News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Adventures of putting 16 GB of RAM in a motherboard that ... by shawnz on Friday April 05, 2019 @09:28AM (#19582260)
Well, you can't screenshot a BSOD, so I assume you mean they would take a photo of it (which would be awkward as hell just getting a high enough res copy from them that I could read it) or more likely they would just tell me the error message verbally and leave out all the advanced details. So I'm not sure this is really that good of a justification to make the BSOD screen more detailed.
Re:Adventures of putting 16 GB of RAM in a motherboard that ... by logfromblammo on Friday April 05, 2019 @10:15AM (#19582697)
A BSoD screen could display a QR code that encodes a URL at microsoft.com that unpacks all the data after the '?' in the URL, and provides an option to change culture and locale, including links to support pages known to be associated with that error, and a button to Bing-search for more information on the error. They could then copy-paste the URL for that page using their phone into a text or email to their favorite technical adept.
Re:Adventures of putting 16 GB of RAM in a motherboard that ... by shawnz on Friday April 05, 2019 @10:59AM (#19583177)
They actually do exactly that already! You can see the QR code right in OP's pic.
Re:Adventures of putting 16 GB of RAM in a motherboard that ... by logfromblammo on Friday April 05, 2019 @01:54PM (#19585263)
I meant that the QR code should be larger, to encode the additional information shown after the registry patch as additional URL parameters. On re-reading, I did not make that clear.

Nobody is decoding QR codes by hand, so it isn't that big a deal to go from "https :// www.windows.com / stopcode ? code=ACPI_BIOS_ERROR" to "https :// www.windows.com / stopcode ? code=ACPI_BIOS_ERROR & p1=0000000000000002 & p2=FFFF9A0..."

Re:Adventures of putting 16 GB of RAM in a motherboard that ... by shawnz on Friday April 05, 2019 @02:06PM (#19585377)
Ah, you're right. I didn't realize the bugcheck parameters weren't included in the code, that's definitely something which would be helpful. However then you still might run into the second problem of not being able to reliably render it in a crashing state. That's the only reason I could think why they would not include those parameters in the QR.