[Ubuntu-be] Win8 will block dual-boot?
wouter Vandenneucker
woutervddn at hotmail.com
Sat Sep 24 06:39:26 UTC 2011
well,
I hope that the secure-boot option is off by default in the final release.. I do see a use however for the secure-boot principle..Companies who have plans of certain "inventions" on their machines can protect their machines better against espionage..
However, I do agree that secure boot WILL harm normal people.. But i'm quite confident that it won't be a big deal, there are enough companies out there who will sue them if this makes it in the final realease..
grts
Wouter
> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 07:01:03 +0200
> From: jurgen.gaeremyn op pandora.be
> To: ubuntu-be op lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-be] Win8 will block dual-boot?
>
> <devil's advocate-mode>
>
> Well... to be completely honest... if you take the cell phone as an
> example... historically I've never been able to change the OS on my GSM.
> So in a certain way the same could be argued for computers...
>
> </devil's advocate-mode>
>
> Hope the MEP's clear this one out, and MS & hardware vendors start will
> grow a new conscience again...
> Maybe it's time (pre-emptive) to shout out in non-tech channels about
> the "bad thing" that MS is trying to pull off and how it will affect me
> and you and everyone...
>
> Here are some techniques that can be used:
> (and that marketing also use)
> - a photo of a crying baby has more effect than statistics on child
> mortality (use vivid examples, make it personal)
> - little near-future effects trigger more "urgency" than long-term
> bigger effects
>
> Obviously,there's also the option of FUD, but I agree that I'd rather
> not lower myself to that standard (even though it should be told if
> there actually is something to be afraid of).
>
> Just my 2-pence...
> Grtz,
> Jurgen
>
> On 09/23/2011 10:43 PM, wouter Vandenneucker wrote:
> > There was something similar a few months ago with a Cell Phone that was
> > locked.
> > The judge decided that the phone was designed for "all" mobile
> > providers, therefore the mobile provider "restricted" the use of the
> > device although it was intended to do more.
> > Result: every person who wanted the device to be unlocked could ship it
> > for free and the company had to unlock them..
> >
> > Let us hope we get a better result in this case though..
> >
> > Grts
> >
> >
> > Wouter Vandenneucker
> >
> > Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:35:26 +0200
> > From: sulumar op gmail.com
> > To: ubuntu-be op lists.ubuntu.com
> > Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-be] Win8 will block dual-boot?
> >
> > I have doubts on the legality of that kind of strategie microsoft is
> > trying to pull up
> >
> >
> > On 2011-09-23 22:32, wouter Vandenneucker wrote:
> >
> > EPFSUG is already talking about shouting it out to some MEP's in
> > order to make sure the rights of the users are guaranteed ..
> > I guess this isn't the last we heard from it. (And that's a good thing!)
> >
> > Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:16:48 +0200
> > From: vincent op mangelschots.org <mailto:vincent op mangelschots.org>
> > To: ubuntu-be op lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-be op lists.ubuntu.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-be] Win8 will block dual-boot?
> >
> > Microsoft does require that the hardware ships with UEFI secure boot
> > enabled but it also states that it will support the unsecured boot
> > process. If so then it's up to the hardware vendors to make it
> > optional.
> >
> > http://tweakers.net/nieuws/76961/microsoft-secure-boot-blokkeert-andere-besturingssystemen-niet.html
> > (dutch)
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Pieter Vande Wyngaerde
> > <pietervandewyngaerde op gmail.com
> > <mailto:pietervandewyngaerde op gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > UEFI secure booting (part 2) via planet.debian.net
> > <http://planet.debian.net>:
> >
> > very good good article @ http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/5850.html
> > (Part 1 here: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/5552.html)
> >
> > from the article:
> > These are the facts:
> >
> > Windows 8 certification requires that hardware ship with UEFI secure
> > boot enabled.
> > Windows 8 certification does not require that the user be able to
> > disable UEFI secure boot, and we've already been informed by
> > hardware
> > vendors that some hardware will not have this option.
> > Windows 8 certification does not require that the system ship
> > with any
> > keys other than Microsoft's.
> > A system that ships with UEFI secure boot enabled and only includes
> > Microsoft's signing keys will only securely boot Microsoft operating
> > systems.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > The truth is that Microsoft's move removes control from the end user
> > and places it in the hands of Microsoft and the hardware
> > vendors. The
> > truth is that it makes it more difficult to run anything other than
> > Windows. The truth is that UEFI secure boot is a valuable and
> > worthwhile feature that Microsoft are misusing to gain tighter
> > control
> > over the market. And the truth is that Microsoft haven't even
> > attempted to argue otherwise.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Jurgen Gaeremyn
> > <jurgen.gaeremyn op pandora.be <mailto:jurgen.gaeremyn op pandora.be>>
> > wrote:
> > > Have a read here:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/will-windows-8-block-users-from-dual-booting-linux-microsoft-wont-say/10772
> > >
> > > Grtz,
> > > Jurgen.
> > >
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-be mailing list / mailto:ubuntu-be op lists.ubuntu.com
>
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-be
------------- volgend deel ------------
Een HTML-bijlage is gescrubt...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-be/attachments/20110924/0d9196ea/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the ubuntu-be
mailing list