D865GBF Updated to BIOS P12

Might be a bad BIOS. Intel has pulled Bios version P12 off of their
Website and substituted Bios P11 for it. If anybody knows why, please
post, as Intel hasn't indicated why they have pulled P12 or
acknowledged that they have pulled it (but it isn't there anymore).

Walter



"Eric Andersen" <NoOne@Home> wrote in message news:<A7adnZsLQfwgxG-iRVn-hw@comcast.com>...
> I reinstalled W2K, leaving the file system intact. I got through about 60
> updates (thank goodnes for cable internet) and started to re-load the
> software. I got to my scanner software and that seems to be where the error
> begins......
>
> *** STOP: 0x0000001E (0xC0000005, 0x804A2588, 0x00000001, 0x0000001D)
> KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED
> *** ADDRESS 804A2588 BASE AT 80400000, DATESTAMP 3ee650b3 - ntoskrnl.exe
>
> I uninstalled the scanner software and the problem has gone away...... It
> is a pass-through parallel port scanner made by Plustek. I think there is a
> USB scanner in my future.
>
> WOW, I found it.....
>
>
> "MyndPhlyp" <nobody@home.now> wrote in message
> news:5hnIb.15815$IM3.6637@newsread3.news.atl.earth link.net...
> >
> > "Eric Andersen" <NoOne@Home> wrote in message
> > news:7uSdnYpWJZFe62yi4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> > > And now the computer crashes from KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED error.
> Boots
> > > to safe mode just fine.
> > >
> > > I took the HD and put it in another system and it boots OK (to test the
> OS
> > > installation).
> > >
> > > I used DOCMEMORY from www.simmtester.com to test the RAM (2x256 DDR400).
> > > Both memory modules individually fail at the same point. This is weird.
> > >
> > > Any ideas? Is this a bad BIOS? Is the RAM bad? What should I do?
> >
> > Without more on the stop error, it's rather hard to diagnose. Try M$'s
> > knowledge base:
> >
> >
> http://support.microsoft.com/search/...=ALL&Tit les=
> >
> false&numDays=&maxResults=25&Queryl=KMODE_EXCEPTIO N_NOT_HANDLED&Query=KMODE_
> > EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED&QuerySource=gsfxSearch_Query &srchExtraQry=
> >
> >

"Walter" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:77a704ce.0401210759.58f4bd0a@posting.google.c om...
> Might be a bad BIOS. Intel has pulled Bios version P12 off of their
> Website and substituted Bios P11 for it. If anybody knows why, please
> post, as Intel hasn't indicated why they have pulled P12 or
> acknowledged that they have pulled it (but it isn't there anymore).
>
> Walter


It's worked fine for me, but it's interesting that it's gone now. Moot
anyway, since P13 is actually overdue now, so should be out imminently.

Not moot yet anyway because as you stated p13 isn't out yet. And it's
more than interesting that it is pulled, because this is indicative of
a company that really doesn't care about its customers when it has
problems with a file and pulls that file without telling its customer
why. I am sure that there are people out there using P12 not knowing
that their data could be at risk. Developers, resellers, system
administrators, etc, make decisions on what hard drives to buy and
other hardware decisions based on specs published for this
motherboard. What if the p12 bios doesn't support hard drives say over
200GB and your company buys thousands of them in the expectation they
would work. I think you would be more than a little upset in that
case. Coming out with a new Bios now would not repair that damage.

Walter

"Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:<E3APb.100622$nt4.298475@attbi_s51>...
> "Walter" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:77a704ce.0401210759.58f4bd0a@posting.google.c om...
> > Might be a bad BIOS. Intel has pulled Bios version P12 off of their
> > Website and substituted Bios P11 for it. If anybody knows why, please
> > post, as Intel hasn't indicated why they have pulled P12 or
> > acknowledged that they have pulled it (but it isn't there anymore).
> >
> > Walter
>
>
> It's worked fine for me, but it's interesting that it's gone now. Moot
> anyway, since P13 is actually overdue now, so should be out imminently.

