3 ms·
Placing additional obstacles to installing your choice of OS, even if each one is individually justified, leads to an veritable steeplechase of obstacles in doi
by MereInterest 4y ago
Placing additional obstacles to installing your choice of OS, even if each one is individually justified, leads to an veritable steeplechase of obstacles in doing so. By placing more and more restrictions on the default, each of which must be individually researched and disabled, fewer people are able to exercise their choice. There doesn't need to be a definitive deathblow if you can bleed away the opportunity to choose.
- Avamander 4y ago> Placing additional obstacles to installing your choice of OS, even if each one is individually justified, leads to an veritable steeplechase of obstacles in doing so. It's a huge stretch to call a single toggle in UEFI an "obstacle" if you're already competent enough to install an OS from scratch. Maybe the focus should be on that, how to provide preinstalled Linux instead. > each of which must be individually researched and disabled Or you read the user manual.
- MereInterest 4y agoHurdles like these are why "competent enough to install an OS" is considered a bar in the first place. I agree that it is good when OEMs offer Linux preinstalled, but that doesn't absolve Microsoft from adding obstacles in cases where OEMs do not. Reading the user manual is a form of research that must be done. When software doesn't allow an action, and doesn't immediately explain what can be done to override the restriction, that's a form of additional research.