Is BTX Still A Proposal?

[josolanes]

FreeBIOS is an opensource BIOS replacement as I understand it

it's still very new, so I wouldn't trust it as of yet...but if they begin to support a larger amount of hardware, I'd consider giving it a try

On their site, at the bottom, is a link to OpenBIOS as well

[CodeRoot]

The alternative of which I speak is actually "the way it was supposed to be, but never was" -- let me explain...

Back when the 'Personal Computer' was "born" (Intel and IBM), the BIOS (Basic Input/Output System) was designed around Intel's 8086 microprocessor and the software-interrupt-driven part of its architecture - the concept and idea of which was to create a consistent, standardized, across-the-board compatible connection layer for higher-level software - with a vector-interrupt-handler execute-service-request type of operation - it was to be sandwiched between all hardware and all (other) software. It was never supposed to be "bypassed" - only "added to" by the use of ROM extensions, utilized by hardware manufacturers to create REAL/TRUE 'plug and play' (not this crap we have today that tries to pass itself off as "plug and play" - it doesn't know what REAL/TRUE 'plug and play' is...) - and which, if utilized properly and correctly, creates a seamless and perfectly balanced system that is not in any way hardware dependant.

Why did this wonderfully brilliant and well thought-out concept/idea/system start out on a good foot but never actually come to complete fruition (like it should have)?????

Two major reasons:

~ Hardware manufacturers were (and still are) LAZY.

Instead of utilizing the system as it was meant to be, they allowed themselves (and still do) to be "suckered" (by Microsoft, mainly) into breaking the system instead of supporting it. IMO, THIS IS A FACT: If all manufacturers would support it, it would prevent/circumvent 95-99 percent of all of the hardware-software problems that we have today. Why are they this ignorant and stupid? For the love of money, of course... And because they are blinded by this love of money (and Microsoft's continual seductions), they continue to follow this very erroneous and great-accomplishment-defying and generator-of-a-multitude-of-problems path.

The way it is supposed to work:

The provision for add-on hardware is made by having plug-in slots where cards can be inserted. All of the necessary bus and control signals are made available through the slot connector. The manufacturer provides an on-the-card ROM containing the code necessary to fully control/operate the hardware in all of its functionality, and written to interface with the interrupt-driven service-routine system. As a good and wholesome natural side-effect, this provides a means of making sure that the manufacturer actually creates a good fully-functional and properly working product. The necessity for the product to properly and correctly interface with the interrupt-driven service-request system requires the product designer/manufacturer to thoroughly test the code - that they specifically write to work with the product - in its complete functionality.

(And, who better to produce the code to operate a piece of hardware than the designer/manufacturer of the hardware?)

Yes, this on-the-card software can be "replaced"/"upgraded" by other software - this is also intended, as part of the very versatile overall functionality of the system. The vector interrupts nature of the system is a modular approach that allows sections of code to be independently "replaced"/"upgraded", thus not forcing any limitations by the on-board ROM software. Notice that the 'B' in BIOS stands for "Basic" - not "Full" or "Final" or "Complete" or "Exhaustive"... The original intent and scope of the BIOS was to get the computer up and running, provide a connection layer (for higher-level software - in the form of a set of service routines intended to be called only through the interrupt system, and which handle all service requests "from above" and control all hardware devices "below") for all hardware on the motherboard, and provide for hardware not on the motherboard through ROM extensions (BIOS-loaded modules of code - containing service routines needed to operate all hardware accessed through the plug-in card - that reside on the card itself).

By this concept, it is OK to replace individual separate modules "below" or "above" the connection layer to "upgrade" a piece of hardware - but it is not OK for any code to "reach across" the "connection" - both sides must adapt to the [well-defined and standardized] "connection" [protocol] itself. And this is precisely what makes it "seamless and perfectly balanced" - no matter what operating system sits on top of it, or what hardware sits below it - the control of the hardware is the same - motive, method, management, and maneuver.

Now, even though these modules can be replaced - the idea is that the "driver software" for the card be provided on the card - thus, the simple action of plugging the card into the slot automatically sets up the hardware within the system - the only probing necessary is just another service routine ("Are you there?"). Everything else is programmable below the connection layer. Before you even turn on the computer, its ready to go... THIS is REAL/TRUE 'plug and play'. In fact, IMO, anything not directly tied to the actual physical plugging of the card into the slot CANNOT - by definition - be considered REAL/TRUE 'plug and play'.

Yes, this concept/idea/system requires a certain necessary level of conformance to some universal standards - but is not nearly as difficult as you might think...

~ Video game producers were (and still are) GREEDY and IMPATIENT.

Because early PC hardware and software could update those colorful little pixels only so fast, producers of video games decided - because they were too ignorant to realize the long-reaching ramifications of their stupidity - to break the system instead of abiding by the "rules" of the system (which required remaining "inside" the limits of the capability of technology) and biding their time until technology could catch up. So, they bypassed it - writing code that directly manipulated video hardware. And thus was the beginning of a series of bad moves on the part of many people which destroyed the "system" and made it unusable for the purpose for which it was originally designed and intended.

-

So, there you have it - LAZINESS (not being willing to 'do it right'), GREED (the love of money), and IMPATIENCE (not being willing to 'stick with what is ultimately better and will better serve in the long run') are responsible for defeating a perfectly good and sound idea that could have been the basis and foundation for good, solid, intelligent, stable, secure, and problem-free computer systems from the beginning...

EDIT: Please don't read out of this post that I am "angry" - "discouraged" would be a more fitting word. I am not saying that this concept/idea/system is perfect - I am saying that a whole lot more and better things could have been accomplished with it if people would have just more seriously considered the rectitude of their motives and the ramifications of their actions...