8 ms·

>We will fight Microsoft's attempt at enforcing Restricted Boot on ARM devices like smartphones and tablets. Like any other computer, users must be able to inst

>We will fight Microsoft's attempt at enforcing Restricted Boot on ARM devices like smartphones and tablets. Like any other computer, users must be able to install free software operating systems on these devices. Again, a multi-thousand word essay on the topic of secure boot and lambasting Microsoft about the locked bootloader in the ARM tablets(which many of the same people think are going to crash and burn anyway). Meanwhile, like in the RedHat and Mozilla blog posts about secure boot, not a peep about Apple or the iPad's locked bootloader which runs about 80% of ARM tablets. Is this because Apple makes their own hardware so the FSF does not care? Or is it just their PR strategy that attacking MS is preferable due to media and people's favorable perception of Apple?

giZm0 14y ago
It is Microsoft that is pushing this.
- recoiledsnake 14y ago
  I am referring to the criticism about ARM devices that Windows RT runs on, not about the x86 version.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    And users of ARM devices shouldn't have the freedom to choose which software they run unless it's one approved by the manufacturer and the companies it serves, right?
    - recoiledsnake 14y ago
      Did you even read my OP? I never said anything like that. They're calling out the platform which has no marketshare and making zero mention of the iPad which has around 60 million tablets sold. FYI that's an ARM device. So you mean they think iPad users shouldn't have the freedom of choosing which software they run but Windows RT users need to? Right?
      - rbanffy 14y ago
        I think iPad owners should be able to run whatever they want, but that's Apple hardware running Apple software, much like my Sony TV is Sony hardware running Sony spin of Linux. That's why I don't own an iPad. UEFI secure-boot is Microsoft pressuring other companies, companies that have no reason to restrict their users (thus reducing the perceived value of their devices) into making their devices tied to Microsoft software. That'll result in thin margins for hardware makers because they won't be able to differentiate and will have to compete in price. Microsoft, of course, is the only one who will benefit from this because they'll be the only source of software (and upgrades) for those devices. In the 80's, PC makers were dumb enough to commoditize the hardware while Microsoft reaped the benefits of fierce competition. I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake.
        recoiledsnake 14y ago
        >I think iPad owners should be able to run whatever they want, but that's Apple hardware running Apple software, much like my Sony TV is Sony hardware running Sony spin of Linux How does this distinction matter to the user of the iPad? They buy a tablet, they're able to run only what it came with. How is it better for them because Apple sells the hardware too? >That's why I don't own an iPad. Then don't buy a Windows RT tablet. It's not like they forced the OEMs to cancel their Android tablets. LG and HTC did that themselves without even making Windows RT tablets. >UEFI secure-boot is Microsoft pressuring other companies, companies that have no reason to restrict their users (thus reducing the perceived value of their devices) into making their devices tied to Microsoft software. That'll result in thin margins for hardware makers because they won't be able to differentiate and will have to compete in price Is dual booting phones and tablets such a big differentiator that people will pay a premium for them? Why do many Android tablets and phones come with locked bootloaders? Why doesn't Apple unlock the bootloader and sell more or sell for a higher price then? Hint: 99% of users don't care >In the 80's, PC makers were dumb enough to commoditize the hardware while Microsoft reaped the benefits of fierce competition. I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake This really shows off your inexperience and lack of knowledge. It's the other way around, Dell and Compaq wouldn't exist today if not for MS licensing them MS-DOS when they didn't have to. Because of MS, Dell became a fortune 500 company in just 6 years. Go read about how they started. >I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake. You mean they just continue to sell only Android tablets(which seem to be low margin by the way, so blame Google?)) and it's not really making them any good money. LG and HTC already dropped out. Also you're ignoring how users reaped the benefits of commodotization of the hardware leading to the PC and internet revolution and are focusing on just MS' profits.
tmzt 14y ago
I see your point, the simple fact is dual-booting Linux-based operating systems on hardware intended for use with Microsoft Windows is the norm, and without this source of computer systems a free license is nearly a moot point. If ARM becomes dominant the idea that Microsoft can simply restrict access because that's how it was done in the past (even citing Apple as an example) simply means they can restrict a majority of all hardware sold from running a different system, extending their monopoly control through partnership agreements to a new generation of hardware. Generally, PC compatibles boot an OS from a sector on the hard drive and provide a standard interface to the bootloader to hardware (BIOS, PCI enumeration, and now UEFI). While ARM is now beginning to adopt a similar boot system (in UEFI on RT devices) it's not carrying with it the openness we once enjoyed with PCs. This is the problem.
- recoiledsnake 14y ago
  >If ARM becomes dominant the idea that Microsoft can simply restrict access because that's how it was done in the past (even citing Apple as an example) simply means they can restrict a majority of all hardware sold from running a different system, extending their monopoly control through partnership agreements to a new generation of hardware. If iPads take over computing and desktops(along with Microsoft) die, won't the same scenario play out? Also, if ARM becomes dominant, won't a secton of the ARM devices be iPads and Android tablets? Why do you think Windows RT tablets will be the majority? >While ARM is now beginning to adopt a similar boot system (in UEFI on RT devices) it's not carrying with it the openness we once enjoyed with PCs. This is the problem. As an aside, ARM is different in the sense that each ARM SoC needs special drivers and coding.
streptomycin 14y ago
You write as if the FSF never criticizes Apple. To the contrary, they criticize them all the time: https://www.google.com/search?q=fsf+apple https://www.google.com/search?q=fsf+apple Would you be satisfied only if every article complaining about the actions of one company also listed every single other company that has done something similar? That would be tedious, as the FSF has criticized lots of companies for crap like this.

