3 ms·
A Developing UEFI Secureboot Situation
- mtgx 14y agoGood for Canonical. I'd hate to see a future where an OS has to be pre-approved by Microsoft for running on a machine that comes with Windows.
- Spearchucker 14y agoAgreed. Imagine needing OS pre-approval from Google on a machine that comes with ChromeOS... or wait, by Apple on a machine that comes with OSX. That's tongue-in-cheek. And yes, I know Microsoft has the desktop market cornered. However that market is no longer what it was, and there is little (other than the economics of adoption) stopping any OS vendor from doing the same.
- mtgx 14y agoAt least there are some encouraging trends with some manufacturers who are starting to be more interested in deploying laptops with Linux/Ubuntu: http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Dell-to-bring-Ubuntu-laptops-to-850-retail-stores-in-India-1620657.html http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Dell-to-bring-Ubuntu-... As Microsoft start selling hardware and compete with their own partners without even telling them, this trend will probably accelerate: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/19/us-microsoft-windows-tablets-asia-idUSBRE85I1NL20120619 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/19/us-microsoft-windo...
- thristian 14y agomjg59, the Fedora employee whose posts about UEFI have earned a lot of HN karma, has posted about why Fedora considered and rejected the system Ubuntu is putting in place: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/13713.html http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/13713.html
- MyHooves 14y agoAnd the response from Mark Shuttleworth is in the post. Fedora is trying to justify why they were quick to pay for a signed bootloader but its not all adding up like everyone wants.