HP notebooks recalled

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

HP says it is recalling some of its Intel mobile chipset (model 845, 852,
and 855) machines. Says that there may be a flaw which causes corrupt
results when paired with certain brands and models of RAM.

http://tinyurl.com/263wc

or long form,

http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml;jsessionid=2DMJQHCBXUOP4QSNDBCCKHY?articleId=22102166

Yousuf Khan

--
Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com
Spambots: just reply to this email address ;-)

 

[rush]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote :

> HP says it is recalling some of its Intel mobile chipset (model
> 845, 852, and 855) machines. Says that there may be a flaw which
> causes corrupt results when paired with certain brands and models
> of RAM.

Apple does those things a lot latelly, 2-4 times a year .


Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

RusH wrote:
> "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote :
>
>> HP says it is recalling some of its Intel mobile chipset (model
>> 845, 852, and 855) machines. Says that there may be a flaw which
>> causes corrupt results when paired with certain brands and models
>> of RAM.
>
> Apple does those things a lot latelly, 2-4 times a year .
>
>
> Pozdrawiam.

Power adapters. Not the notebooks.

Q

 

[Skip]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote in message
news:Lb-dnXA3KqgFAUDd4p2dnA@comcast.com...

> Power adapters. Not the notebooks.

Well, to be fair, the HP recall is >memory modules< and not the notebooks
themselves.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Skip <reply@newsgroup.invalid> wrote:
> "Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote in message
> news:Lb-dnXA3KqgFAUDd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
>
>> Power adapters. Not the notebooks.
>
> Well, to be fair, the HP recall is >memory modules< and not the
> notebooks themselves.

Actually to be fair, I really doubt that it was the memory modules
themselves which were a problem (something like five major DRAM
manufacturers all produced bad ram?). It's more likely that the problem lay
in the Intel chipset, specifically in its memory controller circuitry.
Doesn't look like any of the AMD-based notebooks were affected by this bad
ram.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:U_iDc.7$YgN1.5@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> Skip <reply@newsgroup.invalid> wrote:
> > "Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote in message
> > news:Lb-dnXA3KqgFAUDd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> >
> >> Power adapters. Not the notebooks.
> >
> > Well, to be fair, the HP recall is >memory modules< and not the
> > notebooks themselves.
>
> Actually to be fair, I really doubt that it was the memory modules
> themselves which were a problem (something like five major DRAM
> manufacturers all produced bad ram?). It's more likely that the problem
lay
> in the Intel chipset, specifically in its memory controller circuitry.
> Doesn't look like any of the AMD-based notebooks were affected by this bad
> ram.

then shouldn't the other notebook vendors be reporting the same problem?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Judd <IhateSpam@stopspam.com> wrote:
>> Actually to be fair, I really doubt that it was the memory modules
>> themselves which were a problem (something like five major DRAM
>> manufacturers all produced bad ram?). It's more likely that the
>> problem lay in the Intel chipset, specifically in its memory
>> controller circuitry. Doesn't look like any of the AMD-based
>> notebooks were affected by this bad ram.
>
> then shouldn't the other notebook vendors be reporting the same
> problem?

Well, according to HP, the others should also be following its example, but
so far no one else seems to be budging.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:23:16 GMT, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:
> Judd <IhateSpam@stopspam.com> wrote:
>>> Actually to be fair, I really doubt that it was the memory modules
>>> themselves which were a problem (something like five major DRAM
>>> manufacturers all produced bad ram?). It's more likely that the
>>> problem lay in the Intel chipset, specifically in its memory
>>> controller circuitry. Doesn't look like any of the AMD-based
>>> notebooks were affected by this bad ram.
>>
>> then shouldn't the other notebook vendors be reporting the same
>> problem?
>
> Well, according to HP, the others should also be following its example, but
> so far no one else seems to be budging.

