×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Will Secure Boot Cripple Linux Compatibility?

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the security-through-totalitarianism dept.

Security 545

MojoMax writes "The advent of Windows 8 is drawing ever nearer and recently we have learned that ARM devices installed with Windows 8 will not be able to disable the UEFI secure boot feature that many of us are deeply concerned about. However, UEFI is still a very real danger to Linux and the freedom to use whichever OS you chose. Regardless of information for OEMs to enable customers to install their own keys, such as that published by the Linux Foundation, there are still very serious and as yet unresolved issues with using secure boot and Linux. These issues are best summarized quoting Matthew Garrett: 'Signing the kernel isn't enough. Signed Linux kernels must refuse to load any unsigned kernel modules. Virtualbox on Linux? Dead. Nvidia binary driver on Linux? Dead. All out of tree kernel modules? Utterly, utterly dead. Building an updated driver locally? Not going to happen. That's going to make some people fairly unhappy.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

545 comments

Organized trolling campaign on Slashdot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742652)

GreatBunzinni [slashdot.org] has been posting anonymous accusations [slashdot.org] listing a whole bunch of Slashdot accounts as being part of a marketing campaign for Microsoft, without any evidence. GreatBunzinni has accidentally outed himself [slashdot.org] as this anonymous poster. Half the accounts he attacks don't even post pro-Microsoft rhetoric. The one thing they appear to have in common is that they have been critical of Google in the past. GreatBunzinni has been using multiple accounts to post these "shill" accusations, such as Galestar [slashdot.org] , NicknameOne [slashdot.org] , and flurp [slashdot.org] .

That's not the problem. The problem is that moderators gave him +5 Informative and are now modding down the accused, even for legitimate posts. Metamoderation is supposed to address this by filtering out the bad moderators, but clearly it's not working.

This "shill" crap that has been flying around lately has to stop. It's restricting a variety of viewpoints from participating on the site and creating an echo chamber.

Re:Organized trolling campaign on Slashdot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742886)

Well, gee, what do you know. A subscribed account anonymously posing a pro-active defense of Bonce, followed by Bonch's own weak sauce post advocating for Microsoft, despite Microsoft's untenable position.

Well... I guess that Bonch is at least making his 30 pieces of silver as a SHILL.

Hi, GreatBunzinni! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742896)

How's it going, GreatBunzinni!

Re:Organized trolling campaign on Slashdot (-1, Offtopic)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742920)

How am I advocating for Microsoft by asking if there will be preinstalled Linux tablets? Dumb.

Re:Organized trolling campaign on Slashdot (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742944)

I see you remembered to check the "post anonymously" option this time GreatBunzinni!

How's that going?

"Freedom" (4, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742654)

Would someone interested in Linux on these particular tablets be able to order one from a vendor with Linux (or no operating system) pre-installed? I couldn't find information on whether or not OEMs are restricted from selling pre-installed Linux versions of the tablet. The SoftwareFreedom website says "any ARM device that ships with Windows 8 will never run another operating system, unless it is signed with a preloaded key or a security exploit is found that enables users to circumvent secure boot." The phrase there is "ships with Windows 8," which suggests to me that Custom Boot-enabled versions could ship without Windows. Admittedly, I have a hard time seeing it as a freedom issue, as these are just tech gadgets at the end of the day. I'd rather it was framed as an inconvenience argument, not a freedom one.

Re:"Freedom" (5, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742718)

Tablets won't be able to be fully certified by MS if they don't have secure boot enabled with no way of disabling it. There may be some manufacturers that opt to have a second line for Linux, but I doubt that will be very common. The problem is one of logistics it's not that much cheaper to have a second line that supports Linux, you have to support it and QA it. But, if you just ship hardware that's supported by Linux then you lose no money on that and sell more units. Of course MS is the party here that's misbehaving.

The issue is that ultimately, they're selling these devices that can't have other OSes installed without cracking them, that's inherently a freedom issue.

Re:"Freedom" (2, Insightful)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742790)

The issue is that ultimately, they're selling these devices that can't have other OSes installed without cracking them, that's inherently a freedom issue.

