Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 494 posts

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#471

Post by khedoros »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #469
khedoros wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The laptop supports a Linux-compatible option, and effort was expended specifically to disable that option. If some hardware isn't supported by Linux drivers, that's understandable. If software is added to restrict the modes that the hardware is allowed to operate in, and the restriction wasn't disclosed at the time of sale, I'll return the hardware, because the product doesn't match what I thought I was buying. If I…

> The laptop supports a Linux-compatible option Where? I'm looking at http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/laptops/yoga/900-series/yoga-90... and the specs page lists only Windows 10 Home and Pro in the operating systems section. > and effort was expended specifically to disable that option Lenovo has issued a formal statement denying it. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/lenovo-denies-deliberate...

> Where?

I was imprecise. The chipset supports a Linux-compatible option, were it not explicitly disabled in the firmware.

> Lenovo has issued a formal statement denying it.

They deny purposefully disabling Linux, and I don't have any evidence against that denial. They don't deny disabling AHCI, because they clearly did. In the disassembly of the code: https://lnv.i.lithium.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/76843...

Intel's RAID is implemented in their driver. Switching the option from AHCI to RAID switches the disk controller's ID so it doesn't bind to the OS's standard driver (whichever OS that is), and binds to Intel's instead (assuming it's present). Intel provides its driver (and only for Windows), Lenovo locks the option so that hapless users mucking about in the UEFI settings don't make their machines unbootable.

Lenovo can deny "deliberately blocking Linux", but they can't deny "practically blocking Linux".

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#472

Post by sliken »

khedoros wrote: post #432
leereeves wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to a comment there, it's not hardware, it's a BIOS setting. > I've been able to successfully get past Lenovo's lock through direct bios flashing. I'm looking into better solutions, hopefully I can find a way to do this without an external programmer. I was going to keep people updated from the Lenovo forum, but as this is no longer an option I will keep people updated from here. https://www.reddit.com/r/lin…

Yes, but it's a setting that causes the hardware to behave differently, and which would need driver support to function.

Right, but it also breaks official microsoft windows media. How much sense does that make?

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#473

Post by sliken »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #354
xg15 wrote: post #47

The other HN thread suggests this not actually a dark conspiracy by Microsoft but simply a case of missing linux drivers for the storage devices. This sounds believable to me. But I'll put my tinfoil hat on just for fun and pretend it was an intentional move. Could this make sense as a new twist on the old strategy, making it "Embrace, Extinguish, Extend"? With the WSL, they made it theoretically possible to run Linu…

>locking existing users out of Linux A serious question: What gives Linux users the right to expect that Linux will run on any given PC / laptop? Think about it. These PCs/laptops are designed to adhere to Microsoft's Windows PC hardware standards doc (which was never, ever an open standard) and, with few exceptions, only tested against various versions of Windows. Linux users are failing to receive a feature that th…

If I buy a microsoft windows laptop, I don't expect it to be locked so I can't install.... microsoft windows.

How else am I going to avoid the crapware/malware that lenovo is famous for?

Happens that the same BIOS tweak that prevents windows from working also prevents linux from working.

I don't expect lenovo to spend time/effort accommodating linux, but I also expect them to not artificially limit when I can do with a laptop I purchase.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#474

Post by sliken »

zx2c4 wrote: post #344

The community's reaction seems absurd to me. For whatever reason, the device only exposes some sort of RAID controller to the OS, and for whatever reason, there's no working option for exposing a more standard AHCI interface instead. The problem is that Linux doesn't (yet) have a driver for that RAID controller. Okay, great. Linux doesn't yet support particular piece of hardware. News at 11. Just like usual, if you w…

The problem is the compatible hardware is in there, the driver exists, it's just disabled in bios. If you hack the bios to flip the bios setting linux installs fine.

I don't think many would care, but the lenovo 710s has some pretty unique hardware. Nice intel CPU, nice intel GPU (iris 540), and a nice matte screen.

The Dell XPS 13 is similar, but to get the nice cpu/gpu you have to get a shiny/reflective screen that cuts your battery life almost in half (22 to 12 hours).

