[Ubuntu-be] Win8 will block dual-boot?

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>