So is Apple, but more to the point nothing is stopping Linux tablets from coming to market, in fact there are lots of them out there now. If you buy a 'Designed for Windows 8' device it's no different than buying an iPad with regard to the operating system. I doubt there are many people out there who bought an iPad and are complaining that they can't install Linux on it (me included), so why should it be any different for these 'Designed for Windows 8' devices?

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742894)

I have an iPad, and I have two Linux Tablets (Before you declare me crazy, I only paid for one of them, a Linux tablet.) I don't see that this is a big issue for tablets. And I build my personal dev boxes from scratch, so I doubt it will be an issue there. You can buy Linux laptops now, not sure how this will affect that. I suspect we will get around it all pretty quick anyway.

All that aside, why would I want to buy a device that will not let me install whatever I want on my computer?

Also, Bonch, please stop your trolling campaign campaign, it's getting really old and annoying. All it does is convince people that you are a worse troll than we used to think you were.

Re:"Freedom" (4, Interesting)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742906)

So is Apple

Apple does not sell its OS to 3rd party hardware vendors and dictate how to lock down the device.

nothing is stopping Linux tablets from coming to market, in fact there are lots of them out there now

There are, but how long until MS ramps up the pressure to push Android out of the market via legal and possibly illegal means?

If you buy a 'Designed for Windows 8' device it's no different than buying an iPad with regard to the operating system.

Sure it is. The vendor is being forced by the OS supplier to set the device up in a way that precludes alternatives, and leveraging their monopoly platform to do it.

I doubt there are many people out there who bought an iPad and are complaining that they can't install Linux on it (me included), so why should it be any different for these 'Designed for Windows 8' devices?

Yeah, minorities should ALWAYS be ignored. Only the masses should ever get what they want, everyone else can go fuck themselves. Right?

Re:"Freedom" (0)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743026)

Apple does not sell its OS to 3rd party hardware vendors and dictate how to lock down the device.

So what? And they only have to lock it down if it's 'Designed for Windows 8' and if it's ARM, if they don't put on that Windows 8 sticker then they don't have to do anything.

There are, but how long until MS ramps up the pressure to push Android out of the market via legal and possibly illegal means?

And i'm sure Google will just rest on their laurels and just let Android die.

Sure it is. The vendor is being forced by the OS supplier to set the device up in a way that precludes alternatives, and leveraging their monopoly platform to do it.

But it isn't, if you didn't want Windows 8 you wouldn't buy a device designed for it, unless of course you're an idiot.

Yeah, minorities should ALWAYS be ignored. Only the masses should ever get what they want, everyone else can go fuck themselves. Right?

That appears to be what the OEMs think, if they haven't produced a product for a market it indicates that market is likely not viable.

Re:"Freedom" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38743038)

You do realize that this is pretty much how the free market works, right?

Yeah, minorities should ALWAYS be ignored. Only the masses should ever get what they want, everyone else can go fuck themselves. Right?

Re:"Freedom" (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742914)

From my perspective, m$ historic QA on this topic is usually flexible. I plan to buy the tablet, stick a USB up its, "port," and run linux; life is good.

"Come Bell, I have something to show you." - the Beast

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742948)

To add, Android is based off Linux~ and MOST tablets ship w that, win 7 tablets are still IT only for sanity's sake.

Re:"Freedom" (5, Insightful)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742994)

Because when you buy a device you should be allowed to modify it. It is your private property at that point. It doesn't matter how many stupid people only use them to show off to friends, if even one single person in the entire world wants to be able to modify their personal property in a way that causes no harm to others then it is their right to do so.

Re:"Freedom" (0)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743066)

Because when you buy a device you should be allowed to modify it. It is your private property at that point. It doesn't matter how many stupid people only use them to show off to friends, if even one single person in the entire world wants to be able to modify their personal property in a way that causes no harm to others then it is their right to do so.

And absolutely nothing whatsoever stops you from doing that, for a real-world example just look at all the ipad/iphone jailbreaking.

Re:"Freedom" (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743052)

The problem is the same as those designed for Windows devices in the mid to late '90s. You would pay about double for that logo even though what you were buying was typically stripped of the usual chips so that the functionality could be run through Windows only drivers. Except in this case it's even more insidious as the devices themselves will have all the capabilities needed to run something else, but because of MS will be rendered incapable of doing so.

