> However, that is not increase in security. It is to increase the lockdown. In this instance it is both > And increasing lockdown is a poor proxy for quantif

> However, that is not increase in security. It is to increase the lockdown. In this instance it is both > And increasing lockdown is a poor proxy for quantification of security of specific images. You do realize that locking stuff down is one of the core tenants for securing systems? > By the same token, locking out Windows images and allowing CentOS images also increases the security If your system is shipped to run Linux then yes, locking out Windows images would increase the security. > but then the argument would not be about security anymore, but change to convenience of majority. You're flip flopping all over the place with different topics. If you want to talk about convenience then I agree that locking systems down affects user convenience. It's a well known adage that security is usually a trade off between convenience and protection. But you weren't talking about convenience, you were talking about security. Which is why I've been talking strictly about security. With the greatest of respect, you're coming off a lot like you don't really know this subject matter considering how poorly you're sticking to topic and how you're misunderstanding even many of the basic principles of security. > It is another significant hoop the users have to jump; and it just happens to more complicate Linux usage. I agree it's another hoop but you haven't yet demonstrated how it's significant despite me asking you to substantiate that claim a few times already. It feels to me like you're just throwing in adjectives for dramatic / emotional effect rather than having a rational conversation here. > Those incompetent Linuxers, cannot make anything user-friendly... Why should you care what other people think about Linuxers. Just use the platform you want to use instead of seeing this as some kind of holy war where you need to convert Windows users into Linux users. > Many normal users are not thinking about Linux when they purchase their gear; they will want to try it later, once they used the hardware for a while. If this wasn't a case and users would do research ahead of purchase, the majority of hardware problems under Linux would not exist. I've been using Linux since the 90s (and as my primary OS since XP was released and BeOS deprecated). I've never once shopped around for Linux compatible hardware and never once ended up with a machine that couldn't run Linux because of it. Peoples complaints about Linux compatibility are, in my experience, largely over told. > My point is that it is not a technical issue. It is political issue masquerading as technical one. So a party A designs a system that favors products of party A and it just happens to thow a curveball at everyone else. Color me surprised. Real technical problem would not favor a specific party. I think you're talking this far too personally. The simple solution here is you can just buy someone else's equipment instead. Getting angry on a forum isn't going to change anything (tbh neither is boycotting Lenovo but at lead doing that can give you some level of control).