Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 31st Oct 2011 12:25 UTC
Linux "Red Hat, Canonical and the Linux Foundation have laid out a set of recommendations for hardware vendors in hopes of preserving the ability to install Linux on Windows 8 machines. Windows 8 machines should ship in a setup mode giving users more control right off the bat, the groups argue." Group hug-cheer combo for Red Hat, Canonical, and the Linux Foundation please.
Permalink for comment 495478
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Thu 3rd Nov 2011 07:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
Member since:

The law doesn't take any sides at all since this is all very new. Manufacturers don't have a right to prohibit dual boot either, see what I did there?
You're wrong. Vendors are certainly within their rights to place restrictions on how their hardware functions. Further, they are protected by law against those who misuse the hardware.

The public looses out when a once open ecosystem becomes closed and locked, do you deny this?
I tend to agree with that idea. However, it's not applicable as a users ability to purchase a system with a pre-installed OS other than Windows, barebones with no OS installed, or the ability to build their own system is still perfectly intact.

Everyone involved deserves criticism *including* microsoft!
Here's the thing about criticism... For it to be anything more than hot air, it has to be justifiable. Whining about _only_ the _possibility_ that a user may not be able to use an OS other than Windows 8, on a pre-build system "Designed for Windows 8", is certainly not justification. I have little sympathy for people who buy a product and then cry foul play when they try to use the product in a way other than intended and it doesn't work.

If you don't want to use Windows 8, don't be an idiot and buy a system designed to run only Windows 8.

Boy your right, it's a terrible analogy. A more accurate one would be an unleaded car that only excepts EXON fuel and will not run with other unleaded fuels.
That's even worse.

Many families will buy "designed for win8" computers and intend to use mostly windows. But some of them may eventually want to try out linux too (maybe they have children who are interested in learning it). Or they might want to re-purpose an old computer. The reason most of us linux guys are balking at 3rd party controls is because reusing a windows machine is precisely how most of us learned linux in the first place. We don't all have the cash to buy a dedicated machine to try an OS we've never used before, particularly as kids. One of the great benefits of linux is being able to try it out along side windows.
People who may eventually want to try an alternate OS should take that into consideration before buying a system. The fact still remains that you know what you are buying. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Unless you are bothered that linux is taking away windows market share in this way, I doubt you have a good reason to argue against having OS choice in the hands of the owners.
I have no problem with users being able to choose which OS they want to use. But, that is not a right, and if the user wants choice then the user needs to consider that when purchasing hardware. If the user makes poor purchasing decisions, well, maybe they'll be smarter about it next time.

It should be pointed out, again, that there isn't a single shred of evidence that says users who do purchase "Designed for Windows 8" systems won't be able to install an alternate OS. If that ever does become a reality then again, if you don't want to be limited to Windows 8 but yet buy hardware that limits you to Windows 8, then you have nobody to blame but yourself.

Reply Parent Score: 1