Neon Adventures

[yogi]

I'll write a little about Linux Neon while I'm waiting for Windows 10 to update itself.

I like a challenge. That's one of the reasons I experiment with Linux. It is very challenging to me, to say the least. It shouldn't be that way because I do have some background in Unix as well as Linux. And that might be what rubs me the wrong way about Linux; it's not easy to deal with. I will qualify that and say it's not easy to deal with in the manner I am doing. Windows is my default operating system along with its Windows Boot Manager front end. The Boot Manager functions much like Grub in the sense that it detects bootable devices and provides a menu from which to select the one you may boot into.

My latest adventure was to install Linux Neon alongside Windows 10, Ubuntu 18.04, and Mageia 7. Adding one more OS normally would not be an issue. But, it turns out, Linux developers are not normal. Sometimes they do things out of necessity and other times they do things just because they can. I was a developer of sorts at one time and know how that line of thought goes.

Most distributions of Linux that I've experimented with lately will install in a UEFI environment. There is some guidance about how to do it, but for the most part EFI is free and open sourced so that developers can be creative and do things not possible in DOS. It all works pretty well if you stick with one version of a Linux OS. When it comes to installing multiple versions on the same hardware, that's when the weakness of Linux OS's start to show up. The particular weakness with Linux Neon is precisely the one I've experienced with Ubuntu, Linux Mint, and Linux Peppermint. None of them play well together for a very strange reason. They all use the Ubuntu version of Grub.

I didn't realize there was more than one version of Grub. Each Linux OS has an unique one of it's own, or I should say it would be nice if they were all unique. Ubuntu, Mint, Peppermint, and now Neon share the Grub compiled by the Ubuntu developers and thus all identify themselves as Ubuntu during the boot process. Can you say, Conflict Of Interests? The first problem arising out of that mess is Grub will not install if Ubuntu or one of the other Ubuntu-Grub-using OS's is already in place. If you go to the support forums 50% of the time nobody will answer the request for help. They don't have a clue. Those that do venture to help never get to the root cause. Most of them don't know how Linux implements EFI in spite of the fact that they are moderating support forums. But, finally, I found a reference in a Neon support forum that explains it all.

KDE Neon is a desktop environment built on an Ubuntu OS. Ubuntu in turn is derived from Debian. When it comes time to build a bootloader, i.e. Grub, Neon, Peppermint, and Mint copy their grub.cfg files over to the pre-existing Ubuntu Grub directory in the ESP partition. This is hard coded into Grub and cannot be overwritten by the user. They do this so that they do not have to write a new Grub and compile it for their specific OS. As it happens, they are not simply being lazy - although I can tell some are just that. The reason for using an existing bootloader has to do with secure booting in an EFI world. You need a secret key to do the secure boot, and guess where they have to buy that key. Did you guess from Microsoft? BINGO! Microsoft is the trusted source for secure boot keys worldwide. Thus, if you are inventing a new distro of Linux and want to use Grub for secure booting, you must pay Microsoft to do it.

No, Microsoft did not plot this out in advance. The whole process was defined by the folks who wrote the standards (several companies) for secure EFI booting. Microsoft took over management of some certificates because nobody else wanted to. If you are really curious about how it all works, READ THIS The EFI standard does not specify Grub or anything else. It's up to the developer to come up with a bootloader that will perform in accordance with the standard. Microsoft invented it's own bootloader and it works amazingly well - at least I have not been able to break it yet. Grub works well too if it is implemented as a stand alone bootloader for each individual OS. That is not what the four Linux OS's I mention here are doing. They are all trying to use the same version of Grub so that they can save development costs and (in my humble opinion) not be obligated to pay Micorsoft for a private secure boot key.

Fine. I understand how businesses run. If that's what the Linux community wants, then more power to them. However, they are making my life difficult because they are building stand alone OS's and trying to push them off as being compatible with everything else out there. They even have the gall to say their way is better. Anybody who believes that has never tried to get help solving a Linux boot problem.