"Walter" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:77a704ce.0401220740.6230c817@posting.google.c om...
> Not moot yet anyway because as you stated p13 isn't out yet. And it's
> more than interesting that it is pulled, because this is indicative of
> a company that really doesn't care about its customers when it has
> problems with a file and pulls that file without telling its customer
> why. I am sure that there are people out there using P12 not knowing
> that their data could be at risk. Developers, resellers, system
> administrators, etc, make decisions on what hard drives to buy and
> other hardware decisions based on specs published for this
> motherboard. What if the p12 bios doesn't support hard drives say over
> 200GB and your company buys thousands of them in the expectation they
> would work. I think you would be more than a little upset in that
> case. Coming out with a new Bios now would not repair that damage.


Data could be at risk? Where are you getting that from? They could have
pulled it for any number of reasons, from trivial to serious, but since we
don't know it's not really responsible to throw around phrases like that. I
think it's pretty reasonable to assume though that if it was anything
important, the proper bulletin would have been created and we'd know about
it.

My point was that they intend to replace it with P13, and they said that it
would be out early-to-mid January, which for all I know is when P12 was
pulled. Given this tight turnaround there's no point in putting P12 back out
now, but as you say, they should at least tell us why P12 was pulled, and
they very well might in the release notes for P13.

Unfortunately, it is reasonable to assume that Intel hasn't created the
proper bulletin and informed us about it. Why? Because they haven't. I was
hoping an Intel rep would answer one of these postings with the correct
information but it doesn't look like that is not going to happen. Since they
haven't I know a fellow system administrator who has bought several large
drives for this motherboard to his regret. Apparently, Bios P12 won' t
recognize more than 130GB in a 200GB hard drive. If they won't give you this
basic information, it makes you wonder what else they haven't told you. Like
I said when companies pull essential files off of their websites they have a
responsibility to tell you why. The D865GBF is one of the basic motherboards
used for Corporate America's workstations. Intel has been recognized as the
manufacturer of some of the world's most reliable equipment. If they want to
keep that image, they should show the same respect for their customers.

Walter


"Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:1DTPb.100008$Rc4.633016@attbi_s54...
> "Walter" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:77a704ce.0401220740.6230c817@posting.google.c om...
> > Not moot yet anyway because as you stated p13 isn't out yet. And it's
> > more than interesting that it is pulled, because this is indicative of
> > a company that really doesn't care about its customers when it has
> > problems with a file and pulls that file without telling its customer
> > why. I am sure that there are people out there using P12 not knowing
> > that their data could be at risk. Developers, resellers, system
> > administrators, etc, make decisions on what hard drives to buy and
> > other hardware decisions based on specs published for this
> > motherboard. What if the p12 bios doesn't support hard drives say over
> > 200GB and your company buys thousands of them in the expectation they
> > would work. I think you would be more than a little upset in that
> > case. Coming out with a new Bios now would not repair that damage.
>
>
> Data could be at risk? Where are you getting that from? They could have
> pulled it for any number of reasons, from trivial to serious, but since we
> don't know it's not really responsible to throw around phrases like that.
I
> think it's pretty reasonable to assume though that if it was anything
> important, the proper bulletin would have been created and we'd know about
> it.
>
> My point was that they intend to replace it with P13, and they said that
it
> would be out early-to-mid January, which for all I know is when P12 was
> pulled. Given this tight turnaround there's no point in putting P12 back
out
> now, but as you say, they should at least tell us why P12 was pulled, and
> they very well might in the release notes for P13.
>
>

"Walter Erne" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:sbUPb.9148$RR3.6163@fe1.texas.rr.com...
>
> Unfortunately, it is reasonable to assume that Intel hasn't created the
> proper bulletin and informed us about it. Why? Because they haven't.

And, of course, that's not what I said. I said "it's pretty reasonable to
assume though that IF it was anything important, the proper bulletin would
have been created." And I stand by that, since I have no reason to assume
the worst. Intel is not irresponsible.

> hoping an Intel rep would answer one of these postings with the correct
> information but it doesn't look like that is not going to happen.

I think these groups are long abandoned.

> Since they haven't I know a fellow system administrator who has bought
> several large
> drives for this motherboard to his regret. Apparently, Bios P12 won' t
> recognize more than 130GB in a 200GB hard drive.

