5 ms·

Get back to me when it actually happens, because I've been hearing that line for about 15 years now and it has not happened. The reality is that PC's address t

by II2II 1y ago

Get back to me when it actually happens, because I've been hearing that line for about 15 years now and it has not happened. The reality is that PC's address the needs of a fundamentally different market than "TiVo"s or even mobile phones. While most could, and probably should, be using secure boot noone seems to be eager to take away the option to disable it.

Lammy 1y ago
> Get back to me when it actually happens Hello from 2013, and here you go! https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/SurfaceRT#Secure_Boot https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/SurfaceRT#Secure_Boot https://openrt.gitbook.io/open-surfacert/common/boot-sequence/uefi/secure-boot https://openrt.gitbook.io/open-surfacert/common/boot-sequenc...
- LeoPanthera 1y ago
  This is only true if you count ARM tablets as "PCs", which most people don't.
  - Lammy 1y ago
    No, UEFI Secure Boot is UEFI Secure Boot. The fact that Microsoft exercised this ability twelve entire years ago on a platform where they thought they could get away with it makes it worse, not better.
    - tsimionescu 1y ago
      The fact that said device no longer exists, and has virtually no modern successors, and certainly none that matter commercially, tells a different story. Plus, tablets are not PCs. People are happy with tablets and phones as locked devices. They are not happy with PCs as locked devices, and have not accepted such control, maybe outside the MacOS ecosystem.
  - fsflover 1y ago
    Why does the type of a general-purpose computing device matters?
    - LeoPanthera 1y ago
      At some point you have to accept that not all computing devices are general purpose. You can't replace the OS on an iPad either, but there are millions of those in the world, and yet somehow we're discussing a failed tablet from 13 years ago.
      - fsflover 1y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25172883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25172883
      - II2II 1y ago
        If you can load application software onto them, I think it's fair to say they are general purpose computing devices. (I say application software since something like a thermostat may have a general purpose "computer" inside them and that microcontroller may have a reflashable ROM, but few would classify the device as a general purpose computer.) That said, not all general purpose computing devices are useful for all things. For example: you can, but probably aren't, going to use a mobile phone for a server. On the flip side: you can use a server to do your banking, but most people won't find it as convenient as using their phone for banking (even though banking from a stationary computer is far more convenient than it was in the days when you had to go to a branch). Likewise: mobile devices can be used for content creation, but I doubt that you would find many office workers jumping at the opportunity to use them in the place of a desktop or laptop. On the other hand: someone who is on the road a lot would probably appreciate their portability.
- mjg59 1y ago
  There was a period where Microsoft was attempting to treat Windows on ARM devices in the same way as Apple treats iPads. That's not how things are now, and the walkback on that doesn't support the argument that the goal is to lock competitors out of the industry.
fc417fc802 1y ago
You're living under a rock. It's been happening slowing but surely. As device form factor preferences change the new types conveniently don't make it easy to replace to OS. A significant chunk of them lock you out entirely. Microsoft perennially makes small movements in that direction. Reduced control over the OS and attempts to exert control over the software ecosystem. I assume they're still trying to push consumers towards Windows S mode devices. Kernel mode anticheat that won't run on systems that aren't attested. Streaming platforms that won't serve up decent quality streams. Even if you don't notice the pot being boiled there are those of us that do.
- mjg59 1y ago
  Actually no - modern Windows on ARM devices have the same level of secure boot control as x86 ones.
  - fc417fc802 1y ago
    I never claimed otherwise? "Lock you out entirely" was in reference to a subset of Android, all of Apple, likely many wearables, most IoT devices, and probably others. I tried to outline the broad trend of curtailing user control (not limited to the bootloader) for those who feel like things have been stationary in the long term.
- jand 1y ago
  > Even if you don't notice the pot being boiled there are those of us that do. Tangent: To me that sounds like a reference to the "frog boiling" story. This has been debunked [1], a healthy frog will not remain in a gradually heated pot of water. We need a better analogy for this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
  - fc417fc802 1y ago
    I'm aware, but it's the understood turn of phrase at present. Similar to "tree shaking" which people started pushing back against at some point and I've no idea why because if it conveys the point then who cares whether or not farmers do it?

by II2II 1y ago

Lammy 1y ago

> Get back to me when it actually happens Hello from 2013, and here you go! https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/SurfaceRT#Secure_Boot https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/SurfaceRT#Secure_Boot https://openrt.gitbook.io/open-surfacert/common/boot-sequence/uefi/secure-boot https://openrt.gitbook.io/open-surfacert/common/boot-sequenc...