It's clear there's antitrust violations involved with this. You cannot force companies to lock out competitors in this fashion. And you cannot use such phony certification requirements as a way of punishing manufacturers that don't go along with the anti-competitive behavior.

Apple isn't a good influence on the industry, but what they're doing is significantly less evil in this respect from what MS is doing.

Windows is Oranges in this case (5, Insightful)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743080)

You are comparing Apples(tm) and Windows(tm). What OS does Apple sell? What computer models does Microsoft sell? See the difference?

Re:"Freedom" (2, Insightful)

pclminion (145572) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742898)

I don't see why Microsoft, the owner of the Windows trademark, cannot impose whatever rules it wants to on manufacturers who want to put the Windows logo on their products. This was a big deal in the 90's because Microsoft already had huge platform lock-in, so it was unfeasible to ship a product that wasn't Windows-certified. But on ARM? There's no Windows ARM software available, no multi-decade legacy of crap following behind it, so where is the lock-in? The Windows logo no longer indicates a platform advantage, it merely indicates you passed Microsoft's tests.

A manufacturer can still make an ARM device that runs Windows and allow Linux as well -- they just can't put the Windows logo on it.

The problem is stupid consumers who demand to see that logo.

Re:"Freedom" (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742976)

Because there are limits to what you can require. Requiring that third parties only allow your OS to be installable is significantly worse than bundling a web browser with your OS. Ultimately this sort of multi-corporation misconduct is likely to be a violation of Sherman in so far as it stymies competion and prevents the user from having the full choice of OS on the device.

This is very different from the iPad where Apple pays for the entire development process and sells it to consumers.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743110)

Actually, that works out great, less devices for Linux to support, so hopefully they can refocus some coding effort from driver support. It also works because YOU as the consumer are responsible for buying what you need, not the manufacturer (so buy a tablet you know supports it).

I'm not hearing the same news for desktops though? I could care less about the tablets / phones / ARMs. Desktops and laptops, seem to replace the bios w/o the bs. http://www.techspot.com/news/40493-uefi-to-start-dominating-bios-in-2011-slash-pc-boot-time.html [techspot.com] Not finding a whole lot on it though.

But anyways, all I'm saying is if my tablet has slightly worse hardware specs cause I bought it for the same price as a win 8 tab BUT it lets me run Linux, I just don't think I care. Same w the phones, they can't kill Android because android is supported by the community more than a corporate (google).

Re:"Freedom" (4, Insightful)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743004)

Other way around. These are linux (andriod) tablet makers being paid by MS to make a Windows version. Just like phones, these will be samsung galaxy tabs, acer iconias etc. with a minor refresh/rebrand to run windows. Not windows tablets being done the other way around.

The gadget market is very different from the desktop market anyway. Right now it's an iPad market, with some other hangers on. Whether MS can change that is an open question, but it's not like you can put linux on your iPad, and it has 90% of the market right now.

Re:"Freedom" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742724)

That assumes there will be non-Windows variants of these devices readily accessible. I seriously doubt there will be in any meaningful quantity. It's also likely that the non-Windows variants will cost more "due to higher support costs" and therefore the market will largely consist of Windows only devices.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742736)

They'll probably make a Windows 8 version (locked) and an Android version (also locked) of each tablet. The demand for anything else is too small to bother with. People who want regular Linux will have to jailbreak.

Re:"Freedom" (2)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742788)

That's the thing. You won't even be able to jailbreak.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742916)

If the Android version doesn't have a (securely) locked bootloader too then yes you will be able to.

The situation with Windows 8 on ARM *sucks*, I don't like it and I don't think they should dictate to OEMs that they must not allow custom mode. In my opinion, they went too far with locking down ARM and freeing up x86. For Windows 8 x86 machines, it is required that the OEMs provide a mechanism to install alternative operating systems. For ARM, it is required that they not. This is, to me, wrong. But c'est la vie, it is actually not too different from other tablets, most Android tablets I believe have locked bootloaders that had to be circumvented to install other OSes. And of course, the iPad is a black box.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743002)

If the Android version doesn't have a (securely) locked bootloader too then yes you will be able to

Well with the prevalence of Microsoft's "solution" they may simply swap Microsoft's keys for their own and install Android.

it is required that the OEMs provide a mechanism to install alternative operating systems.