I don't see how that's possible, since I have a 200GB drive (and a 160GB)
with P12. No problem.

> basic information, it makes you wonder what else they haven't told you.
> Like
> I said when companies pull essential files off of their websites they have
> a
> responsibility to tell you why. The D865GBF is one of the basic
> motherboards
> used for Corporate America's workstations.

Yes, we don't disagree (and it not just for that motherboard, the BIOS is
for several), but if it's that important for you to know, simply fill out
the support form. You should have an answer quite soon, and you can report
back here when you have it.

Of course that is what you said. You said "it's pretty reasonable to assume
though that IF it was anything important, the proper bulletin would
have been created". My opinion is that isn't true. I believe my friend on
the drives. You don't get it. I think that if they Intel pull a BIOS
version off of their website and substitute an earlier version that they
should tell their customers why. They didn't do it because they were
superstitious. If they had a good enough reason to pull it then they should
let us know why. And any computer company worth their salt would monitor
newsgroups on their hardware and provide informative and corrective
information. I'm not filling out a support form because I think they should
publicly acknowledge this information not inform people individually.
Corporations that do this normally just are trying to avoid bad publicity. I
think it is bad policy and normally backfires in their face but a lot of
people just don't want to face bad news and think it will just go away if
they ignore it, it doesn't. You may believe big brother is looking out for
you; I happen to think that we have to look out for ourselves. It isn't
often that others look out for you and I don't think they are doing so in
this case. This is usenet; groups are abandoned only if someone doesn't post
and we certainly are doing that./

Walter



"Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:laYPb.100772$Rc4.640358@attbi_s54...
> "Walter Erne" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:sbUPb.9148$RR3.6163@fe1.texas.rr.com...
> >
> > Unfortunately, it is reasonable to assume that Intel hasn't created the
> > proper bulletin and informed us about it. Why? Because they haven't.
>
> And, of course, that's not what I said. I said "it's pretty reasonable to
> assume though that IF it was anything important, the proper bulletin would
> have been created." And I stand by that, since I have no reason to assume
> the worst. Intel is not irresponsible.
>
> > hoping an Intel rep would answer one of these postings with the correct
> > information but it doesn't look like that is not going to happen.
>
> I think these groups are long abandoned.
>
> > Since they haven't I know a fellow system administrator who has bought
> > several large
> > drives for this motherboard to his regret. Apparently, Bios P12 won' t
> > recognize more than 130GB in a 200GB hard drive.
>
> I don't see how that's possible, since I have a 200GB drive (and a 160GB)
> with P12. No problem.
>
> > basic information, it makes you wonder what else they haven't told you.
> > Like
> > I said when companies pull essential files off of their websites they
have
> > a
> > responsibility to tell you why. The D865GBF is one of the basic
> > motherboards
> > used for Corporate America's workstations.
>
> Yes, we don't disagree (and it not just for that motherboard, the BIOS is
> for several), but if it's that important for you to know, simply fill out
> the support form. You should have an answer quite soon, and you can report
> back here when you have it.
>
>

The point that I got out of this back and forth is that some issues are more
important to some people than others and a truly customer-focused company
should be aware of this fact and not assume that just because an issue isn't
imporant to them that is also is not important to their customers.

Certainly drive-size support is not an inconsequential issue as quickly as
drive capacity is increasing and their adoption rate by users is fairly
quick.

Nonetheless, the P12 BIOS update was NOT withdrawn for my mobo (D865PERL).
I just checked and it remains a downloadable update. So there appears to be
a board specific issue with the GBF board.

The release notes for the P12 update were
New Fixes/Features:

· Additional IDCC support added.

· Fixed an issue where system will not boot to PXE when third party 256 MB
AGP card is

present.

· Added L3 cache info to SMBIOS table.

· Added logo support for unreleased processors.

· Displayed L3 Cache option in BIOS setup if a processor with L3 Cache is in
use.

· Fixed issue where loading CMOS defaults outside of BIOS SETUP would reset
memory timing

override questions to invalid values.

· Corrected spelling error for IRQ Help text in BIOS setup.

· Fixed intermittent false memory timing error that occurs after flash
updating a VPD

· Fixed intermittent failure to update VPD only Flash5 capsule.