LeoPanthera 1y ago
This is only true if you count ARM tablets as "PCs", which most people don't.
- Lammy 1y ago
  No, UEFI Secure Boot is UEFI Secure Boot. The fact that Microsoft exercised this ability twelve entire years ago on a platform where they thought they could get away with it makes it worse, not better.
  - tsimionescu 1y ago
    The fact that said device no longer exists, and has virtually no modern successors, and certainly none that matter commercially, tells a different story. Plus, tablets are not PCs. People are happy with tablets and phones as locked devices. They are not happy with PCs as locked devices, and have not accepted such control, maybe outside the MacOS ecosystem.
- fsflover 1y ago
  Why does the type of a general-purpose computing device matters?
  - LeoPanthera 1y ago
    At some point you have to accept that not all computing devices are general purpose. You can't replace the OS on an iPad either, but there are millions of those in the world, and yet somehow we're discussing a failed tablet from 13 years ago.
    - fsflover 1y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25172883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25172883
    - II2II 1y ago
      If you can load application software onto them, I think it's fair to say they are general purpose computing devices. (I say application software since something like a thermostat may have a general purpose "computer" inside them and that microcontroller may have a reflashable ROM, but few would classify the device as a general purpose computer.) That said, not all general purpose computing devices are useful for all things. For example: you can, but probably aren't, going to use a mobile phone for a server. On the flip side: you can use a server to do your banking, but most people won't find it as convenient as using their phone for banking (even though banking from a stationary computer is far more convenient than it was in the days when you had to go to a branch). Likewise: mobile devices can be used for content creation, but I doubt that you would find many office workers jumping at the opportunity to use them in the place of a desktop or laptop. On the other hand: someone who is on the road a lot would probably appreciate their portability.
mjg59 1y ago
There was a period where Microsoft was attempting to treat Windows on ARM devices in the same way as Apple treats iPads. That's not how things are now, and the walkback on that doesn't support the argument that the goal is to lock competitors out of the industry.

fc417fc802 1y ago

You're living under a rock. It's been happening slowing but surely. As device form factor preferences change the new types conveniently don't make it easy to replace to OS. A significant chunk of them lock you out entirely. Microsoft perennially makes small movements in that direction. Reduced control over the OS and attempts to exert control over the software ecosystem. I assume they're still trying to push consumers towards Windows S mode devices. Kernel mode anticheat that won't run on systems that aren't attested. Streaming platforms that won't serve up decent quality streams. Even if you don't notice the pot being boiled there are those of us that do.

mjg59 1y ago
Actually no - modern Windows on ARM devices have the same level of secure boot control as x86 ones.
- fc417fc802 1y ago
  I never claimed otherwise? "Lock you out entirely" was in reference to a subset of Android, all of Apple, likely many wearables, most IoT devices, and probably others. I tried to outline the broad trend of curtailing user control (not limited to the bootloader) for those who feel like things have been stationary in the long term.
jand 1y ago
> Even if you don't notice the pot being boiled there are those of us that do. Tangent: To me that sounds like a reference to the "frog boiling" story. This has been debunked [1], a healthy frog will not remain in a gradually heated pot of water. We need a better analogy for this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
- fc417fc802 1y ago
  I'm aware, but it's the understood turn of phrase at present. Similar to "tree shaking" which people started pushing back against at some point and I've no idea why because if it conveys the point then who cares whether or not farmers do it?