One article that I read said that IBM had found the problem with one of the
vendors and had disqualified them but they declined to name which one.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Mike Ching" <mtching@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:40e03407$1_2@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:23:16 GMT, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:
> > Judd <IhateSpam@stopspam.com> wrote:
> >>> Actually to be fair, I really doubt that it was the memory modules
> >>> themselves which were a problem (something like five major DRAM
> >>> manufacturers all produced bad ram?). It's more likely that the
> >>> problem lay in the Intel chipset, specifically in its memory
> >>> controller circuitry. Doesn't look like any of the AMD-based
> >>> notebooks were affected by this bad ram.
> >>
> >> then shouldn't the other notebook vendors be reporting the same
> >> problem?
> >
> > Well, according to HP, the others should also be following its example,
but
> > so far no one else seems to be budging.
>
> One article that I read said that IBM had found the problem with one of
the
> vendors and had disqualified them but they declined to name which one.

At the company I work for, we had IBM T40's (about a year ago) that had bad
memory - but only from a certain manufacturer. They were all replaced (not
recalled per se) - the Nanya memory was taken out, and "good" memory was
installed.

 

[rush]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Judd" <IhateSpam@stopspam.com> wrote :

> then shouldn't the other notebook vendors be reporting the same
> problem?

IBM had this problem with T30s

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-
8&frame=right&th=ad06ff4208a2a3c0&seekm=b246238d.0307161618.3c121431%40
posting.google.com#link5


Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:37:02 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com>
wrote:
>HP says it is recalling some of its Intel mobile chipset (model 845, 852,
>and 855) machines. Says that there may be a flaw which causes corrupt
>results when paired with certain brands and models of RAM.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/263wc
>
>or long form,
>
>http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml;jsessionid=2DMJQHCBXUOP4QSNDBCCKHY?articleId=22102166

As others mentioned it's not the notebooks themselves but the memory
modules. My understanding is that it's due to a broken power-saving
feature on the Intel chipset and the "solution" is to swap out the
memory modules for ones that don't try to make use of this feature.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:lqh1e05ur6llt42neqp4peovsaip8gh1l6@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:37:02 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com>
| wrote:
| >HP says it is recalling some of its Intel mobile chipset (model 845, 852,
| >and 855) machines. Says that there may be a flaw which causes corrupt
| >results when paired with certain brands and models of RAM.
| >
| >http://tinyurl.com/263wc
| >
| >or long form,
| >
|
>http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml;jsessionid=2DMJ
QHCBXUOP4QSNDBCCKHY?articleId=22102166
|
| As others mentioned it's not the notebooks themselves but the memory
| modules. My understanding is that it's due to a broken power-saving
| feature on the Intel chipset and the "solution" is to swap out the
| memory modules for ones that don't try to make use of this feature.
|

Whichmeans it is not the memory that is faulty, it is the Intel chipset. The
are putting a bandage on the problem instead of fixing it.

 

[rush]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Jason Cothran" <reply@board.nomail> wrote :

> Whichmeans it is not the memory that is faulty, it is the Intel
> chipset. The are putting a bandage on the problem instead of
> fixing it.

everybody does, Microsoft hunting for virus writers instead of
releasing reasonable security model and all ..


Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 21:46:22 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
<reply@board.nomail> wrote:
>
>"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>| As others mentioned it's not the notebooks themselves but the memory
>| modules. My understanding is that it's due to a broken power-saving
>| feature on the Intel chipset and the "solution" is to swap out the
>| memory modules for ones that don't try to make use of this feature.
>|
>
>Whichmeans it is not the memory that is faulty, it is the Intel chipset. The
>are putting a bandage on the problem instead of fixing it.

Assuming I'm getting the store correctly, yes. The trick is that
memory is an easy thing to swap out, chipsets are very difficult to
swap. This is a $20 bandage vs. a $200+ solution.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:c1d4e0t39r4o3d9fkjpuabmbh3t7u1f4uk@4ax.com...
| On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 21:46:22 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
| <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| >
| >"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
| >| As others mentioned it's not the notebooks themselves but the memory
| >| modules. My understanding is that it's due to a broken power-saving
| >| feature on the Intel chipset and the "solution" is to swap out the
| >| memory modules for ones that don't try to make use of this feature.
| >|
| >
| >Whichmeans it is not the memory that is faulty, it is the Intel chipset.
The
| >are putting a bandage on the problem instead of fixing it.
|
| Assuming I'm getting the store correctly, yes. The trick is that
| memory is an easy thing to swap out, chipsets are very difficult to
| swap. This is a $20 bandage vs. a $200+ solution.
|

