this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
128 points (81.4% liked)
Linux
11084 readers
1036 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Blame Intel for making that a bold statement. Their refusal to allow ECC on anything except expensive server SKUs for decades set data integrity back substantially.
Fuck Intel.
As a devil's advocate; what if they allowed ECC by default and manufacturers became overly reliant on it to make certain RAM chips binnable that never should have been?
I can't say I follow you. The price difference between ecc and nonecc should be so low as to make nonecc extinct, in a world where the marketing shits at Intel didn't have their way. How would it end up being a negative?
What I was trying to say is they would just end up using ECC as a crutch, anyways. They already do this with solid state drives. Many reliability errors get swept under the rug because they're caught by error correction. So much so that there's doubt they would function without error correction. They would just do the same with RAM, force error correction for unreliable hardware so that it passes muster. I want the option to run ECC -- via BIOS, not have it imposed. I want the exact state of my hardware to be known if it's anything less than optimal. ECC would obscure these issues for the layman and make suboptimal performance that much more difficult to troubleshoot. Just food for thought. A month late, but better than never.