7 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. We will monitor Microsoft's behavior to make sure they do not deceive the public again by expanding these restrictions to other kinds of systems I love how Windows RT devices which are struggling to ship a couple million are "ARM devices" but there is absolutely no mention of tens of millions of iPads, Kindle and some other Android tablets being sold with locked bootloaders. Same with phones, are WP8 phones with a 3.5% marketshare(albeit increasing) a much bigger threat to user and software freedom than iPhones? Atleast with Microsoft you have the choice of OEMs, whereas with Apple you have no freedom of choosing the manufacturer. I think mentioning Apple undermines their point in such a serious way that the FSF(and Mozilla) hasn't mentioned it any of their long blog posts on Secure Boot. Also, with the PCs sold being mandated by Microsoft to have a way for an end user to disable Secure Boot and Add/Remove their own keys, the user is completely in control and can even remove Microsoft's key if they so wish. US $350,000 is a LOT of money to waste going after this, imagine what could be done with that money if it was spent on things like OpenOffice, Samba and other projects sorely lacking in money and resources. I think this is an exercise in baiting Microsoft haters part with their money rather than any productive exercise to increase computing freedom. I hope donators consider better uses of their money.

josteink 14y ago
Yeah. I find it odd that despite Apple winning the world-championship in patent-trolling and is leading the fight for closed systems and walled gardens, FSF still decides to go after anyone but Apple. Despite this tarnished image of a former tech-innovist, does the FSF really still feel it's impossible to fight the root evil here because of public perception? Is it only picking on Microsoft because that is easier to amass support against? We, as hackers and developers, should support this. We should fight closed systems. We should fight against the forces against general purpose computing (Cory Doctorow has a nice speach on this) and we should fight those who seek to criminalize writing code because somewhere some troll has a vague patent with no implementation covering your work. So yes. Support the FSF on this. But also boycot those who are the chief offenders here. Every dollar spent in an Apple-store is money spent against the core of your profession. Stop spending money there. And throw away your iPhones and Macbooks. They are bad karma and software blood-money.
- mtgx 14y ago
  I agree FSF should fight against Apple, too, and even though they would make a lot of enemies because of it, I think making a lot of enemies this way and becoming that controversial is a lot better than being obscure, because in the same time they'd be gaining a lot of allies, too. I think FSF fighting against Apple's closed policies would ultimately make them more popular and help them. That being said I don't really think that not naming Apple right now, which already has an established closed platform (therefore uphill battle), detracts from them trying to stop Windows 8 machines becoming as closed as iPads before they even get a chance to take off the ground. Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on.
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    >..trying to stop Windows 8 machines becoming as closed as iPads before they even get a chance to take off the ground. Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on. Huh? Where can I access the option on an iPad to turn off secure boot or to add my own keys or to delete Apple's? Windows 8 machines are much much more open than an iPad.
    - throwaway2048 14y ago
      The ability to disable secure boot only applies to x86, and even there your stance has issues. I wish people would stop repeating this like its some kind of iron clad gaurentee, Microsoft only changed the reqirement to begin with after there was a public outcry, and are free to change it again any time. (they likely will after more systems support secure boot) also please consider the fact that how you should be able to disable secure boot is entirely unspecified. If early models are any indication, its going to be buggy and error prone on tons of systems.
  - kryptiskt 14y ago
    > Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on. Yeah, so they should have gone on an all out offensive when the iPad launched. Now there's a huge precedent they will have to try to explain away, why it doesn't apply and Microsoft's stuff have to be open but not their competitors'.
woodchuck64 14y ago
> I love how Windows RT devices which are struggling to ship a couple million are "ARM devices" but there is absolutely no mention of tens of millions of iPads, Kindle and some other Android tablets being sold with locked bootloaders. Microsoft makes a desperate attempt to secure a small anchor amid the avalanche of ARM-Android and inadvertently breathes new life into the Microsoft Meme: "Growth by Stifling Competition." Almost feel sorry for them.
- tsotha 14y ago
  Microsoft can't win no matter what they do. If they don't lock down the boot loader like Apple does they'll end up with root kit viruses and people will say "Oh, you should get an iPad so Russian mobsters don't clean out your bank account". On the other hand, if they do lock it down there are articles like this one.
ansible 14y ago
Or better yet, support the development of truly open hardware with that money. There are a few small groups and companies doing this, like the proposal for a SoC that just had general purpose processor cores, instead of dedicated video encoders/decoders and 3D acceleration. I am certainly willing to pay a bit extra (higher cost, reduced performance) for an open platform.
ttflee 14y ago
Shouldn't they also sue Samsung for not letting me install android on my 43-inch LCD television?
belorn 14y ago
In regard to Ipads, Kindle and Iphone (the three major products mentioned in the comment), FSF has criticized and campaigned against each of them in their campaign defective-by-design. The Windows phones are just a small notice in a long list of criticized products with DRM in them that the owners of the device do not have the keys. Still, the threat of Restricted Boot is a bit different than then ordinary threat from DRM, in that it targets general purpose computers instead of semi-specialized products like phones and e-readers. The ARM move, while not very threatening today, is the foot in the door to push lockdown to more devices than phones and e-readers. It moves the language from talking about devices (a phone, a e-reader, a microwave), to talking about CPU's in computers.

