Oh those poor people stuck in Microsoft land. Now they managed to break their last more or less stable system too. So many computer illiterate people will have no clue what to do, consider their computer broken and buy another one. That's a good thing, right? Keeps the economy going. It's very comforting to know you have a big knowledgeable OEM like HP 'taking care' of your system, or in this case, breaking it. I bet they'll blame Microsoft though.

Looking at the steps needed to fix the computer clearly shows that Windows is not yet ready for the desktop. Seems like in Windows you also need to type in cryptic commands to fix things.

dude read the whole article before making comments... it clearly states that the problem is on HP's side because they're to lazy or stupid to get a separate installation image for AMD systems not containing the intel power saving utility for intel processors...

Dude I did read the whole article. It seems you didn't read my whole comment. Now show me where HP admits that they screwed up. The problem still showed up after Windows got updated, so HP will likely hide behind that fact even if they're the ones to blame.

Who is to blame doesn't really change a thing for users who run into this problem. They are still stuck having either a broken computer or having to type in cryptic commands to get it back up and running. Having to type commands now and then is often mentioned as a reason that Linux is supposedly "not ready for the desktop". This snafu shows that being "supported" by big corporations like Microsoft and HP doesn't guarantee you won't have to do that. If the same measuring stick is used for Windows as for Linux, Windows should also be considered "not ready for the desktop" since you apparently can't fit everything with a GUI.

For most users today, quality distributions like Ubuntu Linux are more "ready for the desktop" than Windows, and give users a much more trouble-free computer experience than Windows ever will. Just look at the Eee PC. Everyone who gives the Linux that comes with it a fair chance instead of wiping it just because of old-fashioned "it isn't Windows" inertia comes to realize just how superior it is.

Linux is obviously behind the times in other parts of hardware so whether this was MS or HP, to say that Linux is superior is just empty words.

Is Linux superior in its office applications, gaming, or 3rd party hardware support? If you answered yes to any of those, try to remember Linus isn't a God. It may be on par in many cases, but not superior.

Yes, Windows has issues. It needs to have compatibility with millions of pieces of hardware, much of which isn't supported by Linux due to the 3rd party not supporting Linux. Yes, MS has used its users as beta testers in the past and continues to abuse market position but, that doesn't mean that their current product is crap.

Anytime someone makes a blanket statement like, "Linux is superior for desktop purposes" just makes me instantly take everything they have to say as flaming.

I guess I got carried away, I'm sorry if my comments were flaming.

I have been frustrated many times in the past because whenever someone proposed a command line configuration or fix for something in Linux (which is often done even if there is a possible GUI solution just because it is more portable and usually more accurate than click-here-click-there directions), usually some jerk had to jump in and say "See, that's why Linux isn't ready for the desktop! You can't expect Joe user to do that!"

So when I saw this issue and the way it has to be fixed using cryptic commands and registry digging, I decided to play the jerk for once. Of course it was to the wrong audience who probably never made a comment like that and didn't know what was eating me. So I would like to apologize for that.

I do want to point out though that I didn't make a blanket statement that "Linux is superior for desktop purposes", I was talking in context of the Eee PC where you get either a fully loaded Linux with lots of apps or a pretty bare Windows XP. A preloaded Linux distro is many times more functional for Joe user than a bare XP where he has to get and install all the apps himself. And a preloaded Linux is just as easy to use as a preloaded Windows.

Secondly, Steve Ballmer's recent comment that Vista is a "work in progress" shows MS using its users as beta testers is not just a thing of the past as you seem to imply.

an HP PC is a lot more expensive than a clon; betwen other reasons, because you get "better support".

Of course, when you need the support, you need to pay guarantees extensions, you never find the drivers, they take ages to download (when the HP web works), you find that perfectly working drivers for perfectly working hardware, are no more downloadable for W9x, the drivers are heavy, bloated, and hard to understand...

Those PCs must be cheaper than a clon!

It says "HP and AMD machines" leading people to believe that all AMD machines are affected. It's really just HP being lazy with their imaging.

All makers test with customers, some a bit more then others, but they all do. When people get killed in a car for a particular reason, ex. it falls over in corners, the car is redesigned, and compared to my example people with the descibed problem are well off.

Unix exists since ages and STILL needs patches, so try to keep all in perspective. MS here, Linux there... all the same... MACs only accept MAC signed hardware, same for SUN Servers and some other brands.

It is a pity, but not a disaster! In England they had bad fuel coming from a distributor, hundreds of cars with broken engines, THAT is something to complain about ... and they did not pay the damages or correct for the end-user!!

Robles, find your remark quite correct, title not optimal.