If you want to read about Grub being bastardized right from the horse's mouth, here are a couple links. They are somewhat technical but understandable enough to get the idea of what is going on in the world of Linux bootloaders.

https://chaselau.me/2019/01/repairing-kde-neon-grub/
https://community.kde.org/Neon/Installa ... _June_2016

[Kellemora]

Just like I've said all along, Mickey$oft is playing GOD!
And even has its HOOKS into Linux with charging a fee to use Open Source GRUB with THEIR Pay to Use Key.
That is downright NASTY! No matter how you try to WHITEWASH it by saying nobody else wanted the job.
Every one of those COMPANIES that were behind EFI were also in Bed with Mickey$oft.
Whoever developed the so called EFI Standard, should be who is responsible for maintaining the Keys.
Not putting them up FOR SALE by a 3rd party FOR PROFIT BUSINESS.
So, as you can see, from your own comments above, Mickey$oft is who is behind ALL the bootloading problems by having complete control of the Keys.
Again, all I can say is NASTY! This makes them a MONOPOLY and they NEED TO BE BUSTED UP!
I don't blame the Linux developers one iota for the problems caused by Mickey$oft's DOMINATION of the Key System.
As far as I'm concerned this is a very good reason to return to using BIOS and get Mickey$oft out of the picture entirely.

[yogi]

I knew you would be excited to learn of my experiences, but I didn't expect you to go off the deep end.

You might be missing the point of this thread. It really would not matter who issues the necessary secure boot keys if the developers wanted to go through the effort to make the boot process work correctly. It's a bit of an irony that Microsoft is the curator, but that's only due to the bias the Linux community has against Windows. There is no technical reason for them to skimp. If they can't afford the time and the money to develop a proper operating system, maybe they are in the wrong line of work.

EFI is not something Microsoft made happen. It was created by a consortium of like minded people with a common technical need. Say what you will about Microsoft's implementation success; all I can do is reiterate what I've been telling you throughout these forums. Unlike Linux, Microsoft's Windows just works. It's not that I blindly took their word for it. If you recall, I started my investigation into Linux so that I can find a suitable replacement for Windows. Go back and read about some of the problems Linux OS's have demonstrated. There simply is no replacement. The Linux community can't come up with anything better - hell, they can't even work on an equal basis - so the blame for all that must rest in the competition's camp? I think not. If Linux developers don't want to pay for that key, they can come up with a better way to do things, or perhaps take over Microsoft's role as they could have done when this all started.

[Kellemora]

The consortium who developed it is WHO should be maintaining it and NOT giving it to someone else to benefit from monetarily because they don't want to handle it themselves, even for a small fee.

EFI has caused more problems than it has solutions! You've even admitted to that several times!

Linux works just fine, I've been using it for years with no problems.
But then too, I'm NOT trying to do things the Windows Way on a Linux computer.

What you are trying to do is more akin to trying to fit the engine from a mac truck into VW bugs trunk.

Have you ever tried to get Windows XP, 7, 8, and 10 to run on the same computer yet?
And then run DOS programs besides?

Give me one good reason why the FREE Open Source Community should PAY Mickey$oft for anything.
They USE one hell of a lot of our Open Source programs to do most of their work, then butcher some of it to resell.
Like their hacking the standard XML protocol and selling it as DOCX which isn't compatible with anything.
As I said, they are Nasty, Nasty, Nasty!

[yogi]

Give me one good reason why the FREE Open Source Community should PAY Mickey$oft for anything.

The short answer is that they would get more people to use Linux instead of Windows if they made their secure distos easier to use.

I'm not surprised at your reaction because I've read it before, but also because it's exactly the same attitude I've seen over and over again in the so called Linux "support" forums. The anti-Microsoft sentiment is preventing many Linux developers from creating quality products that work as well as does Windows; I'll qualify that by addressing the UEFI boot process only. The emphasis seems to be to make Linux unlike Windows more so than to make Linux something that is user friendly and attractive to the masses. That is a negative approach to programming and it's not convincing any Windows users that Linux is better. It's not better.

It also doesn't favorably impress me when I read about developers bitching and moaning that Microsoft is dominating the industry. In the context of UEFI booting Linux creates conflicts among it's own breed of OS's because developers are not using good programming practices. You would expect Linux not to get along with Windows, well, just because it's Windows. Not because it's technically impossible. I know of three different distributions of Linux that take on the same identity during the boot process; it's not Microsoft that is creating the conflicts resulting from that engineering decision. I won't even get into the recognized broken Ubuntu (Ubiquity) installer that everybody is cloning and thereby propagating mayhem.

