linux4all | (no subject)

Entry tags:

legal issues,
mbr

(no subject)

Something to be seriously concerned about, thanks to the reporting of our very own

Microsoft requires that machines conforming to the Windows 8 logo program and running a client version of Windows 8 ship with secure boot enabled. The two alternatives here are for Windows to be signed with a Microsoft key and for the public part of that key to be included with all systems, or alternatively for each OEM to include their own key and sign the pre-installed versions of Windows. The second approach would make it impossible to run boxed copies of Windows on Windows logo hardware, and also impossible to install new versions of Windows unless your OEM provided a new signed copy. The former seems more likely.
A system that ships with only OEM and Microsoft keys will not boot a generic copy of Linux.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

One more reason to look at companies like ZaReason. I wonder how MS's lock-in will affect them?

I'd never heard of ZaReason!

I'm really not quite sure -- presumably they may do better business from the FOSS community?

They build computers specifically fro Linux. If the hardware vendors (Motherboard suppliers) create exclusively Windows secure boot boards, then finding compatible hardware will be problematic for the smaller vendors like ZaReason. There are more, but their names escape me. I've never bought a machine from ZaReason, I just know they exist.

As as said else-net.. because this worked out so well for Sony and their playstation.

Ah, the PS3.

Just because it didn't work well doesn't mean Microsoft wasn't paying attention and will not learn from Sony's mistakes. It also doesn't mean that lock-ins are any less unethical, and that Linux users should stop worrying about the overwhelming culture of lock-in.

Edited 2011-09-21 14:11 (UTC)

I think my immediate reaction was actual physical discomfort, because omg, what?

On the other hand, seems like a desperate kind of thing to do, yes? I predict practical problems and more unhappy customers.

Yeah, I was much the same in my reaction. It is very desperate, and people will actively get up and pay more for ZaReason and co.

Edited 2011-09-21 14:05 (UTC)

Nah, this has been in the works for years, it's been planned for, and in some fashion it's going to happen. The PC business is about moving product in large quantities and ignoring the few squeaky wheels. People like my parents don't care if they can't reinstall the OS without getting a key from their vendor. It's not a factor that goes into their decision to buy a machine.

What I predict is that the cracker community will break the encryption in two days and anybody who wants to install Linux on a PC will just have to break a stupid law again, the way we do with DeCSS.

Hardware vendors are also not stupid. I imagine they'll try to run a small side store for people who want unlocked/unlockable machines, and I imagine that after a few months they'll close those stores down because they're not making enough money to keep pissing off Microsoft. There just isn't that big a market for unlocked PCs.

What I predict is that the cracker community will break the encryption in two days and anybody who wants to install Linux on a PC will just have to break a stupid law again, the way we do with DeCSS.

From what I understand of law, in the EU at least, this kind of cartel lock-in is illegal. However, I definitely hope the cracker community will beat it.

Gah, how galling.

The article I read said that you could flip a hardware switch to disable this IIRC, like on the Chromebooks ...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only