> What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement".
Ahhh, the anti-conspiracy theorist who doesn't want to see a spade in front of him.
You have an employee at a company who has given a very short, to-the-point, precise reason as to why they can't do something. This hasn't been through an edit filter, been past lawyers or anyone else who has seen this as a problem. It's an honest statement that they probably didn't think would blow up into anything major.
> But the company issues AN ACTUAL PRESS RELEASE describing the technical reasoning... and you're just willing to completely dismiss and ignore that?
They're not going to admit that they couldn't do this because they had an agreement with Microsoft in an 'official' statement are they, you idiot?
> What the "buggy, fake drivers" are you talking about? Just making shit up now?
You haven't the faintest idea what they are talking about. 'Fake RAID' drivers (do try reading) are well known to be incredibly buggy because the RAID implementation is not in software in the OS or in hardware, it's shoehorned into the driver. The are not well tested or well maintained. Linux doesn't have these drivers....because it just doesn't need them. It already has a perfectly good RAID implementation of its own.
> Are you REALLY contending that the NVMe devices don't work better under RAID mode, despite the fact that it's a widely researched and accepted fact with whitepaper to boot?
What a load of utter dogshit. Single disk systems are run under AHCI for very good practical reasons. If you have multiple disks, then you can go ahead and look at various RAID implementations. I also wish people luck if they ever want to image their disk for recovery or try and read it in any other system.
> Please stop, this is embarrassing. Go troll somewhere else.
No, you're embarrassing yourself because you haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about and obviously haven't read what's been written.
I'm not the first person to accuse Matthew of this I'm afraid, and use exactly those words.
If you're going to censor comments then feel free to do so for the nonsensical articles you post ;-). Nothing of what Matthew has posted explained anything or provided any kind of semi-credible reason for this for any kind of reasonably technical audience.
> Literally nothing about this sentence is correct.
Sorry, but literally everything about it is correct. What a great adjective.
> Support reps know nothing, and nameless support reps that throw out statements like that with no explanation
Errrrr, no. Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true. This doesn't come out of nowhere.
>I can't believe I'm having to explain this on Hacker News.
Your working life must be pretty interesting if that's you're attitude to every crystal clear, unequivocal and precise statement you read ;-).
> no, it's not some bullshit conspiracy
No, it's not. An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to misinterpretation.
> Plus, you know, you could read Matthew's blog post (the HN link that we're commenting on...) that explains this as well.
I have, and true to form, it doesn't. As usual we get someone who wants to tell us that black is white and that a manufacturer miraculously using buggy fake RAID drivers is now the done thing. For performance. Or power management. Or whatever the reason happens to be.
There is no way that using a fake RAID set of drivers and a completely incompatible and more complex on-disk RAID format is going to increase performance in any way.
There's a reason why that hasn't been done on any system in the past - because it's stupid and fake RAID drivers are notoriously buggy and require support from cloning and other low level software that gets used.
Yer, you're not an expert, or appear to know anything about hardware.
> Hardware that works better = better sales, more money, less support cost?
Utter bullshit. The hardware doesn't work better - it works in the same way that AHCI systems with a single disk have done in the past. This is not going to increase sales, as is obvious to anyone with half an ounce of sense, it won't make more money as a result and it will be lovely to see their support when people clone disks and realise the on-disk RAID format isn't compatible ;-).
> even Microsoft don't ship a driver that supports it.
.....and why do you suppose that is? Fake RAID drivers and hardware are shit that's why. It's an option that is hardly used, if ever, and I never thought I'd see the day when a system had it as its default.
> Or, alternatively, they removed a firmware setting that makes their hardware work less well
Why would they remove it? Removing it requires effort, which hardware companies are loath to do. Leave the system in its actual supported state and change the default. Easy.
There's only so many ways you can slip and slide on this Matthew ;-).
Garrett has a history of stonewalling and misdirection on these matters. It was the same with UEFI, Secure Boot and when he and Red Hat tried to casually shoehorn support for PE binaries into the Linux kernel, hoping no one would notice.
Because providing that option doesn't give anyone sub-par drivers?
Also, the power saving stuff is bollocks. I never thought I would see the day when anyone would recommend using a bullshit fake RAID driver for power saving reasons.
Every other chipset and motherboard in existence has had that option and it hasn't affected anyone adversely. There is no less of two evils. There isn't any evils here.
It's not Secure Boot - yet. But this is what you're going to find - obsolescence depending on built-in hardware driver support. Not only are you not getting Linux installed on here but Windows 7, or any future version of Windows that does not have this driver built for it. You'll then have to throw the hardware away.
No, it wasn't a bullshit statement from a rep - it was a very clear statement from a rep, in black and white, that has not been retracted or clarified by Lenovo in any way. It's always funny when people choose not to believe verbatim statements and explanations put right in front of them.