Your analogies regarding mixing different OS's are not relevant. I'm not trying to get Windows to do what Linux does, nor am I expecting Linux to do what Windows does. I do expect them BOTH to follow the standards when booting UEFI mode. The fact in the matter is that UEFI is a universally agreed upon standard. It's written so that anyone can implement it regardless of the kernel in their operating system. Microsoft did not make the EFI rules - they did a lot to develop DOS and I'm happy to see you would prefer that to what is a modern day standard.

Also true is that nobody in the land of Linux is being forced to pay Microsoft for a certificate. I've seen several Linux distros lately that went out of their way to not buy a private security key. That's the beauty of UEFI. You don't need a secure boot in order for it to work. I don't see any talk or writing coming out of the Linux camp regarding alternatives to UEFI or secure booting. There is nothing stopping them from coming up with a system that truly is better, and not just anti-Microsoft.

[Kellemora]

AS I said, I've never had any UEFI problems with my Debian installations, and I also have Linux Mint on most of my machines, and yes it uses Ubuntu's key. I assume Debian must have their own since it loads and runs in UEFI alongside Linux Mint with no problems.

I'm on my computer from around 8am until 10pm daily. I do a lot of things on here in that many hours, and so far, never have a glitch to deal with.

Linux works perfect for all the things I do on it, and it is FREE.
So in my opinion, you can't beat that!

[yogi]

Linux is free in terms of money, but in my case very expensive in terms of maintenance. The key we are talking about, by the way, is not necessary to use EFI booting. That key is only for secure booting. The difference is similar to sending these messages the way way are doing them, or sending them encrypted. To secure the encryption we would need keys. We can in fact make up our own keys, but if we want to share these messages with the masses, then trusted public keys become an issue. Believe it or not, that's a no-brainer. You need a key? Go get one from the curator. Simple. Of course if you have to buy it from the people you are working against that sticks in your craw.

You are much like the millions of other Linux OS users who say "it works for me" so why does Yogi say it's a problem? There must be something wrong with what Yogi is doing. There is nothing wrong with what I am doing, but I will be up front and tell you outright that I feel like a novice when it comes to understanding how Linux works. I spent a lot of time learning what I know today, and most of that new knowledge focuses on the boot process, which is predominantly UEFI. Some versions of Linux, Ubuntu for example, seem to be well developed and stable. That is aside from their installer flaw. The reason why I'm seeing and writing about problems I've tried to solve with Linux is because I am not stuck on one or two versions that served me well for the last decade or so. I'm naturally curious so that I want to see what other people are doing, but I'm also keeping the argument of flexibility and open sourced code in mind while I experiment. There are many people besides yourself telling me that Windows does not have the wide breadth of customization that is inherent in open sourced code. That's true, but Windows doesn't have the problems with UEFI that is so obvious in Linux. If you can't boot into the OS, what good is the flexibility? You don't see the problems because you don't use Windows and do not wander very far off the path from Debian.

Debian is rock solid Linux. It is true to the Linux mantra of FREE and open sourced. That is to say, it does not include anything that is proprietary, such as nVidia graphics drivers. Well, you don't use nVidia drivers either so that you would not see any problems that the vast numbers of us people who do use nVidia are plagued with because of Debian's policy. Yes, it's very stable and well developed, but every one of the OS's I've ranted about in this forums are not, and they are all (but one or two) derivatives of that original GNU code Debian sponsors. They are not stable in spite of the developer's assertions because there is no incumbent coding restrictions or discipline involved when you create a fork of the original. There are a lot of creative and brilliant programmers in Linux Land, but many of them have limited resources; both financial and academic. They are good enough to know how to take a stable well developed operating system and turn it into something that never existed before. When I call them on their shortcomings, the buck is passed "upstream" to Debian. Not their problem that nVidia hardware won't boot or that the Ubuntu installer they plagiarized is buggy. Yes, they know, but that doesn't stop them from propagating it anyway.

Is all that due to Microsoft's dominance of the desktop computer world? You would think it is when you talk to die-hard Linux fans. I talked to a developer in a forum who didn't realize that Linux can be booted from Windows. He had no idea Windows had a boot manager in which I could not find HIS Linux progeny. Thus his answer to my problem was to use Grub. Yes, that is an answer, but it's not the answer that will convince me Linux is better.

