Why are they doing this?
Because supporting 15 year old cheap consumer products is a waste of energy.
Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
41–50 of 163 posts
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#42I can't believe this. All these years I've been recommending Intel products because of their long term support. I know these boards are legacy, but does it really cost them that much to host the files for occasional downloaders? One would have thought they'd tread carefully after so many recent PR hits, but I guess not.
Yeah, I've been buying Intel for years but just today I installed some Intel software and it asked me to join their "Computing Improvement Program." Part of the program? Send the "categories of websites you visit" back to Intel, among other things. [1]. They're really trying my patience with the semi-constant stream of Speltdown-like issues.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#43"Intel to remove all BIOS updates for their Desktop boards " seems to be a more correct headline?
For their 10+ year old End Of Life boards.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#44I will admit that I do not understand that move; especially so if it is a cost cutting measure. Then again I remember arguing with a VP that storage is cheap and email size limits are draconian enough already. She was not pleased. Maybe it is really just about the budget.
Storage is indeed cheap. Buying it through a service provider not so much.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#45I can't believe this. All these years I've been recommending Intel products because of their long term support. I know these boards are legacy, but does it really cost them that much to host the files for occasional downloaders? One would have thought they'd tread carefully after so many recent PR hits, but I guess not.
Is 15 years not long term enough support for you?
In some industries, that's not even medium-term.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#46I can't believe this. All these years I've been recommending Intel products because of their long term support. I know these boards are legacy, but does it really cost them that much to host the files for occasional downloaders? One would have thought they'd tread carefully after so many recent PR hits, but I guess not.
Yeah, I've been buying Intel for years but just today I installed some Intel software and it asked me to join their "Computing Improvement Program." Part of the program? Send the "categories of websites you visit" back to Intel, among other things. [1]. They're really trying my patience with the semi-constant stream of Speltdown-like issues. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21563871
They're worried that you visit HackerNews, AMD.com and Phoronix. Intel should focus on getting their house in order and produce better hardware rather than to spy on their users.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#47Now if I was an AMD exec I'd suddenly announce that "all versions of all our drivers for all hardware on all platforms will be available forever".
Great, my Brazos APU would welcome getting their OpenGL and video hardware decoding capabilities back to the level of fglrx.
I never understood why AMD did not push that angle more, it is an act that would be very hard to follow by Intel unless they bought NVidia or something extreme like that.
It also would allow AMD to potentially gain an edge over NVidia in the GPGPU space. Missed opportunity imo, it still seems like an excellent idea.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#48I can't believe this. All these years I've been recommending Intel products because of their long term support. I know these boards are legacy, but does it really cost them that much to host the files for occasional downloaders? One would have thought they'd tread carefully after so many recent PR hits, but I guess not.
Is 15 years not long term enough support for you?
The article mentions "even later sandy bridge board" being EOL'd, that's like... 2012 ish?
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#49I will admit that I do not understand that move; especially so if it is a cost cutting measure. Then again I remember arguing with a VP that storage is cheap and email size limits are draconian enough already. She was not pleased. Maybe it is really just about the budget.
Storage is indeed cheap. Buying it through a service provider not so much.
Talking to my IT department, it seems the argument is that storage is only cheap in isolation. In the real world it aggregates across products, users and hierarchies.
Example email:
- I want bigger mailbox to handle bigger mails incoming and outgoing. Result: bigger mailbox.
- Then everyone else in the company gets bigger mailboxes. Result: bigger mailbox x1000.
- Also: bigger mail-server backups.
- Also: bigger desktop/user-profile backups, because Outlook duplicates all this info locally.
- Also: bigger storage needs for anything also interacting/duplication selected mail (like CRM, import services, whatever).
- Also: bigger backups needed for all those systems.
- Etc etc.
And IMO it's a perfectly valid claim.
Maybe storage "only" costs $0.1 per 100GB in isolation (or whatever), but for a full company with all systems involved, in aggregate it quickly it may exceed 1000x that.
Re: Intel desktop board BIOS update end-of-life
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
See https://www.archiveteam.org - they've done such things before, and they do post their work to the IA. And yes, this is something where they should be involved.
This is old news. We already grabbed it all, when it was first announced.
Where did they end up? Or are they not available yet?