> Locking a machine to Windows is the manufacturer's choice, not Microsoft's. Microsoft has hardware certification requirements for machines that ship with Win

> Locking a machine to Windows is the manufacturer's choice, not Microsoft's. Microsoft has hardware certification requirements for machines that ship with Windows, and these certification requirements mandate whether or not a machine will be locked to Windows. On traditional x86, these requirements mandate that it must be possible to both disable SecureBoot and enroll the owner's keys; on ARM, Microsoft changed these requirements to forbid both options (https://softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-confirms-UEFI-fears-locks-down-ARM/ https://softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-confi...), so that these machines would be locked to operating systems signed by Microsoft. If manufacturers want to be able to ship machines with Windows, they have no choice but to follow these hardware certification requirements; and it's not hard to argue that Windows is a monopoly, such that manufacturers have no choice but to ship machines with Windows. > A better comparison is if MS banned installing apps not distributed by MS. Isn't that what "S mode" does?