I don't hope to convince you of the merits of Windows. I also don't expect the problems I see with my Linux adventures to weigh heavily on your daily computer experiences. When it comes down to a final analysis I've been naive. I never realized that all those so called advantages of Linux are just hype. It's free if you don't count maintenance time. Who are you trying to kid when you say there are no virus problems? No, Linux doesn't have a registry, but it has libraries, config files, and dependencies which outweigh any burden I've ever experienced with regedit. It boots faster? Well yes, if it boots at all and you have the right hardware. I recognize there can be an emotional attachment to one's computer and it's software. Therein is where the advantages lie for both Windows and Linux. Whatever feels good and serves your purposes, is what you should be using. What I'm doing here is giving you food for thought; something to chat about in these forums. Your responses are filling in the voids in my own experiences. I thank you for that.

[Kellemora]

FWIW: I don't HATE Windows, even though I may sound like it most of the time.
I've been using Mickey$oft since the days of DOS, 3.0, 3.1, and still have an XP machine up and running for internal work.
When I bought a new Windows XP Pro MCE machine, although it ran great. Most of the peripherals I was buying did not work on it. You know my HP scanner story already, followed by my buying an HP machine and it still didn't work.
My next Windows machine was the ultimate spyware OS called Vista. And this is what drove me to explore Linux.

My wife had a Windows XP Pro machine she was using, until the video card went south. It was a great running machine.
And you know my story about going out and buying her a brand new off-the-shelf Windows 10 machine to get her back up and running right away. No time to wait for a built-up machine, and I wanted to keep her happy.
She was miserable and frustrated with that machine, but didn't want to tell me because it cost so much.
Luckily I picked up on it and got a used ten year old Windows 7 machine for her (from her son). It's not the best with the Alienware package, but since it was once a hi-end gaming machine, it works quite well for her.

I took the new machine I bought for her and put Linux Mint on it. Now it runs almost as fast as the Silver Yogi, but not quite, it is a cheaper CPU and lower RAM. But compared to Win 10, it screams. If I wasn't so low on money and time, I would have it down under her desk with a KVM so she could do her Windows only things on Windows, and everything else on Linux. Some of her Windows only things could work in Wine, but as long as she has a Windows machine, that is what she prefers.

Going back to when I was in the tri-fold advertising pamphlet business. Although I was on Windows XP machines, I still used Open Office Writer for my printable layouts, because msWord screwed everything up all the time, even when I used the settings the printing company told me to use. In fact, they are who suggested I use Open Office Writer, and since it was free, I downloaded and used it. This was yet another reason I moved on over to Linux. That, plus I could no longer afford to keep programs written for Windows updated anymore, especially those I only used on rare occasions.

As far as Nvidia goes, almost all of my machines have Nvidia graphics, and they all work with Debian and Linux Mint no problem. Nvidia is in bed with Windows and do not write drivers for BSD or Linux. So all you can hope for is that some 3rd party wrote drivers for whatever Nvidia card you are using. Can't blame Linux for the pitfalls of Nvidia! That would be like blaming Ford because their starter motor won't fit a Chevy.

[yogi]

Reading your comments about nVidia drivers makes me wonder if you ever attempted to download them from the nVidia web site. I don't know about BSD, but I do know that any flavor of Linux I ever used to download nVidia drivers was available for that version of Linux. The availability of drivers is not the result of nVidia being biased or lax in it's support. The problems I am seeing with Debian are that I cannot use their kernel modules to boot into the OS so that I can install the proprietary nVidia drivers I already downloaded. Unlike certain distributions of Linux based on Debian, Debian's kernel is clean as a whistle. The generic Linux kernel video driver, nouveau, is not compatible with nVidia. The reason why is because they refuse to cater to anybody who is not supplying open sourced drivers, which nVidia is not. This Debian policy is consistent with the FOSS philosophy and I can't fault them for being true to form. However, because they are being purist, they are excluding a lot of potential Linux users of their operating system. I happen to have a lot of time and patience and can look into the work-arounds that play well in many Debian derivatives. But, for reasons far beyond logical, Ubuntu 19.x will boot up with nVidia hardware right out of the box. I don't have to add any kernel mods to Grub to make it happen. This is the ultimate irony in my opinion.

