ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Fedora/Microsoft - Embrace, Extend, Assimiliate

<< < (2/5) > >>

Stoic Joker:
First part of last paragraph:The last option wasn't hugely attractive, but is probably the least worst. Microsoft will be offering signing services through their sysdev portal. It's not entirely free (there's a one-off $99 fee to gain access edit: The $99 goes to Verisign, not Microsoft - further edit: once paid you can sign as many binaries as you want), but it's cheaper than any realistic alternative would have been.
--- End quote ---

On the other (SSL cert. stuff), that's my understanding also.

Stoic Joker:
Soldering? lol.-mahesh2k (June 01, 2012, 10:02 AM)
--- End quote ---

Sure, why go through all the trouble of a complex and possibly unstable hack if the chip can be circumvented with a few well placed jumpers. Granted it does require a bit if skill ... But then again so does Linux. :)

mahesh2k:
Well linux installer is very simple these days(assuming user knows partitioning and point-n-click) and I can't compare it with soldering skills. If this bootkey restriction takes up then most of the branded PCs will behave like old chinese console black dots which were STP (single time programmable). sort of like use and throw machines?

40hz:
That $99 and who pays it is a red herring.

The problem isn't how much or who pays for it. The problem is that UEFI drives a wedge down the middle of what was formerly an open hardware ecosystem. Now there are "Windows PCs" and "non-Windows PCs" on the hardware level. Microsoft has used its numbers to effectively get its own proprietary hardware platform (like Apple) without actually having to manufacture it. Which is the best of all possible worlds in that they can control a huge segment of the mobo/CPU market without having to "own" anything. A very handy argument to make when accused of anticompetitive business practices in the USA.

This could, of course, be easily eliminated as a problem if all the PC manufacturers would include a simple mechanism (a switch on the back of the case or a jumper on the mobo) to turn off UEFI without having to go through heroics. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting to see that happen. I'm sure there will be some purely token hand wringing and breast beating on the part of certain manufacturers (Dell et al.) over this. But nothing of substance will emerge from it.

The other problem is that this will effectively eliminate dual-booting to an alternate OS. Unless it's RedHat. If Windows 8 won't run without UEFI - and only RedHat (currently) can run WITH it - then your Linux option is RedHat. A sorry thing in that RedHat (along with Suse and Canonical) have abandoned anything but lip service about platform independence in the interest of cozening up to Microsoft in order to get a share of whatever bones and scraps Redmond deigns to toss them.

Expect Canonical and Suse (and probably Mageia, PCLinuxOS, Vector, and Centos) to follow suit.

As a side benefit this move also creates a rift in the Linux world. And a lot of bad blood. Something Microsoft seems intent on exploiting by playing one faction off against another while maintaining it only wants what's best for the end-user.  

I fully expect Microsoft will start patent trolling in earnest once a few more key Linux distros sign onto Microsoft's notion of a new world order. (Which in case you don't know is: One World with every computer running some version of a Microsoft OS - with all other operating systems running as VMs under it.) They'll start by picking off distros one by one like they have the smartphone vendors, getting gradually larger and larger players to cave in on their demands for blackmail and protection money. Once that's done it's a small matter to engage Debian in a protracted legal battle with the goal of litigating it out of business - but without ever letting it reach a judge or jury for a formal ruling. Especially since the last thing Microsoft could possibly want is for such a case to be decided purely on technical and legal merits.

With Linux dead, or reduced to a satrap in the Microsoft Empire, and no open hardware computing platform available for a "new" alternate OS to emerge on, Microsoft will have achieved a virtual monopoly on the world's mainstream computing environment.

All of which seriously sucks. And will largely mark the end of most of the rapid innovation in computing we've enjoyed for the last 30 years.

It's already working that way in the smartphone and mobile computing world. So why not drag the desktop and server market into it just to be consistent?

Like Joni Mitchell so aptly said: "Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you got till its gone?"

 :-\

mahesh2k:
Again we are assuming that things to happen one sided. In tech world things don't work that way. I feel in between they'll also lose the customers on their platform if they act so adamant about it. Many people who purchase windows per-installed will most likely use linux or alternative OS and run windows in virtual machine. That way they can get their work done with no hardware limitation. I don't think canonical will follow this path, If they were to be following this route they could have sold "ubuntu for mobile" directly to some closed source telecom hardware vendor. As for patent trolling, linux will then become more of hackers OS and will continue to get distributed opposing all patent crap. It happened before with .mp3 format on all platforms and will continue to happen again if the patents are used to stop innovation.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version