600 Bios upgrade

[Retro67]

This is odd.

I just upgraded the bios on my tpad 600 to IBET54WW. This is supposed to be a bios dated 2001, but when I go into setup of the 600 it reads a date of 9/18/99 even tho it is definelty the version IBET54WW.

Do I have the 2001 bios or some older one????

Any thoughts are appreciated.

[JHEM]

You have the correct BIOS. The 9/18/99 date is the original release date, not the upgrade date.

Why? No one knows!

Regards,

James

[Retro67]

Thank you James!!!

Its looking good so far.

[pkiff]

it reads a date of 9/18/99 even tho it is definelty the version IBET54WW

I think that the 600/770 series BIOSes have an internal datestamp that does not match the actual release date in order to keep Windows 98 from automatically installing ACPI power management instead of installing in the preferred, APM mode. IBM recommends APM mode for all 600/770 machines using Windows 98SE due to various implementation flaws of ACPI under 98SE, even though some of those machines were designed to be ACPI ready.

According to IBM, "During the installation process of Windows 98 Second Edition, if it detects a BIOS date of 12/2/99 or later, it will automatically install itself in ACPI mode." (from IBM Document MIGR-48VPPW: Windows 98 Second Edition setup guide - ThinkPad General).

All the latest BIOSes for my 600/770 machines, including the end-of-product models 600X and 770Z have internal BIOS dates prior to 12/2/99 (2 December 1999), regardless of what date the BIOS was actually released.

Why? No one knows!

Phil.

[whizkid]

Funny. If the Linux kernel detects a BIOS date before 1-1-2000 (2001 maybe... well SOME date), it will disable ACPI because so many machines had buggy ACPI implementations.

[alfio]

Funny. If the Linux kernel detects a BIOS date before 1-1-2000 (2001 maybe... well SOME date), it will disable ACPI because so many machines had buggy ACPI implementations.

yes, that's exactly what Xubuntu is doing on my 600X. although i have the latest BIOS (updated around 2001 i think) the date still shows up as 1999 for some reason and the ACPI gets disabled.

what exactly does one loose without ACPI? this is mainly a desk machine (i.e. i never run it on batteries alone), am i missing anything?

alfio

[whizkid]

You lose some of the instrumentation of batteries, I think. So you can't tell what the design capacity is, or the current capacity, or count the number of charge cycles. Maybe. :)

It shouldn't make any difference in performance, whether on battery or AC, just your knowledge about the performance.

There may be small differences in suspend/hibernate... or not. I wouldn't worry about it.

[pkiff]

You lose some of the instrumentation of batteries, I think. So you can't tell what the design capacity is, or the current capacity, or count the number of charge cycles. [...] It shouldn't make any difference in performance, whether on battery or AC, just your knowledge about the performance.

Yes, whizkid is right: the main real-life differences between APM and ACPI are that ACPI provides many more hooks that programs can use to monitor your CPU/battery/performance. There is also a difference in the implementation of plug-and-play, USB, and docking-type connectors.

On the 600X, even with ACPI, you cannot access the number of battery cycles because the batteries themselves don't support this. But what you CAN do with ACPI under Windows is use MobileMeter, Notebook BatteryInfo, SpeedSwitch, or any number of other useful utilities to check your battery charging rate, battery capacity, CPU temp, hard drive temp, etc.

Also, as whizkid suggests, there are additional levels of power states available under ACPI. With APM you've got just 3 I think, but under ACPI you've got 5 or something, with a lot more detailed control over them.

Lastly, there are deep, OS-core, resource-handling differences between APM and ACPI. This may affect in particular whether you can hot/warm dock different items or unplug USB devices without manually stopping device drivers first.

Having said that, for a computer used as a desktop machine, you shouldn't notice much of a difference. And I recall seeing mention somewhere that for certain versions of Linux, APM was better supported on the Thinkpad 600s than ACPI anyway. See for e.g., Thomas Hood's
Debian GNU/Linux on IBM ThinkPad 600X page.

Phil.

[Rob Mayercik]

IBM recommends APM mode for all 600/770 machines using Windows 98SE due to various implementation flaws of ACPI under 98SE, even though some of those machines were designed to be ACPI ready.

So then when I kick mine up to XP, it'll be using ACPI instead of APM by default?

Hmm, maybe that's why I had better luck with suspend/hibernate during the XP trial period than I ever have with 98SE...

[unrortit]

its sort of annoying because it like makes out the laptop to be real older spec when indeed it is not.
dell atleast update the defunct time stamp so when you look in the bios it sorta shows 2001,2002 etc
the fact that an ol76x sereis bios is virtually the same as the lastest tp600x bios,it makes one wonder if ibm deliberately
done so in an effort defame the proven product as out of date?
*look below and it will show copyright '''2000
thats as brave as they dared(chickens)

[pkiff]

So then when I kick mine up to XP, it'll be using ACPI instead of APM by default?

Yes. XP will install ACPI automatically. With some work, you can force XP to install APM, but I don't know if there is any reason to -- I've done it on one of my machines to check if it would solve certain issues and it didn't.

the fact that an ol76x sereis bios is virtually the same as the lastest tp600x bios,it makes one wonder if ibm deliberately done so in an effort defame the proven product as out of date?

As I explain earlier in this thread, the release date of the 600 sereis BIOSes does not match the internally reported BIOS date, and yes, as I understand it, IBM deliberately did this to ensure proper installation of Windows 98 on their machines. They explain this in the notes to the BIOS updates on the IBM/Lenovo site: Symptoms corrected by the latest BIOS - ThinkPad 600X. It seems like a sound approach to me, especially since these machines were originally released (including the first 600X's) with Windows 98.

Phil.

[Rob Mayercik]

So then when I kick mine up to XP, it'll be using ACPI instead of APM by default?

Yes. XP will install ACPI automatically. With some work, you can force XP to install APM, but I don't know if there is any reason to -- I've done it on one of my machines to check if it would solve certain issues and it didn't.

Considering that I had better luck with XP in regards to Suspend/Hibernate, I wouldn't want to force APM.