Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 31st May 2012 11:11 UTC
Fedora Core "Fedora 18 will be released at around the same time as Windows 8, and as previously discussed all Windows 8 hardware will be shipping with secure boot enabled by default. [...] We've been working on a plan for dealing with this. It's not ideal, but of all the approaches we've examined we feel that this one offers the best balance between letting users install Fedora while still permitting user freedom." Wait for it... "Our first stage bootloader will be signed with a Microsoft key."
Thread beginning with comment 520191
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Ehmm...
by ilovebeer on Thu 31st May 2012 17:52 UTC in reply to "Ehmm..."
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

Microsoft takes control of my new motherboard and I have to pay them $99 to regain control of my own property... aahh, the wonder of the "free market".

When you buy a computer, you purchase ownership of the hardware only, not the software. If you don't like the software the computer runs, buy a different computer running different software, or a barebones system and put whatever you like on it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Ehmm...
by Alfman on Thu 31st May 2012 18:02 in reply to "RE: Ehmm..."
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ilovebeer,

"When you buy a computer, you purchase ownership of the hardware only, not the software."

Why are you so dense? The whole problem is that consumers who "purchase ownership of the hardware only" don't truly own it because 3rd parties retain control over the hardware keys.


EDIT:
And by the way, I don't care if *you* don't mind that 3rd parties hold the keys to *your* property. But quit making pathetic excuses that none of us should be concerned over who controls *our* property. I can't even believe it's come to this, we now need to justify the case for the public to control it's own keys instead of corporations??

Edited 2012-05-31 18:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Ehmm...
by ilovebeer on Fri 1st Jun 2012 03:35 in reply to "RE[2]: Ehmm..."
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

"When you buy a computer, you purchase ownership of the hardware only, not the software."

Why are you so dense? The whole problem is that consumers who "purchase ownership of the hardware only" don't truly own it because 3rd parties retain control over the hardware keys.

What the hell are you blabbing about now? Are you actually stupid enough to try debating against a person "owning" the hardware they've purchased, and not "owning" the software it came with? And you expect people to take you seriously? ......Wow.

EDIT:
And by the way, I don't care if *you* don't mind that 3rd parties hold the keys to *your* property. But quit making pathetic excuses that none of us should be concerned over who controls *our* property. I can't even believe it's come to this, we now need to justify the case for the public to control it's own keys instead of corporations??

You're either trolling again or have the worst comprehension in history. Why do you insist on going on and on in response to things I never said? Hopefully you'll return to Earth before posting again.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Ehmm...
by Soulbender on Fri 1st Jun 2012 03:05 in reply to "RE: Ehmm..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Microsoft's certification requirements for ARM machines forbid vendors from offering the ability to disable secure boot or enrol user keys."

So I then own hardware that I do not control. There's absolutely no valid reason for this arbitrary restriction. It only exists to unfairly favour Microsoft.
It's as absurd as if I purchased an audio player from Sony and they designed it so that under no circumstance could I play music from a non-Sony music label.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Ehmm...
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 1st Jun 2012 06:58 in reply to "RE: Ehmm..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

So when the hardware is locked down at the lowest level firmware--the BIOS/EFI--you know, the piece of software REQUIRED for the hardware to run, that's okay? Am I understanding that correctly?

What if I would like to buy an ARM-based machine, but Microsoft, in their infinite Abusive Monopolistic Wisdom, says that I can't install anything except Windows 8? So that's somehow alright? Hint: I've wanted an ARM machine for a while now, and no, it was NEVER to be able to run Windows 8. Hell, that OS was nothing more than a nut stain in Ballmer's underwear.

And now that ARM is finally making their processors available in computer styles other than cell phones, if I want to get an ARM-based laptop, desktop or tablet computer, I not only need to pay the Windows Tax to get Windows 8 with it, but at the same time waive all of my rights to install some other--ANY other--operating system, unless I support paying yet ANOTHER tax to Microsoft? Come the fuck on. Seriously.

I was proud that when I got my Android-based cell phone late last year, its manufacturer was one of the few remaining manufacturers that did not agree to pay Microsoft for nonsensical bogus patent bullshit. Earlier this year they did. So not only is Microsoft getting money (and OS sales) on practically every PC sold, they are also getting a shitload of money by Android phone manufacturers, AND now by Linux distros that simply want to be able to run on hardware that they rightly should to begin with. It will start with ARM-based tablets, and then as a recent OSNews article said, trickle up to laptops and eventually desktops, until Microsoft owns a monopoly on ARM devices... just as they practically do x86 now.

What the fucking fuck is going on here? Fucking seriously? And you think that's alright?

Reply Parent Score: 2