Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Hat / Fedora To Work On Bringing Up Arm Laptops Under Linux

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    my only point was that Google isn't responsible for providing this kind of stuff.
    There are responsibilities that come with power, and surveillance woke capital has proven itself worse than MS was for us. This is the only important conclusion, MS brought us an ARM based general computing platform, and Google didn't. Despite the fact that Google brought more powerful small computers in everyone's pocket, than MS ever brought in as laptops and computers, it can only pretend it has no responsibility to empower the users when leading the tech industry.

    The idea that Google cannot mandate a standardized boot environment, despite the fact that open source implementations exist for most boards somewhere on github, is a laughably ridiculous notion. The standardized boot environment makes maintaining devices less expensive, and reduces the cost of expensive custom engineering. It would reduce the cost of an OEM selecting Android, the exact opposite of what the detractors have asserted. Do they have the right to avoid doing something against their interests? Yes they certainly do, but that still leaves MS more aligned with our interests.

    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I agree, but you don't need a [U]EFI to do that.
    ARM commissioned a major study on this question, and their conclusion was clear, they need a standardized hardware platform to "do that". You can say "well it could be something other than UEFI", and in theory it could be, but the study also provided an iron clad case that UEFI/ACPI is the only reasonable choice. An entire technology ecosystem is required to get a product into customer hands, and each part must be able and willing to fulfil its job. So we need a standardized pre-boot environment, and nothing else can credibly become said environment as there is only one viable option. Disagreeing with that study, and its conclusions, is a clear example of you going beyond what you claimed was your "only point".
    Last edited by techzilla; 10-09-2019, 11:40 AM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by techzilla View Post
      There are responsibilities that come with power, and surveillance woke capital has proven itself worse than MS was for us. This is the only important conclusion, MS brought us an ARM based general computing platform, and Google didn't. Despite the fact that Google brought more powerful small computers in everyone's pocket, than MS ever brought in as laptops and computers, it can only pretend it has no responsibility to empower the users when leading the tech industry.
      There's a very big difference between having some responsibility to a market you are heavily invested in, vs accusing them of being the sole reason for all your problems, which is what you implied when you said:
      "I'm not forgiving Google for fucking all of us. MS is better for Linux users EVEN when they don't use linux on their products, Google trapped us with an intentionally crippled boot process. .... if Google didn't enable and promote an intentionally crippled hardware eco-system."
      All of that is blown astronomically out of proportion. Google is not responsible for Linux users on ARM. They're not responsible in any sense of the word for making it easier for users to alter the boot process, let alone have any actual control in it since they aren't the ones who make ARM. They're a software company.
      The idea that Google cannot mandate a standardized boot environment, despite the fact that open source implementations exist for most boards somewhere on github, is a laughably ridiculous notion. The standardized boot environment makes maintaining devices less expensive, and reduces the cost of expensive custom engineering. It would reduce the cost of an OEM selecting Android, the exact opposite of what the detractors have asserted. Do they have the right to avoid doing something against their interests? Yes they certainly do, but that still leaves MS more aligned with our interests.
      None of what you said there makes any sense. Why would Google deliberately cripple their own partners and userbase for a feature they couldn't care less about? If they mandate something like that, existing devices that don't have a standardized boot environment will be incompatible with their product. That's ridiculous.
      Meanwhile, why would Google care about a standardized boot environment when the vast majority of their users aren't asking for one? Their job is to make an OS. How it is deployed is up to the partners. Google isn't expecting people to dual boot their phones, and the whole point of a Chromebook is to cater to tech-unsavvy people. You're asking them to step up for something that hardly anyone cares about.
      Keep in mind, I own several ARM devices myself. I'd love to see a standardized boot process for ARM. I believe there should be one. But, never would I expect Google to be responsible for it, and I'm sure most of their competitors would not be keen on Google calling the shots for them.
      If you want someone to point fingers at, point them at SoftBank.
      ARM commissioned a major study on this question, and their conclusion was clear, they need a standardized hardware platform to "do that". You can say "well it could be something other than UEFI", and in theory it could be, but the study also provided an iron clad case that UEFI/ACPI is the only reasonable choice. An entire technology ecosystem is required to get a product into customer hands, and each part must be able and willing to fulfil its job. So we need a standardized pre-boot environment, and nothing else can credibly become said environment as there is only one viable option. Disagreeing with that study, and its conclusions, is a clear example of you going beyond what you claimed was your "only point".
      And yet somehow, you don't realize that it is ARM/SoftBank who should cater to the requests of their survey. Somehow, you think Google, a 3rd party company that doesn't even have a license to manufacture ARM chips, is responsible.
      I don't deny what people want and what ARM devices should have. I never disagreed with the study. My gripe is how you think Google is the reason why nothing is happening.

      Comment

      Working...
      X