upcycler wrote:What does "sneakernet" mean? I cannot figure out how to get anything off the Mac and onto the HP since once I have loaded Mint there is no communication. The Mint does not recognize a Mac or Windows formatted flash drive, so I can't move it that way. Is there something else to try?
"Sneakernet" refers to moving files on removable media -- floppy discs, CD-Rs, USB flash drives, tapes, or what have you. What's viable depends on your hardware. If the only common connector/media available to you is USB, then USB flash drives are the most convenient option. That
should work, but if you're having problems with it, you may want to investigate that, although it's a significant detour in solving your main problem. Linux
should recognize a FAT USB flash drive. If it doesn't, then it could be a problem with the USB drivers in Linux; however, since you say Linux is booting from a USB flash drive, that seems unlikely. More details would be needed to diagnose this problem.
upcycler wrote: Another person suggested that I use a Linux emergency system, but I have been unable to determine what that is (forum & internet searches talk about using it, not where an emergency system is or how it is to be found.)
Something like
PartedMagic, System Rescue CD, or the Mint installation medium booted in its "try before installing" mode. Note that for some purposes, such as using the efibootmgr program, you'd need to boot it in EFI mode (that is, using an EFI boot loader) rather than in BIOS/legacy mode (using a BIOS boot loader). The last I checked, PartedMagic didn't support EFI-mode booting, but recent versions of System Rescue CD do, and the Mint install disc does, too.
upcycler wrote: I do know the HP lets me make changes to the BIOS. I have disabled secure boot. But, why is there a BIOS if it is a uefi system?
You (probably) don't have a BIOS; you've got a UEFI. Manufacturers are continuing to use the term "BIOS" in reference to their UEFI firmware. This is technically incorrect, but I think they're doing it because many people know what a BIOS is, at least roughly, and since UEFI fills a similar role, referring to a UEFI as a BIOS is easier than referring to it as firmware and then saying that BIOS and UEFI are two different types of firmware, and that they've set up their UEFI user interfaces to resemble those of the old-style BIOS.
viking777 wrote:although Uefi firmware is supposed to be a bios replacement it only replaces part of the bios (ie the bit that does the booting) the bit that does the POST and other sundry bits and pieces is still done by the old bios - good eh?
The earliest and crudest UEFI implementations for x86-64 PCs were done as you say, with BIOS doing the hardware initialization tasks and the UEFI part running on top of that. More modern UEFI implementations, though, ditch the BIOS entirely and rely on other tools to do the hardware initialization. This newer approach has the advantage of replacing 16-bit BIOS code with more efficient 64-bit code that's more in tune with the needs of modern OSes. These more modern UEFIs typically feature a "fast boot" mode that bypasses BIOS-style support, for instance. (They can still support BIOS-mode boots by using a UEFI component known as a Compatibility Support Module, or CSM.)
I don't have solid numbers on how many UEFIs are built atop a BIOS, vs. using something else for the low-level stuff. The trend is toward more of the latter type, though, and my suspicion is that most Windows 8 PCs ship with the latter type of implementation.