Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Oct 2011 21:03 UTC, submitted by Dirge
Thread beginning with comment 493372
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Security isn't a dirty word
by Lennie on Tue 18th Oct 2011 22:47
in reply to "RE[2]: Security isn't a dirty word"
RE[4]: Security isn't a dirty word
by f0dder on Wed 19th Oct 2011 00:11
in reply to "RE[3]: Security isn't a dirty word"
By demanding that OEMs implement this for Windows 8 obviously Microsoft is increasing the risk for everyone.
Hence why the FSF campaign is good. And no-one will deny that Microsoft wouldn't mind if OEMs mess up and thus not allow people to install an alternative operating system.
True - except that there'd probably be enough outcry (and perhaps boycotts) to harm them - it's not a 100% clear-cut win





Member since:
2009-08-05
If that happens, that's a real problem, and then you've got a piece of hardware that's as handicapped as Apple's commodity hardware. And I do agree that there's a lot of reason for concern, which is why I welcome the FSF campaign.
But to be taken seriously, people should try to avoid the "zomgMSareevilthisWILLhappen" doomsday theories.