I'd be really happy if the nVidia dilemma was confined to a single distribution of GNU/Debian/Linux/whatever. It's not confined to a single distro and the symptoms and cures are different in each case. Why is that? It's due to the fact that the underlying code is indeed open source and anybody can hack into it or add onto the original shell. God help us if those developers don't have a clue about what they are doing.

Well, it goes on and on. I've not given up on Linux and probably never will. As I pointed out elsewhere I have an insatiable curiosity and love a challenge. I wish I could argue that Windows is problem free and I can get all the support I need from that community. It's just not the case. However, the problems and lack of support that come with Linux are overwhelming at times.

[Kellemora]

Now that you mention it, I did have one computer I had to download an Nvidia driver for.
I had the instructions on how to recompile the kernel for it to work.
Everything worked as expected. But then I added a new kernel upgrade and blew it.
Had to use a Knoppix disk to get my video back and install a generic driver in order to recompile the kernel again.
That's when I locked it out so the kernel would not get upgraded.
What is interesting though, is when I added Linux Mint to a partition, it added the kernel drivers for my Nvidia card and it worked better than the one I compiled. This is one reason I used Linux Mint on that machine most often. Rarely booted into Debian anymore on that machine. I finally upgraded Debian to a later version which required the newest kernel and everything worked on it too. However, I DID have to select the OPTION to install proprietary stuff, which caused a bunch of Accept Screens to come up before the installation moved on.

There is one thing I don't like that Linux does. When I boot up one of my machines, I always get this Warning that such n such a Driver is not installed and do I want to install it, yes or no. I MUST select NO each time I reboot, which is annoying.
The reason I have to select NO is because the driver package THEY ASSUME as the one I need, does not have the driver for my video section on the mobo. If I say yes, I get the black screen, and even worse, if you say YES, it remembers you said YES, so a reboot doesn't get you back to the selection window. Again, boot up using Knoppix to fix it by uninstalling and reinstalling the kernel. Then boot up and remember to say NO when it asks, hi hi.

At least now we have a system similar to Windows where we can save our install before doing an upgrade, and fall back to it if the upgrade fails for some reason. But you have to remember to go save it, it's not automatic.

[yogi]

The fix for using nVidia in Linux has been to do exactly what you describe. Install the driver and then recompile the kernel, which requires a rebooting of the machine by the way. When the kernel was upgraded to the current 5.x series they did something to allow the system to boot so that you can install the drivers from the "extra" software menu. Ubuntu and Mint (there may be others) went one step further with a modification to the Ubiquity installer that allows for downloading and installing the right drivers automatically. If you do the driver installation manually, as you describe, then you need to modify Grub (I believe) so that each new kernel update also adds the nVidia drivers. Linux STILL does not provide anything that is proprietary but they did come up with a work around.

All that is peachy, if not a kludge fix. Unfortunately, when you depart from Ubuntu and Mint the kernel may not be the newest 5.x series. That's the case in an amazing number of distributions of Linux. For some reason developers do not feel obligated to use what is current. I don't know what to say about Debian because it's hit and miss. I have two Debian distributions that simply won't boot because of the presence of nVidia hardware on my laptop. The normal kernel fixes don't work and the support forums go silent when I ask about it. I have a strong suspicion that the problem is in the desktop environments requiring the use of Python. In some cases I can change the DE, such as in Linux Mint, and things suddenly start to work well with nVidia. I was trying to install Sparky Linux yesterday and actually got a Python generated error message during the installation. It puked and would not complete the install. This is why I am thinking it's not all a kernel problem but also involves which desktop one is using.

I hate to say it, but the problems seem to have a lot to do with FOSS and with the flexibility of choosing various DE's. People are telling me that's an advantage.

