<html> <head> <style></style> </head> <body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'> well, <div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; "> </div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; ">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..</div><div>Companies who have plans of certain "inventions" on their machines can protect their machines better against espionage..</div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; "> </div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; ">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..</div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; "> </div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; ">grts</div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; "> </div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; "> </div><div style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 10pt; ">Wouter <div>> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 07:01:03 +0200 > From: jurgen.gaeremyn@pandora.be > To: ubuntu-be@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@gmail.com > > To: ubuntu-be@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@mangelschots.org <mailto:vincent@mangelschots.org> > > To: ubuntu-be@lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-be@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@gmail.com > > <mailto:pietervandewyngaerde@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@pandora.be <mailto:jurgen.gaeremyn@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@lists.ubuntu.com > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-be </div></div> </div></body> </html>