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.
Thread beginning with comment 495012
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Them are fighting words...
by twitterfire on Mon 31st Oct 2011 14:47 UTC in reply to "Them are fighting words..."
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

Stop what exactly?

What are you blaming MS for? They recommend hardware vendors to implement secure boot in UEFI in order to use "Windows 8 ready" logo but they don't require secure boot to be enabled by default. Nobody stops hardware vendors to allow secure boot to be disabled.

Reply Parent Score: -1

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

twitterfire,

"...but they don't require secure boot to be enabled by default. Nobody stops hardware vendors to allow secure boot to be disabled."

I would like a citation for that because that seems to be a new piece of information. Will windows run normally without any restrictions if secure boot is disabled?

Reply Parent Score: 5

Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

I would like a citation for that because that seems to be a new piece of information. Will windows run normally without any restrictions if secure boot is disabled?


New information? Hardly - look at any of the previous posts on the subject, and you'll see them talking about the OEM branding issue. Because from day one, that's what it's been about - OEMs can't put that little Windows sticker on the case if the machine doesn't use secure-boot.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

but they don't require secure boot to be enabled by default.


Actually, that's exactly what they do require if the vendor wants to have the "Designed for Windows 8" logo.
This anti-competitive practice isn't going to sit well in many parts of the world though.

Reply Parent Score: 15

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

It's not anti-competitive if you can turn it off. THe demo that they showed had an option to turn it off in the "BIOS", so what's the problem. It's no different than buying any other pc with Windows if it can be turned off.

Though it makes for some great FUD.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

...they don't require secure boot to be enabled by default.


Maybe not yet. Perhaps when Windows 9 rolls around though, and all modern computers have the Secure Boot feature, we will see a dialog during the Windows install process that says something like "In order to continue installing, please *click here* to turn on Secure Boot." Since the vast majority of users, even power users, will simply click and not think about it, it's entirely possible that Microsoft will not only turn it on but insert code that prevents it being turned back off for other OSes.

Then again, it could end up like the Pentium III processor serial number debacle: One BIOS update to turn it off by default in the original boards and it's never heard of again.

Reply Parent Score: 2