Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Jan 2012 16:20 UTC, submitted by moondevil
Windows And so the war on general computing continues. Were you looking forward to ARM laptops and maybe even desktops now that Windows 8 will also be released for ARM? I personally was, because I'd much rather have a thin, but fast and economical machine than a beastly Intel PC. Sadly, it turns out that all our fears regarding UEFI's Secure Boot feature were justified: Microsoft prohibits OEMs from allowing you to install anything other than Windows 8 on ARM devices (the Software Freedom Law Center has more).
Thread beginning with comment 503251
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Inverted rules for ARM and non-ARM?
by raboof on Fri 13th Jan 2012 18:49 UTC
raboof
Member since:
2005-07-24

Adding some highlighting/cherry-picking of my own:

On non-ARM systems, (...). A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. (...). Disabling Secure MUST NOT be possible on ARM systems


Am I reading this right? You must be able to disable it on non-ARM, but must not be able to disable it on ARM?

Reply Score: 3

bouhko Member since:
2010-06-24

Yeah that really shows how purely anti-competitive this demand is. There is not a single technical motivation beneficial to the user behind it.

I guess they realized that if they force SecureBoot on x86 as well, people would get angry because they can't install earlier Windows version.

So they are trying to sneak this new "feature" only in the ARM-based PC since earlier Windows versions don't work on ARM anyway.

I have no words to describe how little respect I have for the people that came up with this brillant idea.

Reply Parent Score: 5

hechacker1 Member since:
2005-08-01

Well then hackers and eventually users that want to get out of the walled garden will choose the model with x86 architecture.

Intel recently released their SoC, and it's faster yet within the same power envelope as existing ARM solutions.

AMD is hard at work developing their own version.

So an ARM licencee may actually stand to lose here if enough people care about running Windows or other OSes without boot time restrictions.

Edited 2012-01-14 02:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

That means I should be waiting on a MIPS version of windows 8 ?

By the way I'm typing this on an ARM tablet (TF101), which is awesome with linux. But the current trend of locking the bootloader (mostly for security purpose... DRM security purpose), is depressing, while I understand the (stupid) business requirement of doing so, it clearly push tablet into the niche of media consumption, and not as a viable business computing platform (which makes it less relevant than PDAs).

Reply Parent Score: 3