Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux Foundation Struggles With Microsoft UEFI Signing

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
    The "price" you pay on any of these companies has nothing to do with money. Products by those companies will insult the aesthetics of anyone who is not a primate.
    Humans *are* primates.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
      Humans *are* primates.
      Humans are just the primate with the greatest potential in intelligence and cleverness.
      All other factors except this is just basic stuff.
      We (humans) are in fact a complex kind of "fungus" because on a very low level the cells work in the same way like the cells in the "fungus"
      That is the same with computers the basic stuff is very basic: "1/0" and some little logic "and/or/not"
      But the complexity grow very fast.

      Humans hardware is "basic" but the software part of the humans is very complex.

      One of the biggest problems of the human race is the unbalanced gift of intelligence of the individuals.

      But there is hope for this problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
        All i see are a bunch of numbskulls whining about how it is so difficult to enter the boot menu and turn Secure Boot OFF.

        And expecting their 'freedom' to be served to them on a sliver platter.

        Put your money where your mouth is and buy ZaReason/System76 if you really give a damn about hardware freedom.

        If not, STFU.

        Guy, just in case you didn't notice: Secure Boot is enabled by deafult and was supposed to be switchable maybe in the "bios" setup program. On desktops. But even this might be too complicated for some people. A lot of them are afraid when they hear BIOS setup (okay it would be questionable if they'd try to install Linux but it might be easier for them).

        But. On desktops. NOT on mobile devices, tables, phones, whatever. MS wants these dongled with Windows 8.

        So tell me again who is to STFU...

        Moreover I personally don't want that strange functionality in my hardware. Maybe it is a "sleeper". I also don't want tcpa/tpm there. Any padlock engine is far better anyway in terms of crypto functions if I need them.

        Comment


        • #34
          The fact that we allow some international standard to be locked to Microsoft is the first alarm bell that should go off.

          By playing into their game you give them validity for some perceived fairness when there is absolutely none.

          Who do you think are the people microsft targeted with this approach? The new linux adopters/dualbooters are the ones who will suffer most from this. And my fear is that the tipping direction is towards win8 bevause it work out of the box, allways.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            Humans *are* primates.
            Should have used the word ape.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post
              The fact that we allow some international standard to be locked to Microsoft is the first alarm bell that should go off.
              Precisely. I don't want to sound overly dramatic but honestly it's a disgrace. Besides since when do the words "Microsoft" and "secure" ever go together...

              Someone with neutrality and no vested interests and well, trustworthy should be in charge of anything like this.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                Products by those companies will insult the aesthetics of anyone...
                Though it pains me to admit it, I would never ever buy an ugly laptop.

                Comment


                • #38
                  @Adarion

                  Don't you think that when you are unable to disable one setting in the firmware that you are not really smart enough to use Linux?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Kano View Post
                    @Adarion

                    Don't you think that when you are unable to disable one setting in the firmware that you are not really smart enough to use Linux?
                    I personal think more in a way, that I have to jailbreak my kindle to access the OS behind it...

                    This UEFI secure boot sounds to me like, I have to jailbreak the BIOS/Motherboard to use it with a different OS.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Kano View Post
                      @Adarion

                      Don't you think that when you are unable to disable one setting in the firmware that you are not really smart enough to use Linux?
                      I have "tech analphabets" friends and relatives that use linux with satisfaction and appreciating it's use experience, but scared by everything that is "low level" because they're afraid to break something...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X