[Kellemora]

I have a program that works great when I'm on my normal Mate desktop.
But every once in a while I will open Cinnamon, the one that looks more like cell phone screen.
But cannot get my Kabikaboo open. No biggie really, I normally use FreeMind now. But sometimes I like to start out by placing my start-up index in Kabikaboo and then once I have it like I want, copy it over to FreeMind to build from.
Sorta like I liked to start most of my Flyers in msWRITE3.11version, then copy it over to a DOC after it was the sizes I needed it.
As an aside: I did manage to go through my old CRD files using Cardfile.exe on the old XP machine, but that program did not offer a way to save as text or even as pdf. So what I did was make a screenshot of each card, then added them to a DOC document, which I then opened on the Linux box and converted to odt so I could clean them up and make them look like text documents, and finally saved them as a pdf.
My only reason for converting to pdf was so I could treat them as the graphical images they really are or were as a screenshot before pasting them to a document. This way I could resize them all at once to fit 9 on a page, and in alphabetical order, or especially those cardfile cards that covered several cards. Worked out great, and took less time than it did to type this info out, hi hi.

[yogi]

There have been times when I did something similar to your method. I'd take a screenshot and saved the image for scanning as text. It would not get all the characters correct 100% of the time, but my HP printers saved me a lot of translation problems when I had incompatible software. Linux has some kind of scanning software built in too, but I don't know if it can do the image-to-text thing.

Some of the old Linux desktops look more like Windows than does Windows. Mate is a step in that direction, but Xfce makes me think of Windows XP for some reason. LOL When you get into the more graphics intense desktop environments, that's when adjuncts such as Python get called in. That is also where the nVidia way of processing graphics becomes incompatible with whatever the hell Linux thinks it should be doing. The solution has been to stop the boot process at a point where I can create a terminal session (alt+ctrl+F2) and install the nVidia drivers manually. Recently, and particularly with Debian, it's not possible to interrupt the boot process at the proper point. Another trick is to use the recovery mode, which is something like the "safe" mode in Windows. I can usually install nVidia via the repositories if that works. However, you don't get a choice to go into the recovery mode when doing a first time install. Ubuntu and a couple others now have a "safe graphics" mode coded into their Grub iso. This is cool when it works. The last two Linux distro's that had it would fail the same as if a normal boot was attempted. I discovered that some of those iso's that won't boot on the laptop will boot on the tower. The only hardware difference is the processor itself so that I have no idea why that works.

[Kellemora]

I didn't use OCR to make my copies of things. Just kept them as image files. Especially receipts.

I had a problem with my WiFi on the netbook after a Debian upgrade.
Went back to the original kernel and it still didn't work.
Mentioned it to someone and they gave me a different WiFi card to put into the netbook.
I wasn't sure if I wanted to try that myself or not, so used my hard wired LAN a couple of time I had the netbook out.
The next time when I went to use it for something and plugged in the LAN, it had updates.
Ran them of course, and the WiFi was back to working again. Has worked right ever since.
I couldn't figure out why it worked OK all along, and then quit working with the upgrade, and wouldn't work when I rolled back to the previous kernel. Stuff like that never made sense to me.

Speaking of which. For no apparent reason, the new computer I bought for Debi that I have up here with Linux Mint on it.
About once every three days, the keyboard will not respond. I can unplug it and plug it back in and it will work, or I can reboot and it will work. This tells me it is not the plug as I first thought.
Also, if I wait like six days, then the mouse will stop working too. In both cases, unplugging and plugging them back and they start to work again, but a reboot fixes this also.
I mentioned this in the forum a couple of times, and they said it has to do with my screensaver.
OK, don't see how, but OK. Changed to a different screensaver, same problem, hi hi.
Also, after I get an upgrade, the screensaver won't kick in until or unless I reboot the system.
It appears the screensaver comes on, but the screen is black. Wiggle the mouse, check the screensaver settings and they have not changed. So I mentioned this too on the forum. I'm not using suspend or hibernate, both of those features are turned off.
They finally asked me to plug the computer into a different monitor and see if it still does it.
Nope, no problems at all using a different monitor. So I swapped out the monitor with my XP machine and no problems at all since.

[yogi]

I've taken apart a few laptops and was duly unimpressed with the WiFi hardware. It's basically a postage stamp sized circuit board that is screwed down someplace out of the way. A couple cables and a couple screws removes it all, and of course the reverse process can be used to put a new card in. From my experience the most difficult problem with replacing the WiFi card would be routing the cables properly. LOL

Upgrades are a necessary evil. There is something called NVRAM (non volatile random access memory) on the mother board, and it holds a lot of information for EFI booting. It has other information too which certain software "updates" can modify. Thus if an updates proves disastrous, reverting back to a prior state doesn't always get you back exactly. That NVRAM may keep the bogus information until you write over it. Removing the software that put it there in the first place isn't enough. Of course, that's only one possibility for misbehaved updates. They can do many other things to change system response permanently.

As you were describing the problem with Deb's former computer, I was thinking USB bus controller problems and possible firmware updates. I can imagine a monitor messing up a screen saver, but it's not so easy to understand why it would play havoc with keyboard or mouse. My monitor has a USB hub built in and I used to use it for desktop peripherals. One day the port just died so that I had to switch to other USB ports for my mouse and keyboard. Again, that was a USB problem that happened to be located physically inside the monitor.

Screensavers and me don't get along. I prefer the screen to go dark rather than to have it glowing with distractions. Now with lock screens so common everywhere, screen savers should be deprecated. LOL

[Kellemora]

I do have most of my computers set to go to black for 5 minutes, then the monitor turns off, and hard drive spins down.

I don't have any of my computers lock so I have to add my password to open them back up again, with the exception of my accounting computer. I have to both log-in as the user, as well as log-into the accounting program. I can log-into the computer to do other things, but when I open the accounting program it asks for a password too, not actually to open the accounting program, you can use it without a password on a new file or an unprotected file. But to open a company file takes a password, a different password on each one too. I think all accounting programs are like that, if you turn that feature on of course.

What you mentioned about NVRAM might be why my son had to take his laptop computer to the dealer a couple of times.
Using the users factory restore option apparently doesn't bring it back to how it came from the factory.
He don't like doing that because they reformat the hard drive and reinstall the version of the OS that came on it.
Then he has to let it go through all the upgrades again after he gets home.
Then reinstall all of the programs.
Both times he had to do this was after he installed a program from his bank for his credit card reader.
Now he just has this tiny thing that plugs into his cell phone. He can swipe a card or plug it in so it reads the embedded chip, but he has to make sure and get it dead center or it don't work. No wait, I think he has two different things he plugs in, one for swipe and one for the chip.

Oh, here is something new too. The shop that works on my car, when he prints out the invoice, it has one of those square bar code things, forget what they are called. But if you have the program on your cell phone, you can scan that code to pay your bill. I suppose your cell phone has to have a debit card built into it so the money transfers from your bank to their account.

At the Amazon grocery stores, you have to have a Schmartz-Fone to shop there. You use it to get in the door, then you can put it away. There are no checkouts, you just go around and select your groceries, and a Big Brother Spy System in the ceiling keeps track of what you pick up and what you put back. When you get ready to leave, a small kiosk prints out a receipt if you want one. Otherwise you will get one sent to your cell phone via e-mail in about an hour.

I've never been there, but I think one of the gas stations has a system where you scan something on the pump with your cell phone, get your gas and just go.
Perhaps some day I will have to get a Schmartz-Fone just so I can buy a burger, hi hi.

[yogi]

The square you scan to do various things is called a QR Code. It's more than just a bar code reader in that it can hold executable code in it too. You can indeed use that to buy gas, but your payment method has to be linked to their system. Google, Apple, Microsoft, and a bunch of others too all have accounts that you can use for payment with your clever phone. In essence it does away with credit cards at the POS, but at some point you need to pay the piper. LOL

Aside from reading QR codes, most clever phones have near field sensors too. That means if you put your phone within a centimeter or two of a POS reader, the two will interact via RF. Kind of like Bluetooth but on different frequencies. Plus the near field is deliberately designed not to work at a distance. This is how you might use your Android clever phone to buy burgers in the future.

My standard credit card has an unique feature that I really like. There is a magnetic strip on it from the old days and a shiny gold chip as well. But now there is something in the card that will allow me to simply tap the sensor on the POS reader and be done. No swipes or insertions are necessary. I guess this is intended to foil the skimmers that steal credit card information. The downside is that only a few shops have this type of reader.

I posted an article about those Amazon Go stores. They are amazing places, but as the article points out, they are not fool proof. Yet.

[Kellemora]

MANY years ago, I had a FAST PASS System in my car for buying gas.
I worried about it at first because you have to drive under a few pumps sensors to get to the pump you stop at.
Then I learned the sensor does not activate until a motion sensor senses you standing outside your car at the pump.
Then the screen would say ready to fuel, remove handle, select grade.
When you hung up the pump handle it would say, transaction in process, do you want a receipt.
Whether you said yes or no the screen would say transaction complete, thank you.
The screen would not change until you got in your car, then it would turn off.
I tested this by standing there almost for five minutes once, and that screen didn't shut off until I got in the car.
I also tried jumping into the car right away and sure enough, it went right off.
So I wasn't so leery of it anymore.

On the new credit cards, yes my newest is a touch-n-go, but nobody I know has the terminal for it here.
Heck, some of the places you still have to swipe, even if they have a chip reader. I guess they aren't paying the additional fee to use the chip reader part, hi hi.

QR Code, yes that is the name I couldn't remember.

You have to have a Schmartz-Fone and an Amazon account to use one of their stores.
They have a small experimental store way out in Farragut, the rich folks area. Have no idea what they sell nor do I know anyone who has been there.
Our local Kroger store tried these hand held scanners so you didn't have to go through any checkout, but you did have to stop on one of the big blue plastic floor plates before going out the door.
You also had to use only the Blue shopping carts. Nothing special about the cart itself, except perhaps they knew the weight and with all the other styles of carts they have there, I'm sure they all weigh differently than the blue carts.
Right past the blue plate in the floor was a bagging area. There was also a sign by the blue plate that said, remove your coat, umbrella, purse, totes, or briefcase before placing cart on the blue pad.
They only used this system for about four or five months before taking it out.

The other Kroger store we shop at has taken out four of their self-serve kiosks and put the old normal check-out lanes back in place. I guess they were losing too many customers, hi hi.
I know the few times we were out at that Kroger, nearly everyone who tried to use self-checkout was there longer and had some type of problem. I'm sure they just moved them from that store up to our local Kroger because they have tons of self-check out counters in there now. Ironically, they are usually all full too. Perhaps because a lot of folks have figured out how to beat them at their own game, hi hi.

[yogi]

The absolute best self-checkout systems I've ever seen or used are at Home Depot. They look a lot like the ones in the grocery store with the exception that the GUI is a lot bigger. It makes it easier for old guys like me to read. But then, there isn't a lot to read as I must do with the other stores who have such things. The only message on an open monitor is "START SCANNING." No choices whatsoever. All you can do is scan. The scanner is one of those hand held jobs so that you don't actually have to lift anything in order to get your items scanned. Once scanned, the item appears on the checkout monitor clearly described and the price made abundantly obvious. There is a message that encourages you to put your item in the plastic bags provided, but it's not a requirement like some of the grocery stores. After everything is scanned the only option is to tap the [DONE] button, at which point it asks how you are intending to pay for all this. Again, it's clear and obvious with no distractions. The card reader and the money grabber are clearly visible near the monitor. I never had to hunt for them at Home Depot. I can be in and out of one of those lanes in under a minute, depending on what I'm buying. It's glorious.

My pet peeves at the grocery are in regard to scanning and weighing. I have no choice but to drag my purchase across the scanner or to place it on the scale. Heaven forbid I need to weigh it. I then get a dazzling array of choices and hopefully I can differentiate the Bosc from the De Anju pears or the pit boss will come running over admonishing me for selecting the wrong menu item. How she knows is beyond me. And yes, it seems as if it is an absolute requirement to put my grocery items in the provided bags. It won't let me pay unless I do that. And, when it comes to paying ... the choices are enough to cause seizures. Then, I better have a secret code for their rewards program or I will get a lecture about how much extra I am paying because I refuse to participate in their spying on my shopping.

I often wonder if it would be just as bad at Home Depot if they sold groceries. Mayibe ...

[Kellemora]

I won't use a self-checkout. Even if I tried, it would still take a checker to come make price correction overrides.
They are not giving me a 10% discount like we all get at self-serve gas stations.
They are not paying my workman's comp.
They are not paying me a salary.
And they are not bagging my groceries and putting them back in the cart.
If you watch how long it takes people to check out using them, it is not faster.
And definitely NOT more convenient.

If we let them get by with this, next they will leave cartons of products in the aisles and expect you to restock the shelves for them too.