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#475

Post by sliken »

zx2c4 wrote: post #373
arca_vorago wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems absurd because you complete glossed over the most important part: " and for whatever reason, there's no working option for exposing a more standard AHCI interface instead." This isn't linux's fault for not supporting some non-standard raid driver, this is lenovos fault for not allowing users to change the bios settings to non-raid. Also, just because you are been using a Thinkpad sucessfully (which is largel…

> This isn't linux's fault for not supporting some non-standard raid driver, > this is lenovos fault for not allowing users to change the bios settings to non-raid. Lenovo made a computer that exposes hardware to the OS for which Linux does not yet have drivers. They could have exposed a more standard interface, but they didn't. I guess this is their fault, okay. But again, what's the big deal? What's next? You'll be…

Er, the compatible hardware is in the lenovo laptop, it's just disabled in BIOS.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#476

Post by sliken »

ensiferum wrote: post #120

I have been a long time ThinkPad user and recently purchased my latest ThinkPad T460p. Sadly it has some issues, the latest NVidia drivers don't work on the device but I'm forced to use the 1 year old driver that Lenovo provides in their packages. Figuring this out took my several days of trouble shooting (only dx9 was affected). Also the system fan is constantly running. I went to their support site and the online s…

The reason I was looking at the Lenovo 710s instead of the thinkpads was specifically because the 710s included a nice intel GPU (iris 540) and not a nvidia chip which hugely complicates power management, drivers, etc.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#477

Post by sliken »

alphadevx wrote: post #122

Get a Developer Edition XPS 13 from Dell instead, comes with Linux pre-installed. I have one and they are awesome, if manufacturers support Linux they get my $.

Dell has 2 XPS 13 options.

1) Great battery life, lousy cpu, nice matte screen, not much ram available.

2) Half the battery life, nice cpu (i7-6560), nice GPU (iris 540), and a 3200x1800 reflective screen that reduces your battery life from 22 hours to 12.

The Yoga 710s (sadly with the broken BIOS that prevents linux from installing) is much like the theoretical XPS 13 without the power sucking 3200x1800 display.

So I was just looking for a decent laptop, decent build quality, and wanted to avoid the pain/suffering relating to trying to get nvidia working with a laptop that sleeps, switches to the internal intel on battery, and has some stupid system for moving pixels from the nvidia chip through the intel chip to get to the frame buffer.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#478

Post by sliken »

0x0 wrote: post #20

So they did lie when they said "Microsoft Loves Linux". https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsserver/2015/05/06... Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Heh, well there's a small footnote. Microsoft loves Linux users.

So sure, they want ubuntu to run on windows, so they can get into the container market.

So sure they will sell office in the cloud to target the legions of chromebook users. Not that they would ship office for linux.

Nor would they consider supporting linux on their surface books.

The locking linux out of various platforms with EFI seems to be progressing nicely.

But sure, microsoft will meet you half way to steal your customers and try to find out some other way to lock them into a microsoft platform.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#479

Post by brokenmachine »

chirau wrote: post #436
soperj wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay out the ass for 4 year old hardware?

So you would rather pay out the ass for the latest hardware... even if it does not allow you to install Linux?

How about older hardware without the Apple tax, that does run Linux?

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#480

Post by brokenmachine »

makaronin wrote: post #358
xg15 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True - but as the other HN thread (that I can't seem to find anymore > will write one. On the other hand, Microsoft could have easily gotten a much more "robust" lockdown - by simply demanding mandatory, unchangeable Secure Boot like on the ARM tablets. But they didn't do that.

One guy has done a nice work decompiling the BIOS and found that skipping over the hidden BIOS pages is hard-coded into the firmware. See this https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/Linux-Discussion/Installing-Ubu...

Can they not modify that BIOS code to not skip those pages?

I'm sure anyone with enough knowledge to decompile a BIOS would have obviously thought of that idea though. I'm guessing the BIOS images are signed or something?

Regardless, this smells evil to me...

Post reply on HN