On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie@gmail.com>wrote:
On Tuesday 08 Jan 2013 09:38:58 Mike Cloaked wrote:
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday 07 Jan 2013 18:46:14 LANGLOIS Olivier PIS -EXT wrote:
To be honest, I had 0 problem with installation and UEFI usage. Beside installation, there is very few noticeable difference between BIOS and UEFI. I have insisted to use it just because I had a MB capable of UEFI.
If you want to try UEFI, my advice is. Go for it, there is not much risk
to
do it but do not expect a big change. This won't shake your world!
Seconded. It makes very little difference, if any. The only time I've noticed is when I wanted to upgrade the laptop's firmware, and getting a FreeDOS image to boot was trickier than with BIOS.
Paul
That's interesting - though I guess it is possible to change the BIOS setting just to boot a freedos usbkey to reflash the firmware and then reset to uefi again to boot back into the normal system again?
Yes, absolutely. That would be admitting defeat, though!
Also, when I first set up the machine, there were still some kernel / driver issues with UEFI, but that settled down at around the 3.0 kernel release.
Paul
If I can boot a freedos bootable usbkey under uefi and do the firmware update flash that way it would be great! I will try that as it will be around the first thing I need to do before partitioning the drives and then installing arch.... should be interesting! -- mike c