Exactly. Just like a big company to put a bandage on a sore that needs
stitches. They aren't fixing anything, they are just covering it up. It's
about like buying a brand new car as new with bondo in it because it was
wrecked on a test drive.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:18:06 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
<reply@board.nomail> wrote:
>
>"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:c1d4e0t39r4o3d9fkjpuabmbh3t7u1f4uk@4ax.com...
>| Assuming I'm getting the store correctly, yes. The trick is that
>| memory is an easy thing to swap out, chipsets are very difficult to
>| swap. This is a $20 bandage vs. a $200+ solution.
>|
>
>Exactly. Just like a big company to put a bandage on a sore that needs
>stitches. They aren't fixing anything, they are just covering it up. It's
>about like buying a brand new car as new with bondo in it because it was
>wrecked on a test drive.

Well, I've done a bit more looking and it seems like I may have been
too quick to judge Intel, it looks like it could well be that it's a
"flaw" in the modules themselves, or perhaps more to the point, the
way that Intel chipsets expects the memory modules to handle the
"self-refresh" feature is somewhat different to how the memory modules
implement self-refresh. Unfortunately finding exact details is
somewhat tricky.

To be fair to HP, they seem to be doing the right thing here. This
exact same flaw will almost certainly also affect Dell laptops (since
HP and Dell laptops are mostly produced by the same Taiwanese
companies, just with different badges thrown on the front), and most
likely Toshiba, IBM and others. It seems like a flat out
incompatibility with Intel chipsets and memory modules from Samsung,
Infineon and Winbond. A separate but similar issue was also found
with Micron modules. Considering that those companies probably
account for 75%+ of the OEM memory module market and ALL the major
OEMs have products using the Intel mobile chipsets in question, this
is a pretty much industry-wide issue.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I wonder if this might be the cause of the mysterious memory errors I
encounter randomly on my Gateway 450rog. Not that it matters, I am in the
middle of a dispute with Gateway, I want my money back, and they want to fix
this thing for the 4th time since last October when it was new. I will never
purchase Gateway again, the customer service is a joke, and their service is
even worse.

Dan


Tony Hill wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:18:06 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
> <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
>>
>> "Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>> news:c1d4e0t39r4o3d9fkjpuabmbh3t7u1f4uk@4ax.com...
>>> Assuming I'm getting the store correctly, yes. The trick is that
>>> memory is an easy thing to swap out, chipsets are very difficult to
>>> swap. This is a $20 bandage vs. a $200+ solution.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly. Just like a big company to put a bandage on a sore that
>> needs stitches. They aren't fixing anything, they are just covering
>> it up. It's about like buying a brand new car as new with bondo in
>> it because it was wrecked on a test drive.
>
> Well, I've done a bit more looking and it seems like I may have been
> too quick to judge Intel, it looks like it could well be that it's a
> "flaw" in the modules themselves, or perhaps more to the point, the
> way that Intel chipsets expects the memory modules to handle the
> "self-refresh" feature is somewhat different to how the memory modules
> implement self-refresh. Unfortunately finding exact details is
> somewhat tricky.
>
> To be fair to HP, they seem to be doing the right thing here. This
> exact same flaw will almost certainly also affect Dell laptops (since
> HP and Dell laptops are mostly produced by the same Taiwanese
> companies, just with different badges thrown on the front), and most
> likely Toshiba, IBM and others. It seems like a flat out
> incompatibility with Intel chipsets and memory modules from Samsung,
> Infineon and Winbond. A separate but similar issue was also found
> with Micron modules. Considering that those companies probably
> account for 75%+ of the OEM memory module market and ALL the major
> OEMs have products using the Intel mobile chipsets in question, this
> is a pretty much industry-wide issue.
>
> -------------
> Tony Hill
> hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca