Legit Reviews

Ok I have been working on my computer for 5 days now and will probably never build another after this.

After tons of problems I have Vista Ultimate 64 installed, so I go to update the Bios

Using the Express Bios is says internal system error when the Bios goes to start-old notes say something about hard drive issues but I have 60G available

So I tried to use Iflash, it says that I have the wrong version Bios for my version of Windows(I put Vsita 64 in the box)

so now I dont know what to do, I'm not OC'ing, I just want the dam thing to work, if I could get my money back i would RMA everything...............................................................

Any help would be appreciated.

You wanna RMA the board cause your using beta software from M$?

No IRQ I'm just looking for a solution, is it a board issue or a software issue? Thats what I'm trying to figure out, I see others on forums posting that they are using Vista 64 and updating their bios on the bad axe 2, I'm just trying to figure out if my board is screwed up before I waste anymore time on the computer I'm building.

I believe you cannot use the Windows Bios update in Vista 64. You might do some more searching to confirm this. I am using Vista 64. But I dual boot with XP Pro. XP Pro is where I updated the Bios.

That said, I believe it may be safer to use the floppy method to update the Bios.

Good Luck!

Joey-

I'm also running Vista 64 Ultimate on a Bad Axe 2. When I update the BIOS, I use the ISO option, and have no issues.

Sean

seanriddle wrote:Joey-

I'm also running Vista 64 Ultimate on a Bad Axe 2. When I update the BIOS, I use the ISO option, and have no issues.

Sean

Gotta' agree with seanriddle, the ISO update is the best way to go (CD-Rs are cheap)

What did you do to uncompress the ISO image? and what software did you use to burn the image to the CD-R?

gara56 wrote:What did you do to uncompress the ISO image? and what software did you use to burn the image to the CD-R?

You don't uncompress anything, when you download the ISO image it is a *.iso file that is an image of the CD.

Deepburner free might work or ImgBurn. I use the latest Nero but I don't use 64 bit so I'm not sure...

gara56 wrote:what software did you use to burn the image to the CD-R?

I use ISO Recorder. Works great and it's free. I'm running it under Vista 64-bit just fine.

Sean

Thanks Sean. I'll give it a try tonight when I get home.

Glenn

seanriddle wrote:

gara56 wrote:what software did you use to burn the image to the CD-R?

I use ISO Recorder. Works great and it's free. I'm running it under Vista 64-bit just fine.

Sean

Sean,
Burned the ISO image onto a CD-R thanks to that utility you mentioned. Everything updated without any problems.

I plan to send the makers of ISORecorder a donation. That saved me a lot of grief.

I use magiciso to burn vista iso file to dvd. It works without any problem.
http://www.magiciso.com/tutorials/miso-burnwin.htm

Well, Vista x64 has finally drove me off the cliff. I decided to pull my two drives containing Vista apps and decided to put in a new HD and reinstall XP/Pro. I'm just going to pkg the other HDs and reinstall them in my machine when more Vista x64 drivers are available and MS has fixed some its problems. I'm just tired of getting BSODs for problems (i.e., memory, drivers, HD) that I can isolate even when the OS tools say they didn't find any problems. I thought about doing a dual boot setup, but I don't want to go through the headache.

Glenn

Well nothing worked, ISO or anything had to do the BIOS recovery to update my board

I have issues with this board, but Vista isn't one of them.

However, both Windows 2003 x64, Windows XP x64 (which is simply Windows 2003 SP1 x64 re-branded as "XP"), and Vista x64 are, very simply put, not ready for prime time.

It will be impossible to get all your software working with any of these three OSes. WOW64 / x64 windows is simply at a disadvantage given 99% of all executable code out there is IA-32 - x64 simply doesn't get wide exposure and enough runtime to hash out all the issues.

So unless you need more then 3.25GB of memory, stick with the 32bit OSes. It will be less painful.

I always think of OS/2 "for windows" where OS/2 could run windows 3.1x programs but not windows 95 programs and how wine-style-emulating is fundamentally annoying.

All 32-bit code runs through WOW64 on x64 windows versions.

Sun is the only vendor I've seen handle transition to 64 bit well, and they did this a long time ago. 64 bit CPUs in '95 and 64-bit OS (Solaris 7) in 98.

In my experience, even something as ubiquitous as Palm Desktop is an issue in x64 versions. I'm sure thats because Palm did something naughty, but it doesn't change the fact it doesn't work right.