Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Nov 2011 19:34 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Permalink for comment 495781
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:39 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 19:39 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-14
For those that didn't bother digging through all the links, you can stop blaming Red Hat for some kind of conspiracy. The post from the Red Hat employee about HP and UEFI had nothing to do with this debate. It was simply a posting asking for help with a problem that HP identified as the UEFI. Now maybe it is, and maybe they were wrong. The article never mentions secure boot as indeed the machine in question doesn't have secure boot. But that doesn't mean that a problem in the UEFI wasn't still causing the end user trouble.