Linked by Howard Fosdick on Thu 6th Dec 2012 05:26 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 544524
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.
ssokolow,
"That is, assuming they can convince the motherboard manufacturers to support things to a suitable degree."
Haven't they already?
"That is, assuming they can convince the motherboard manufacturers to support things to a suitable degree."
Haven't they already?
You honestly expect motherboard manufacturers to obsessively release patches for every single motherboard they offer for the entire 5-10 year lifespan of the manufactured boards and not screw up getting them actually installed in the end users' PCs?
Last I checked, with BIOS-based motherboards, the solution was "release something tested, expect no more than 1% of users to need to update, and possibly provide updates when a hardware incompatibility or software bug is discovered."
(I know of at least once instance where a Gigabyte rep insisted that it must be the owner's fault that a fully-updated BIOS was still exhibiting a problem... maybe because they were running Linux before the problem was also proven to be present on Windows)
I seriously doubt motherboard manufacturers are prepared to handle reliably providing ongoing security fixes for what is essentially a small operating system.





Member since:
2010-01-21
That is, assuming they can convince the motherboard manufacturers to support things to a suitable degree.
This is basically like Android but with less thought put into how patches are going to get made and distributed for each of the gazillion different motherboard models that'll go on the market, each needing its own combination of proprietary EFI add-on modules to work.