Except there's no standardization or automation to allowing a user to safely and easily install an OS that isn't already listed in the key storage. Check this writeup [dreamwidth.org] once the site is done protesting SOPA/PIPA to see how.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

ewanm89 (1052822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742930)

Of course you can, it may require replacing a chip on the motherboard but of course it's possible with enough time and effort.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743030)

Have you ever tried to remove a surface-mount SoC? With underfill securing it to the board?

Yeah, good fucking luck with that.

Re:"Freedom" (2)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743040)

Yes, this is the entire point. They're bringing this concept to basic general computing; people are already annoyed at having to jailbreak consumer blackboxes like phones and tablets and game consoles, and now that the masses have rolled over and wagged their tails when presented with these restrictions the powers that be are going even further.

Re:"Freedom" (1, Insightful)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742768)

The fundamental problem is that the relative market share is such that a whole lot of OEM's won't bother with non-Microsoft hardware. Given Microsoft's market share, they won't see adequate money in it (there would be money, just not enough). Add in Microsoft's perpensity to bully and persuade OEM's, the hardware just won't be there for the most part.

And this still doesn't address the problem of not really owning your hardware, which is what this change does. You will be absolutely limited in what software your hardware can run.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743112)

And this is just the sort of thing that got MS in trouble with antitrust laws in the past. Yes, they got a slap on the wrist for that and were required to hire an underpaid intern to write "we're sorry" 10 times on the blackboard. Now they're repeating it. OEMs are going to be strong-armed to provide this just like they were strong-armed in the past; if they want the MS seal of approval they have to play ball.

There's no hope in hell of the masses boycotting new consumer devices that have these restrictions; they don't understand the issues and they've proven that they actually want locked up devices as long as they're new and shiny and have rounded corners.

Re:"Freedom" (3, Insightful)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742954)

It's a freedom argument. If I purchase a device then it is MINE. I should be able to control it, take it apart, paint it a different color, give it to my kids, etc. And this freedom means I should be able to put my own software on it without permission from some bozos in Redmond.

Pre-installed Linux is only halfway there. It means I can't change the linux if I want to, or put on BSD, etc. Stop treating these devices like stupid consumer gadgets. Ok, they probably are going to be just that in practice, but that doesn't mean they should be forbidden to be more than hipster jewelry.

Re:"Freedom" (3, Informative)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742970)

So taking away your freedom to tinker with a gadget you own is an inconvenience issue, not a freedom issue? I think it's more than rather inconvenient that you no longer own the objects you buy. It's a property issue, not an inconvenience.

Re:"Freedom" (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743126)

>Admittedly, I have a hard time seeing it as a freedom issue, as these are just tech gadgets at the end of the day. I'd rather it was framed as an inconvenience argument, not a freedom one.

No, at the end of the day, these are general purpose computers, crippled to look like "just tech gadgets".

Even if it would turn out that it is legal for MS to do this, it is wrong. That may come off as subjective, and depending on what weight one assigns to what right and what freedom of whom, one might come up with another answer.

It boils down to chipping away a little freedom of many end users in the face of a lot for one mighty corporation that will want to control and milk the consumers to their detriment, making computing suck a bit more for everyone.

Which side are you on?
 

Note: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742668)

This will be the last story we post today until 6pm EST in protest of SOPA... or not..

Re:Note: (2)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742702)

When Wikipedia's blackout is over, look up timezones.

Re:Note: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742826)

Or look at google's cached page now:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:D9ELHvdpvqcJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_zone

Re:Note: (1)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742752)

Yep... for slashdot to choose 6 PM EST shows their true colors. They really don't give a damn about SOPA/PIPA. The west coast hasn't even come home from work yet.... Weak.

Re:Note: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742990)

Nobody cares about the west coast.

Simple solution (5, Insightful)

NeoTron (6020) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742690)

Don't purchase any of these ARM powered devices which run Windows 8.

