5 ms·

High-end ARM servers support standards called "SBBR" and "SBSA" which means they support UEFI and ACPI. The experience of using them is not very different from

by rvp-x 6y ago

High-end ARM servers support standards called "SBBR" and "SBSA" which means they support UEFI and ACPI. The experience of using them is not very different from using x86 machines: boot an arbitrary OS and almost everything works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Base_System_Architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Base_System_Architectur... There's an effort to make even the Raspberry Pi support this standard: https://rpi4-uefi.dev/ https://rpi4-uefi.dev/

zozbot234 6y ago
I assume even Windows on ARM relies on that UEFI support. It's not just server-side stuff.
- surajrmal 6y ago
  Yes, it does.
salawat 6y ago
Yes. UEFI. Because your bootloader should totally be able to access a network stack for future remote attestation...I mean, trusted computing purposes! Reading my way through the specification at the moment, and I'm failing to see how UEFI does anything user-friendly at all. It seems to only be useful to entrenched business interests (read Big *) and to a lesser extent maybe OEM implementers. Whereas all the cryptographic subsystem utilization by industry seems to be being used against users in the interests of fortifying market position. Wish I'd have added my voice to the din back when I was first reading about it back in the oughts. Didn't realize how much of a pain in the rear it was about to make my computing life. Too late to turn back the clock now. I just wish I understood what was so wrong with the old BIOS POST->handoff process. Probably need to sit down with an Old HP or Dell XP box and try to figure that out. Besides the Rootkit issue (which frankly, it feels like there are less intrusive and user-abuse enabling approaches to dealing with) I don't buy that the end-user got a single blessed thing out of UEFI; only lost.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  It's worth noting here that Apple was actually among the first to adopt UEFI—it was used by the first Intel Macs in 2006. They didn't really follow the specifications so there were a lot of differences, but it was definitely UEFI. Actually, one of the reasons Hackintosh bootloaders have gotten so much better recently is they don't need to deal with BIOS ==> EFI translation. So clearly Apple saw something in it.
  - GeekyBear 6y ago
    Intel donated their original EFI standard to the Unified EFI Forum for further development in summer 2005. >The Unified Extensible Firmware Interface Forum or UEFI Forum is an alliance between several leading technology companies to modernize the booting process. The board of directors includes representatives from thirteen "Promoter" companies: AMD, American Megatrends, ARM, Apple, Dell, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, HP Inc., IBM, Insyde Software, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, and Phoenix Technologies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_EFI_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_EFI_Forum Apple started their adoption of EFI before the UEFI was a thing.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      Sorry, yes, I should have said "EFI" rather than "UEFI".
    - fomine3 6y ago
      Irrelevant story: Apple adopted and has trademark of OpenCL but they finally dropped it. https://www.khronos.org/legal/trademarks/ https://www.khronos.org/legal/trademarks/
      - GeekyBear 6y ago
        Fun fact: Apple wrote OpenCL, open sourced it, and then handed it over to Khronos.

by rvp-x 6y ago

zozbot234 6y ago

I assume even Windows on ARM relies on that UEFI support. It's not just server-side stuff.

surajrmal 6y ago
Yes, it does.

salawat 6y ago

Yes. UEFI. Because your bootloader should totally be able to access a network stack for future remote attestation...I mean, trusted computing purposes! Reading my way through the specification at the moment, and I'm failing to see how UEFI does anything user-friendly at all. It seems to only be useful to entrenched business interests (read Big *) and to a lesser extent maybe OEM implementers. Whereas all the cryptographic subsystem utilization by industry seems to be being used against users in the interests of fortifying market position. Wish I'd have added my voice to the din back when I was first reading about it back in the oughts. Didn't realize how much of a pain in the rear it was about to make my computing life. Too late to turn back the clock now. I just wish I understood what was so wrong with the old BIOS POST->handoff process. Probably need to sit down with an Old HP or Dell XP box and try to figure that out. Besides the Rootkit issue (which frankly, it feels like there are less intrusive and user-abuse enabling approaches to dealing with) I don't buy that the end-user got a single blessed thing out of UEFI; only lost.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago
It's worth noting here that Apple was actually among the first to adopt UEFI—it was used by the first Intel Macs in 2006. They didn't really follow the specifications so there were a lot of differences, but it was definitely UEFI. Actually, one of the reasons Hackintosh bootloaders have gotten so much better recently is they don't need to deal with BIOS ==> EFI translation. So clearly Apple saw something in it.
- GeekyBear 6y ago
  Intel donated their original EFI standard to the Unified EFI Forum for further development in summer 2005. >The Unified Extensible Firmware Interface Forum or UEFI Forum is an alliance between several leading technology companies to modernize the booting process. The board of directors includes representatives from thirteen "Promoter" companies: AMD, American Megatrends, ARM, Apple, Dell, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, HP Inc., IBM, Insyde Software, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, and Phoenix Technologies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_EFI_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_EFI_Forum Apple started their adoption of EFI before the UEFI was a thing.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    Sorry, yes, I should have said "EFI" rather than "UEFI".
  - fomine3 6y ago
    Irrelevant story: Apple adopted and has trademark of OpenCL but they finally dropped it. https://www.khronos.org/legal/trademarks/ https://www.khronos.org/legal/trademarks/
    - GeekyBear 6y ago
      Fun fact: Apple wrote OpenCL, open sourced it, and then handed it over to Khronos.