" As usual we get someone who wants to tell us that black is white and that
> a manufacturer miraculously using buggy fake RAID drivers is now the done
> thing. For performance. Or power management. Or whatever the reason happens
> to be."_

What the "buggy, fake drivers" are you talking about? Just making shit up now?
Are you REALLY contending that the NVMe devices don't work better under RAID
mode, despite the fact that it's a widely researched and accepted fact with
whitepaper to boot?

Please stop, this is embarrassing. Go troll somewhere else. I won't be
participating in this conversation further, it's clearly a complete waste of
time.

~~~
dang
You've broken the site guidelines badly in this thread. We ban accounts that
do that. Please (re-)read the following, and either post civilly and
substantively, or not at all.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html)

------
johansch
It's so sad to see this. (This entire thread, and its comments are down-
voted.)

Let me try again. New Microsoft is awesome! Old Microsoft never happened.
Double plus good!

~~~
dang
Please don't post unsubstantive comments. Also, please don't post comments
complaining about downvotes; that's explicitly against the site guidelines
([https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)).

People often feel that their pro/anti MS views are being suppressed by the
anti/pro members of the community, but really it's just that the community is
divided. Accusations of abuse without evidence aren't allowed here, and
someone merely holding an opposing view isn't evidence.

We detached this comment from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12551876](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12551876)
and marked it off-topic.

------
throw2016
Some commentators seem to be more keen on labelling others conspiracy
theorists than consider the possibility that MS and Lenovo could be up to no
good.

The only way to convince these folks it seems would be a smoking gun or even
better a signed confession from satya and lenovo admitting to shady behavior.

Since that's not how shady behavior works in the real world presumably many
here are supporters of the camel in the sand approach with a zero tolerance
policy towards non conforming camels.

------
intopieces
FTA:

"For a consumer device, why would you want to? The number of people buying
these laptops to run anything other than Windows is miniscule."

This is a really poor argument, and slightly disingenuous. Sometimes, people
change their use for a device. Maybe they want to explore linux in the future,
maybe they want to sell the laptop to someone who wants to use it for linux...

That the blame is being possibly misdirected ought not to detract from the
fact that blame is necessary. If users don't vocally oppose measures like
this, the industry will assume that this kind of restriction is reasonable.
It's not. Yes, power management is important, but anyone who puts linux on
their laptop will quickly learn there are limitations to the features of that
device that were originally tailored to the OS the device shipped with. That's
a good lesson, and a good opportunity for a community to develop around the
device (if it's good enough) to mitigate those deficiencies and adapt them for
the particular linux distro.

In short, Lenovo is at fault for not being up front about this limitation, for
not explaining it, and for not devoting at least some resources to mitigating
for their potential linux-inclined users.

Then again, perhaps a linux-inclined user might also be one of the many that
don't trust Lenovo after their self-signed certificate scandal.

~~~
richardwhiuk
I think you are missing that the 'you' in that argument is Lenovo, not the
consumer.

Lenovo doesn't have an interest in how people's use of a device changes,
unless it changes they up front purchasing decision. They do have a very
strong interest in making sure that reviews and writeups don't say that the
battery life is rubbish because the laptop has been switched to AHCI mode. As
such, they have a strong incentive to prevent this happening.

Given that the operating which 99.9% of their install base will use supports
this, it's almost certainly a net win. They don't support running Linux on it
- that's at the customers risk. Why would they devote any resource to this?

~~~
farcical_tinpot
Correction, they only support on version of that OS - which is the point here.

To claim you're going to get better battery life with a fake RAID driver is
also one of the funniest things I've ever heard.