Re:Simple solution (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742742)

Simple, yes; solution, not so much. One of the wonders of Linux is its use as a windows replacement. This is an attempt to prevent that. Sure, if you bought something with Android you ought to be able to run a non-Android Linux sooner or later, but that's not nearly as important as being able to toss Windows over for it.

Re:Simple solution (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742778)

You solution is this; If you don't like what they have offered you, design your own hardware and commission it to be built.

If the maker of the tablet wants to lock it to windows or android, they have that right. If you don't like their choices buy something else or do as I have suggested above.

Re:Simple solution (0, Troll)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742968)

If you don't like their choices buy something else or do as I have suggested above.

If you don't like addressing me civilly. go fuck yourself or do as I will suggest below.

Go fuck yourself twice.

There's no reason why I should suck it up and accept what the manufacturer of the device wants. That's loser talk.

Re:Simple solution (0)

imboboage0 (876812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743100)

Since you're not into this 'loser talk,' might I ask what you plan to do? It's interesting that you think just because you are a consumer, you can tell manufacturers what to build.

THEY do the design. THEY do the build. THEY sell it. YOU choose to buy it, or not. That's it.

Re:Simple solution (1)

Shompol (1690084) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743060)

You solution is this; If you don't like what they have offered you, design your own hardware and commission it to be built.

Only to end up in the history books, like BEOS did. What basically happened is MS approached the "commissioned party" and asked them to stop or lose the Windows business. Yes, leveraging a monopoly is sweet.

Re:Simple solution (1)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743136)

Ah, yes, I can see it now. The battle cry "a soldering iron in every kitchen, a microchip in every pot"!

Aside from the overheads in building a one-off (multiply all costs by ten, divide all compatibility by a hundred, mutilate all certification beyond recognition), the extraordinary difficulty in building a tablet (not exactly a tower unit, is it?) and the problems with vendors (you want to order what from Intel? To them, you are nothing and no-one), you've still got the smallish problem that perhaps 0.0001% of the population has the time, inclination, money or incentive to run a DIY shop merely to be able to run Linux versus something else.

Linux could have ruled the world a decade ago, but for such mantras.

Resale value? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742822)

Consider this, demand for second-hand devices of this sort is going to be VERY weak. I'd not buy one myself.

Re:Simple solution (5, Funny)

taniwha (70410) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742842)

Oh no - you should purchase them .... but them return them because they don;t work with Linux

Re:Simple solution (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742908)

Then be told to go home because that's not a valid reason to return it? Unless they told you it was compatable with Linux before you bought it.

Re:Simple solution (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38743104)

Unless they told you it was compatable with Linux before you bought it.

That's neither a valid reason... remember the PS3?

Re:Simple solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742854)

That only works when the Linux community is a significant portion of the anticipated consumer base, and I'd be willing to bet we aren't.

Re:Simple solution (1)

Techmeology (1426095) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742902)

Unfortunately, most consumer hardware (at least when it comes to complete systems) comes somewhat paired with software (such as the OS). Have you ever tried buying a laptop without an OS installed (or with Linux as that OS)? How about a tablet without either Android (and no official way of installing your own distro) or Windows?

WHAT?!?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742722)

"What do you mean I can't put Linux on this Commodore Vic 20?!?! I'm outraged!!!!!"
get over yourself.

EPIC FAIL (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743130)

""What do you mean I can't put Linux on this Commodore Vic 20?!?! I'm outraged!!!!!""

Why can't you? You have the source code, and there are 8 bit versions of it for microcontrollers already, that don't have or need a VMM. Yes, it is requires a Herculian effort to do so, but you can, which is the whole point here.

Don't buy the incompatible hardware. Done. (2)

Vandil X (636030) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742726)

When the incompatible hardware doesn't sell, the OEMs will hear you loud and clear.

Re:Don't buy the incompatible hardware. Done. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742758)

I don't think /. comprises that much of the tablet market.

Re:Don't buy the incompatible hardware. Done. (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742850)

No, not really. Linux is a far smaller market share (the only place where it dominates is 'net servers, and server farms like Google's, Amazon's, etc).