· Fixed issue where system would not log event log errors.

· Fixed issue of unused PCI clocks not being turned off.

· Updated default Fan control settings

· Added IDCC Memory Extended Configuration information.

· Fixed a system hang problem during POST with a Flash USB Flash card
reader/writer.

None of the earlier releases addressed drive addressing except for RAID
issues.

As originally designed, the GBF natively supports 48-bit LBA, so you
shouldn't need any BIOS update to support a very large drive. So your
friens's problem is probably not associated with the BIOS.

Good luck on solving it.

"Walter Erne" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MS0Qb.7425$6o4.1132@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> Of course that is what you said. You said "it's pretty reasonable to
assume
> though that IF it was anything important, the proper bulletin would
> have been created". My opinion is that isn't true. I believe my friend on
> the drives. You don't get it. I think that if they Intel pull a BIOS
> version off of their website and substitute an earlier version that they
> should tell their customers why. They didn't do it because they were
> superstitious. If they had a good enough reason to pull it then they
should
> let us know why. And any computer company worth their salt would monitor
> newsgroups on their hardware and provide informative and corrective
> information. I'm not filling out a support form because I think they
should
> publicly acknowledge this information not inform people individually.
> Corporations that do this normally just are trying to avoid bad publicity.
I
> think it is bad policy and normally backfires in their face but a lot of
> people just don't want to face bad news and think it will just go away if
> they ignore it, it doesn't. You may believe big brother is looking out for
> you; I happen to think that we have to look out for ourselves. It isn't
> often that others look out for you and I don't think they are doing so in
> this case. This is usenet; groups are abandoned only if someone doesn't
post
> and we certainly are doing that./
>
> Walter
>
>
>
> "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:laYPb.100772$Rc4.640358@attbi_s54...
> > "Walter Erne" <werne2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:sbUPb.9148$RR3.6163@fe1.texas.rr.com...
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, it is reasonable to assume that Intel hasn't created
the
> > > proper bulletin and informed us about it. Why? Because they haven't.
> >
> > And, of course, that's not what I said. I said "it's pretty reasonable
to
> > assume though that IF it was anything important, the proper bulletin
would
> > have been created." And I stand by that, since I have no reason to
assume
> > the worst. Intel is not irresponsible.
> >
> > > hoping an Intel rep would answer one of these postings with the
correct
> > > information but it doesn't look like that is not going to happen.
> >
> > I think these groups are long abandoned.
> >
> > > Since they haven't I know a fellow system administrator who has bought
> > > several large
> > > drives for this motherboard to his regret. Apparently, Bios P12 won' t
> > > recognize more than 130GB in a 200GB hard drive.
> >
> > I don't see how that's possible, since I have a 200GB drive (and a
160GB)
> > with P12. No problem.
> >
> > > basic information, it makes you wonder what else they haven't told
you.
> > > Like
> > > I said when companies pull essential files off of their websites they
> have
> > > a
> > > responsibility to tell you why. The D865GBF is one of the basic
> > > motherboards
> > > used for Corporate America's workstations.
> >
> > Yes, we don't disagree (and it not just for that motherboard, the BIOS
is
> > for several), but if it's that important for you to know, simply fill
out
> > the support form. You should have an answer quite soon, and you can
report
> > back here when you have it.
> >
> >
>
>

"LaManchaDQ" <LaManchaDQ@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:n5-dnb8HZ-eF8IzdRVn-vg@comcast.com...
>
> Nonetheless, the P12 BIOS update was NOT withdrawn for my mobo (D865PERL).
> I just checked and it remains a downloadable update.

That's interesting, since before this I thought all like boards were sync'd
up. Your P12 actually came out a couple months before the P12 for the
GBF/GRH/GLC (etc), and the revision notes were a little different, so for
whatever reason it's a different animal. Also, P13 isn't out for your board
yet. Just for the sake of the thread, here's the P12 and then the P13
revision notes for the GBF/GRH/GLC (etc):

About This Release:
December 16, 2003
BF86510A.86A.0051.P12.0312161054
Core Baseline version 01.07.00
VBIOS build 3102
UNDI 4.1.10
82547EI UNDI 1.2.10
New Fixes/Features:
- Display L3 Cache option in BIOS setup when a processor with L3 Cache is
used.
- Added alternate hardware management ASIC supplier support.
- Update Intel inside logo.
- Added Pentium® 4 Extreme Edition and Pentium 4 with HT Extreme Edition
logo support.
- Fixed an issue where system will not wake on LAN after a Power failure.
- Fixed an issue where system would not log events.
- Fixed an issue with some applications causing a CMOS checksum error during
POST.
- Video BIOS updated to build 3102.