giZm0 14y ago

It is Microsoft that is pushing this.

recoiledsnake 14y ago
I am referring to the criticism about ARM devices that Windows RT runs on, not about the x86 version.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  And users of ARM devices shouldn't have the freedom to choose which software they run unless it's one approved by the manufacturer and the companies it serves, right?
  - recoiledsnake 14y ago
    Did you even read my OP? I never said anything like that. They're calling out the platform which has no marketshare and making zero mention of the iPad which has around 60 million tablets sold. FYI that's an ARM device. So you mean they think iPad users shouldn't have the freedom of choosing which software they run but Windows RT users need to? Right?
    - rbanffy 14y ago
      I think iPad owners should be able to run whatever they want, but that's Apple hardware running Apple software, much like my Sony TV is Sony hardware running Sony spin of Linux. That's why I don't own an iPad. UEFI secure-boot is Microsoft pressuring other companies, companies that have no reason to restrict their users (thus reducing the perceived value of their devices) into making their devices tied to Microsoft software. That'll result in thin margins for hardware makers because they won't be able to differentiate and will have to compete in price. Microsoft, of course, is the only one who will benefit from this because they'll be the only source of software (and upgrades) for those devices. In the 80's, PC makers were dumb enough to commoditize the hardware while Microsoft reaped the benefits of fierce competition. I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake.
      - recoiledsnake 14y ago
        >I think iPad owners should be able to run whatever they want, but that's Apple hardware running Apple software, much like my Sony TV is Sony hardware running Sony spin of Linux How does this distinction matter to the user of the iPad? They buy a tablet, they're able to run only what it came with. How is it better for them because Apple sells the hardware too? >That's why I don't own an iPad. Then don't buy a Windows RT tablet. It's not like they forced the OEMs to cancel their Android tablets. LG and HTC did that themselves without even making Windows RT tablets. >UEFI secure-boot is Microsoft pressuring other companies, companies that have no reason to restrict their users (thus reducing the perceived value of their devices) into making their devices tied to Microsoft software. That'll result in thin margins for hardware makers because they won't be able to differentiate and will have to compete in price Is dual booting phones and tablets such a big differentiator that people will pay a premium for them? Why do many Android tablets and phones come with locked bootloaders? Why doesn't Apple unlock the bootloader and sell more or sell for a higher price then? Hint: 99% of users don't care >In the 80's, PC makers were dumb enough to commoditize the hardware while Microsoft reaped the benefits of fierce competition. I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake This really shows off your inexperience and lack of knowledge. It's the other way around, Dell and Compaq wouldn't exist today if not for MS licensing them MS-DOS when they didn't have to. Because of MS, Dell became a fortune 500 company in just 6 years. Go read about how they started. >I wonder if tablet makers will be stupid enough to make that same mistake. You mean they just continue to sell only Android tablets(which seem to be low margin by the way, so blame Google?)) and it's not really making them any good money. LG and HTC already dropped out. Also you're ignoring how users reaped the benefits of commodotization of the hardware leading to the PC and internet revolution and are focusing on just MS' profits.

tmzt 14y ago

I see your point, the simple fact is dual-booting Linux-based operating systems on hardware intended for use with Microsoft Windows is the norm, and without this source of computer systems a free license is nearly a moot point. If ARM becomes dominant the idea that Microsoft can simply restrict access because that's how it was done in the past (even citing Apple as an example) simply means they can restrict a majority of all hardware sold from running a different system, extending their monopoly control through partnership agreements to a new generation of hardware. Generally, PC compatibles boot an OS from a sector on the hard drive and provide a standard interface to the bootloader to hardware (BIOS, PCI enumeration, and now UEFI). While ARM is now beginning to adopt a similar boot system (in UEFI on RT devices) it's not carrying with it the openness we once enjoyed with PCs. This is the problem.

recoiledsnake 14y ago
>If ARM becomes dominant the idea that Microsoft can simply restrict access because that's how it was done in the past (even citing Apple as an example) simply means they can restrict a majority of all hardware sold from running a different system, extending their monopoly control through partnership agreements to a new generation of hardware. If iPads take over computing and desktops(along with Microsoft) die, won't the same scenario play out? Also, if ARM becomes dominant, won't a secton of the ARM devices be iPads and Android tablets? Why do you think Windows RT tablets will be the majority? >While ARM is now beginning to adopt a similar boot system (in UEFI on RT devices) it's not carrying with it the openness we once enjoyed with PCs. This is the problem. As an aside, ARM is different in the sense that each ARM SoC needs special drivers and coding.

streptomycin 14y ago

You write as if the FSF never criticizes Apple. To the contrary, they criticize them all the time: https://www.google.com/search?q=fsf+apple https://www.google.com/search?q=fsf+apple Would you be satisfied only if every article complaining about the actions of one company also listed every single other company that has done something similar? That would be tedious, as the FSF has criticized lots of companies for crap like this.