The problem with this bit by bit elimination of Linux is that it makes it harder and harder to develop Linux; it is slowly but surely squeezing Linux out.

The OEM's will play along; that's where the lion's share of the money is. Linux will wither a bit more, despite being a better tool in certain applications.

And this won't be the final push to bind hardware to the Big Name Corporation software. If this is allowed to move forward, I'd give it a decade before you'll be able to only buy any computing device as effectively an embedded system; hardware and software, with no re-purposing.

What this really affects (3, Insightful)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742728)

It seems to me this only affects a subset of devices that don't even yet exist. If what you want to do is run linux with virtual box and other assorted unsigned kernel modules then why would you be buying a 'Designed for Windows 8' ARM device? You wouldn't, just like you wouldn't buy an iPad to do those things. You would buy an x86 device, or an Android device, or an ARM device that is not 'Designed for Windows 8'.

Re:What this really affects (5, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742836)

Myopic.

Reminds me of when drug testing started to take hold in the 1970s - "If you don't want to drug test, you can choose to work at a job where you don't." Except generally, assholism comes with built-in scope creep. Now you can't get a job at Home Depot pushing carts without having machines inspect your personal fluids to determine your off-work behavior. The simply "if you don't like X, then go elsewhere" so-called 'solution' is a fallacy, and always has been. It's a way to avoid a problem; it does not fix anything, or prevent a problem from getting worse.

Another great example - "Don't like crime in this city? Move to another city." Or "Don't like the shitty laws here? Move to another country." {And when the countries of the world unite to form a cartel of shitty laws worldwide -- for instance ACTA -- they will be far harder to fight.}

Re:What this really affects (2, Insightful)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742862)

Except that it's not like that at all, you don't buy a hammer if what you need is a screwdriver, just like you don't buy a device specifically designed for an operating system if you want to run a different operating system, you choose a different device. What sort of entitlement complex do you have when you get to the point of thinking companies have to build devices that are everything to everyone?

Re:What this really affects (5, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743024)

The same entitlement complex that those who enforce anti-trust laws have.

Also, whoosh. My point went over your head based on your metaphor that does not represent the situation at all.

A more apt metaphor would be: What if new devices started using proprietary screwdriver bits? Maybe they get a kickback from the screwdriver bit industry, or manufacture the bits themselves to pad their profit (remember the outrage when the iPhone changed its screws?). The "if you don't want that tool, buy another tool" metaphor simply does not work. You cannot use their tool because they have changed it to be less adaptable. People can buy phillips and flathead screwed devices 'til the cow comes home, but there's enough mindless consumers and people that it would not change the bottom line enough for $CORPORATION to change their ways. After another company sees the money they make, they start using proprietary screws too. Eventually, it becomes an industry trend. You can either shell out for the proprietary screwdriver, or use none of these devices. Either way, your unwillingness to go with a bullshit 'feature' does nothing to stop that bullshit from creeping into every device in existence; you merely stuck your head in the sand.

YOU actually come off as the entitled one here, except that you feel entitlement for the faceless corporations that are only interested in your money, rather than for yourself and your own freedom of market choice. You somehow feel that if they were forced to offer something that costs the same to make, but allows people greater freedom, that somehow this affects your livelihood or your "feelings" on what a corporation should be allowed to do. Unless you're a CEO yourself, you're simply loving to learn the taste of the boots you lick. In fact, simply boycotting a product does not make its shitty features go away. And corporations were originally only allowed to continue existing if they served the public good; otherwise they died a mandatory, automatic death sentence. (That is, before those same corporations and their cronies re-wrote the law so that they have more rights than actual people. Privatize profits, socialize losses, no death penalty if you're a corp, and if you're a CEO you can kill someone and not go to jail because you're deemed more important than others.)

I mean, imagine someone saying "if you don't like the fact that airbags can decapitate your baby, then don't get a car with airbags". Do you think that stopped them from coming? Now I am in danger of responding to your bad metaphor with another metaphor, but my point -- which still stands -- is that simply avoiding something you don't like does not make it go away.