###

About This Release:
January 22, 2003
BF86510A.86A.0053.P13.0401220953
Core Baseline version 01.07.00
VBIOS build 3102
UNDI 4.1.10
82547EI UNDI 1.2.10
New Fixes/Features:
- Added enhancement for future processor support.
- Fixed an issue with INT13h Function 15h returning incorrect information.
- Added code to differentiate some Intel® Pentium® 4 processors from Intel®
Celeron® processors
- Suppressed POST CMOS error message when force CMOS defaults option is used
for Flash update.
- Fixed issue where system would not complete POST if no video card is
plugged in and a LAN card present.
- Fixed an issue of delay in booting to Floppy with 2 SATA drives connected
in native mode.
- Fixed an interoperability issue with the Intel SMBUS Driver.
- Added L3 cache info in SMBios table.
- Added latest processor update.

Updates for my board certainly is a different animal from the BIOS update
that is intended for the GBF/GRH/GLC. It doesn't surprise me that the
release notes for the two BIOS files were different, though I made the same
assumption that you had - that the BIOS files were synced up a little closer
than they are apparently for closely related boards. Sorry if that mislead
anyone here.

"Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:NveQb.104780$Rc4.713435@attbi_s54...
> "LaManchaDQ" <LaManchaDQ@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:n5-dnb8HZ-eF8IzdRVn-vg@comcast.com...
> >
> > Nonetheless, the P12 BIOS update was NOT withdrawn for my mobo
(D865PERL).
> > I just checked and it remains a downloadable update.
>
> That's interesting, since before this I thought all like boards were
sync'd
> up. Your P12 actually came out a couple months before the P12 for the
> GBF/GRH/GLC (etc), and the revision notes were a little different, so for
> whatever reason it's a different animal. Also, P13 isn't out for your
board
> yet. Just for the sake of the thread, here's the P12 and then the P13
> revision notes for the GBF/GRH/GLC (etc):
>
> About This Release:
> December 16, 2003
> BF86510A.86A.0051.P12.0312161054
> Core Baseline version 01.07.00
> VBIOS build 3102
> UNDI 4.1.10
> 82547EI UNDI 1.2.10
> New Fixes/Features:
> - Display L3 Cache option in BIOS setup when a processor with L3 Cache is
> used.
> - Added alternate hardware management ASIC supplier support.
> - Update Intel inside logo.
> - Added Pentium® 4 Extreme Edition and Pentium 4 with HT Extreme Edition
> logo support.
> - Fixed an issue where system will not wake on LAN after a Power failure.
> - Fixed an issue where system would not log events.
> - Fixed an issue with some applications causing a CMOS checksum error
during
> POST.
> - Video BIOS updated to build 3102.
>
> ###
>
> About This Release:
> January 22, 2003
> BF86510A.86A.0053.P13.0401220953
> Core Baseline version 01.07.00
> VBIOS build 3102
> UNDI 4.1.10
> 82547EI UNDI 1.2.10
> New Fixes/Features:
> - Added enhancement for future processor support.
> - Fixed an issue with INT13h Function 15h returning incorrect information.
> - Added code to differentiate some Intel® Pentium® 4 processors from
Intel®
> Celeron® processors
> - Suppressed POST CMOS error message when force CMOS defaults option is
used
> for Flash update.
> - Fixed issue where system would not complete POST if no video card is
> plugged in and a LAN card present.
> - Fixed an issue of delay in booting to Floppy with 2 SATA drives
connected
> in native mode.
> - Fixed an interoperability issue with the Intel SMBUS Driver.
> - Added L3 cache info in SMBios table.
> - Added latest processor update.
>
>