Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Sep 2011 22:06 UTC, submitted by kragil
Windows After the walled garden coming to the desktop operating system world, we're currently witnessing another potential nail in the coffin of the relatively open world of desktop and laptop computing. Microsoft has revealed [.pptx] that as part of its Windows 8 logo program, OEMs must implement UEFI secure boot. This could potentially complicate the installation of other operating systems, like Windows 7, XP, and Linux.
Permalink for comment 490283
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by ronaldst
by lemur2 on Wed 21st Sep 2011 23:33 UTC in reply to "Comment by ronaldst"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

"I have a hard time believing the combined power of Apple and Microsoft - both strong supporters of these kinds of anti-user features" Can't tell if trolling... Anti-user? That doesn't even compute.


"Anti-user" is any feature that is part of a product that is there only because it benefits the vendor, not the user.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damaged_good

"In economics, a damaged good (sometimes termed "crippleware" or product with "anti-features") is a good that has been deliberately limited in performance, quality or utility, typically for marketing reasons as part of a strategy of product differentiation."

Microsoft's "Geuniune Advantage" euphamism is an absolute classic example. This did absolutely nothing for users except lock some of them out and require some people to purchase new copies of software they had already bought.

Here is another example of a different flavour:
http://www.osnews.com/comments/25175

Microsoft's "Windows 7 Starter" is a similar (although not as drastic) example where Microsoft take a reasonable OS and then go out of their way to cripple it. It actually costs Microsoft more to produce such a version which has the express aim to give users less functionality.

Anti-user. QED.

Edited 2011-09-21 23:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 12