It's not a "simple solution". It is neither simple, nor a solution. It is not simple to reduce your freedom of choice, and it is not a solution in any way, shape, or form. A solution solves a problem. The problem still exists. You've done nothing.

"Don't like wars over oil? Then don't buy gas!"

"Don't like abortions? Then don't have one!" (This is a trick example, as I *love* abortions. But to someone who thinks abortions represent a problem {which is not me} -- this 'solution' does not actually solve the 'problem'.)

"Don't like the encroachment of civil liberties in the name of the drug war? Then don't do drugs (alternate: move to another country)."

"Don't like cops tasering people? Then don't mouth off to cops!"

Anyone who thinks this attitude constitutes a solution has a major cognitive logic defect.

Re:What this really affects (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743120)

-Clint
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)

"Want bad Karma? Then don't give a fuck!"

Sorry had to ... !!!! ;)

Re:What this really affects (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743138)

Anyone who thinks this attitude constitutes a solution has a major cognitive logic defect.

Just like anyone who thinks those examples are analogous to this situation. This a device built for a specific purpose (to run Windows 8), if you want to run other operating systems then buy a device designed to do such things.

YOU actually come off as the entitled one here, except that you feel entitlement for the faceless corporations that are only interested in your money, rather than for yourself and your own freedom of market choice.

I do have freedom of market choice fool, no-one is changing that, if i want to run Android I'll buy a tablet that supports it, so not an iPad and Apple restricting the iPad to running iOS doesn't affect my freedom of choice.

Re:What this really affects (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742950)

People need jobs to live a good lifestyle. People don't need Designed for Windows 8 computing devices.

Test certificates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742740)

Just an uniformed question, but wouldn’t the OS varies allow unsigned loading of binaries but prompt the user or inform them in some way? This is how it is handled for most systems in which you are developing new drivers. By default only trusted sources are loaded but if you want to enable other signed binaries the user has to specifically allow it, what is wrong with this approach?

Re:Test certificates (2)

Atlantis-Rising (857278) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742830)

The user is, primarily, the problem, security-wise. Giving the user the ability to opt out of the security defeats it, because had they not been a problem to start with, the security would not likely be necessary.

Re:Test certificates (2)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743062)

Then the solution is simple. Eliminate all the users. I suggest hiring the daleks for that one, they seem enthused with the idea.

Re:Test certificates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38743084)

Not really, the users posing the largest risk are those that won't know how to opt-out even when an opt-out is available, as such all that such a system needs to be reasonably safe is being on by default and that large risky chunk of users will never toggle it, they won't even know it's there and even less so what it does.

Re:Test certificates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742838)

Just an uniformed question, but wouldn’t the OS varies allow unsigned loading of binaries but prompt the user or inform them in some way? This is how it is handled for most systems in which you are developing new drivers. By default only trusted sources are loaded but if you want to enable other signed binaries the user has to specifically allow it, what is wrong with this approach?

This is the approach that MS supports for x86 systems, but not for ARM-based ones. I say, screw MS! If I don't own the hardware I have paid for, and therefor have the right to modify it to my own needs, then I say to h-e-double-hocky-sticks to those who would try to sell it to me. I don't see a "you are leasing/renting this computer" on the box when I buy it, and until I do, then if I cannot install another OS (Linux, QNX, MyOwnOS, or whatever), they aren't selling it to me to become MY property. They are saying that it is Microsoft's property.

Re:Test certificates (1)

Z34107 (925136) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742890)

This is the approach that MS supports for x86 systems, but not for ARM-based ones. I say, screw MS!

I don't see a problem with them locking down the "designed for Windows 8"-emblazoned ARM tablets. Apple proved there's a market for unconfigurable iDevices, so let Microsoft have a stab at the "it just works" crowd. x86 tablets will be just as free as Windows has ever been.

Not that I'm likely to buy either, mind you. I just don't take personal offense to Microsoft trying to sell to my grandma.

NO !! DON'T BUY MACHINES WITH WINDOWS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742756)

Simple as that !! I don't want to see any "ooooh, but windows comes on everything good" crap !! Don't buy those !!

