Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Oct 2011 21:03 UTC, submitted by Dirge
GNU, GPL, Open Source "The Free Software Foundation released a statement open for public signing, titled 'Stand up for your freedom to install free software'. The statement is a response to Microsoft's announcement that if computer makers wish to distribute machines with the Windows 8 compatibility logo, they must implement a system called 'Secure Boot'. The FSF statement warns against the danger that, if done wrong, this system would have to be called Restricted Boot, because it could make computers incapable of running anything but Windows." Signed.
Thread beginning with comment 493450
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Wed 19th Oct 2011 15:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

Technically, once we purchase these computers and we are the owners, shouldn't we have the right to do what we wish with our computers?
Well, no, legally you don't have that right. Also, while you may own the hardware, you do not own the software (in any form) that runs on it, but merely possess a usage license. And of course there are terms to usage licenses.

It's not that simple. Alot of windows users today call us technies when they need help. And we, as techies, often use linux tools to troubleshoot/backup/restore systems because they're the best tools of the trade.
Yes, it is that simple. If you don't like what buying a certified prebuilt Windows 8 box entails, then you opt for one of the alternatives; custom order, build your own, buy a barebones. There's absolutely _nothing_ difficult about this.

About the claim that Linux 'repair' tools are the best of the trade -- that's complete fluff. There isn't a single maintenance tool available to Linux that doesn't have a Windows alternative.

When a consumer buys a win8 computer, they will not realize that secure boot could restrict their service options.
There's no proof of this.

Even if they do want a computer that can be unlocked, there is little likelihood that they'll be able to find out which systems are unlockable from the presented specs, and it's doubtful that the store associates will know either.
Again, no proof. This is all total speculation and generated fear. The thing about playing what-if, ...people tend to get all worked up and panicky over things that usually never materialize. I'm going to reserve my worry until there's something tangible to actually worry about.

Lastly, many if not most of us started using linux alongside windows either by dualbooting or repurposing an older machine (I include myself). Nothing in the history of computing this far prevented us from installing linux/bsd on a "designed for win xp" computer. Microsoft has not clairified whether dualbooting will be possible, but if not it will be alot more difficult / expensive for users to try any alternative operating systems. Perfectly good hardware may end up in the bin because it's tethered to an obsolete operating system.
All this freaking out is based on peoples imagination of what _might_ happen, but based on nothing in reality. There's no reason to believe users won't be able to continue to install over their preinstalled OS. Further, if you want a Linux box, why waste your money on buying a prebuilt Windows box where part of the cost goes towards a Windows usage license? Maybe people should be reminded you can easily custom build, or buy barebones desktops & laptops.

The sky won't fall, but it's stupid to have a trust model built into the hardware which keeps the owner out of the loop.
There isn't a single piece of evidence that says that's the case. But even if it turns out to be, we just come back to what I mentioned in the beginning... if you don't like it, don't buy it -- there are alternatives.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Icaria on Thu 20th Oct 2011 05:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

There's no proof of this.
There's no proof that consumers are ignorant of the technical details of the pre-built systems they buy? Are you really that stupid, or are you just being glib for the sake of argument?

Again, no proof.
Ugh, here you go again. In what alternate dimension do retailers know what the hell they're talking about and in which intimate details of the UEFI/BIOS implementation are made readily available? Even when you build your own systems, you invariably end up scouring obscure forums for compatibility details not make available through any official channels.

All this freaking out is based on peoples imagination of what _might_ happen, but based on nothing in reality. There's no reason to believe users won't be able to continue to install over their preinstalled OS.

There isn't a single piece of evidence that says that's the case.
Aside from, you know, all the technical details that have been released. It's even been covered in this thread:
http://www.osnews.com/thread?493410
Nothing like putting your fingers in your ears, wilfully ignoring the evidence and accusing others of 'not being based in reality'.

Reply Parent Score: 6