josteink 14y ago

Yeah. I find it odd that despite Apple winning the world-championship in patent-trolling and is leading the fight for closed systems and walled gardens, FSF still decides to go after anyone but Apple. Despite this tarnished image of a former tech-innovist, does the FSF really still feel it's impossible to fight the root evil here because of public perception? Is it only picking on Microsoft because that is easier to amass support against? We, as hackers and developers, should support this. We should fight closed systems. We should fight against the forces against general purpose computing (Cory Doctorow has a nice speach on this) and we should fight those who seek to criminalize writing code because somewhere some troll has a vague patent with no implementation covering your work. So yes. Support the FSF on this. But also boycot those who are the chief offenders here. Every dollar spent in an Apple-store is money spent against the core of your profession. Stop spending money there. And throw away your iPhones and Macbooks. They are bad karma and software blood-money.

mtgx 14y ago
I agree FSF should fight against Apple, too, and even though they would make a lot of enemies because of it, I think making a lot of enemies this way and becoming that controversial is a lot better than being obscure, because in the same time they'd be gaining a lot of allies, too. I think FSF fighting against Apple's closed policies would ultimately make them more popular and help them. That being said I don't really think that not naming Apple right now, which already has an established closed platform (therefore uphill battle), detracts from them trying to stop Windows 8 machines becoming as closed as iPads before they even get a chance to take off the ground. Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on.
- cooldeal 14y ago
  >..trying to stop Windows 8 machines becoming as closed as iPads before they even get a chance to take off the ground. Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on. Huh? Where can I access the option on an iPad to turn off secure boot or to add my own keys or to delete Apple's? Windows 8 machines are much much more open than an iPad.
  - throwaway2048 14y ago
    The ability to disable secure boot only applies to x86, and even there your stance has issues. I wish people would stop repeating this like its some kind of iron clad gaurentee, Microsoft only changed the reqirement to begin with after there was a public outcry, and are free to change it again any time. (they likely will after more systems support secure boot) also please consider the fact that how you should be able to disable secure boot is entirely unspecified. If early models are any indication, its going to be buggy and error prone on tons of systems.
- kryptiskt 14y ago
  > Better (and easier) to kill off a bad idea early on. Yeah, so they should have gone on an all out offensive when the iPad launched. Now there's a huge precedent they will have to try to explain away, why it doesn't apply and Microsoft's stuff have to be open but not their competitors'.

woodchuck64 14y ago

> I love how Windows RT devices which are struggling to ship a couple million are "ARM devices" but there is absolutely no mention of tens of millions of iPads, Kindle and some other Android tablets being sold with locked bootloaders. Microsoft makes a desperate attempt to secure a small anchor amid the avalanche of ARM-Android and inadvertently breathes new life into the Microsoft Meme: "Growth by Stifling Competition." Almost feel sorry for them.

tsotha 14y ago
Microsoft can't win no matter what they do. If they don't lock down the boot loader like Apple does they'll end up with root kit viruses and people will say "Oh, you should get an iPad so Russian mobsters don't clean out your bank account". On the other hand, if they do lock it down there are articles like this one.

ansible 14y ago

Or better yet, support the development of truly open hardware with that money. There are a few small groups and companies doing this, like the proposal for a SoC that just had general purpose processor cores, instead of dedicated video encoders/decoders and 3D acceleration. I am certainly willing to pay a bit extra (higher cost, reduced performance) for an open platform.

ttflee 14y ago

Shouldn't they also sue Samsung for not letting me install android on my 43-inch LCD television?

belorn 14y ago

In regard to Ipads, Kindle and Iphone (the three major products mentioned in the comment), FSF has criticized and campaigned against each of them in their campaign defective-by-design. The Windows phones are just a small notice in a long list of criticized products with DRM in them that the owners of the device do not have the keys. Still, the threat of Restricted Boot is a bit different than then ordinary threat from DRM, in that it targets general purpose computers instead of semi-specialized products like phones and e-readers. The ARM move, while not very threatening today, is the foot in the door to push lockdown to more devices than phones and e-readers. It moves the language from talking about devices (a phone, a e-reader, a microwave), to talking about CPU's in computers.