Boycott (1)

woboyle (1044168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742770)

The solution (yeah, as if that will ever happen) is to boycott any and all devices that come with Windows 8 pre-installed, including x86 systems. Microsoft has to be made to understand that they are NOT the only shark in the water.

BRILLIANT! (1)

Motard (1553251) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742958)

Don't buy a product that won't do what you want it to and call it a boycott. And it can all be accomplished without leaving the couch.

Re:Boycott (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742982)

... and tell everyone you know not to buy them either. This part is important, as 'geeks' are not that numerous, but the influence of many is very large.

GOOD! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742806)

Everything that reduces the necessity to dumb down Linux (see Unity) for end users (who do not care if they use Linux or Windows) is applauded by me.

I don't care what runs the ssh client to connect to my Linux servers.

Re:GOOD! (1)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743036)

Everything that reduces the necessity to dumb down Linux (see Unity) for end users (who do not care if they use Linux or Windows) is applauded by me.

Why is the dumbing down of linux a bad thing?

You may not like unity, but if you look hard enough, you might eventually find someone who does, and for you, there are any number of other desktop environments to choose from, and switching between them isn't hard at all. Isn't that the whole point of linux: freedom and choice to make your system do what you want it to sudo.

computers don't have to be hard to use, they are tools that allow us to do work (and look at porn.) if a simpler interface aids anyone in getting their work done (or their porn viewed) how can it possibly be a bad thing?

Anti-Trust? Sherman Act? Clayton Act? (-1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742810)

I'm not lawyer, but it seems like it could be.

Microsoft conspiring with hardware makers is no different than Standard Oil conspiring with the railroads.

Re:Anti-Trust? Sherman Act? Clayton Act? (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743070)

The sad thing is, as a US citizen, I'd like to see Microsoft succeed. The US has so few industries left that bring money into the country that we can ill afford to lose many more.

But they just keep insisting on doing stupid shit like this that absolutely needs to be slapped down (though, given the relative amount of money the MS lobby and the Linux lobby [1] contribute to congress, and the lessons MS learned the last time around, I have doubts that it will happen...)

[1] I know. It made the point, though, didn't it.

Some bright entrepreneur will make a fortune.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38742880)

...supplying open source hardware.

Just wait until Windows 8 and Apple IOS suffer their first major hack. The resulting panic will be unbelievable.

This is more than just a phone and tablet issue (4, Insightful)

Calibax (151875) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742912)

Right now, the ARM architecture equates to tablets and phones for many, maybe most people.

However, a number of companies (Qualcomm, NVIDIA, and others) have announced that they are developing ARM processors to challenge Intel in laptops and desktop systems. Probably they are going with ARM because Intel is being somewhat uncooperative (and maybe anticompetitive) by not letting them have licenses that would allow them to produce x86 compatible systems.

For these companies, having Windows on their ARM systems is vital. However, we shouldn't be short-sighted - restricting the ability for ARM systems to boot anything but Windows will (in the long run) benefit Intel, AMD, Via, etc. as much as it will benefit Microsoft by restricting which operating systems the upcoming ARM based systems can boot. They will either run Windows or they will run everything else, depending on the boot ROM in the system. Guess which most will chose.

Re:This is more than just a phone and tablet issue (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742972)

It's also the ruggedized hardware that the military often requires. This is a chunk of the ever growing military software market.

Self build ARM PCs (2)

Techmeology (1426095) | more than 2 years ago | (#38742936)

Unfortunately, most complete hardware systems tend to come paired with software (i.e. the OS). The only people who get to choose their OS are people who build their own PCs. If this becomes too common, the only way will be if it's possible to build your own (much as people do with x86 PCs today). Of course, that still sucks for anyone who wants a mobile device, or who has old (eventually) equipment, doesn't want to build them selves, etc.

knoppix and other testing / recovery secure boot (5, Insightful)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#38743090)

knoppix and other testing / recovery tools also need secure boot.

Does networking booting work with secure boot?

Ghost?

Hard Drive Diagnostics tools (self booting ones)

Dell Diagnostics tools (self booting ones)?

Acronis True Image

clonezilla?

Memtest86+ (better and more to the hardware then the windows memory test tool)

There is alot of stuff some still dos based that is need out side of windows.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...