MicroSoft moves to block Linux using UEFI to prevent Linux installs. Sounds like they know Ubuntu ..

[L0oniX]

...is a real threat. The thing MSFT said wouldn't happen, UEFI being used to prevent Linux installs - http://t.co/imCdQn7B is happening - http://t.co/nS99Lg6Z

[Warpy]

1. Well, there's another reason to keep my two wheezing XP boxes alive

along with the fact that I have a lot of software that just won't run on Win7 and probably won't run on Win 8.

[kenny blankenship]

2. Aren't Govt sanctioned monopolies fun?

Wait until mandatory private health insurance kicks in.

[RKP5637]

6. Each day Americans are enslaved into the fascist system. Hopefully OWS is

waking people up. The recent 9% approval rating for congress means people are waking up. The next question is what do Americans do. The electoral system is failing us, many of the presidential hopefuls are outright bizarre and TPTB will snuff out OWS like with Kent State.

[blogslut]

21. UEFI is government sanctioned?

[kenny blankenship]

23. No, MSFT is

But you knew that.

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. In my experience, virtual box is a better way to run an alternate os. n/t

[Renew Deal]

4. The actual title "Microsoft could lock out Linux on Windows 8 PCs, but it won’t"

And first paragraph:

To be certified as a fully-compliant, bona fide Windows 8 logo device, a prospective PC must replace its aging BIOS with the new-fangled Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI). On the outset, this is certainly a good thing — UEFI is the reason that Windows 8 can detect rootkits and malware at boot time, and it’s part of the reason that Windows 8 can start so quickly — but UEFI could also be used to block other operating systems, such as Linux, from being installed.

I think there is a bit of dramatization going on here.

[kenny blankenship]

5. You didn't read the second article.

[Renew Deal]

7. I saw it.

It's just a matter of software vendors catching up. I'm sure Ubuntu will get there. :shrug:

[L0oniX]

9. Yea they're working on it. Funny that this happens when Ubuntu is doing so well.

[lbrtbell]

8. That's it...Windows is now officially a virus - n/t

[RegieRocker]

11. That ain't no crap either...Truth

[dixiegrrrrl]

10. Pls help me understand this:

If we buy a computer that has Windows 7 or 8 installed, we cannot install Linux in it?

So in order to install Linux, we have to build our own 'puter?

[L0oniX]

12. It's a change from mother boards using BIOS.

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. got it...thanks.

[Aerows]

31. Won't happen

Microsoft may THINK it can happen, but it won't. Everything from phones to Xboxes have been hacked to run alternative OSes. Not in a million years will they be able to do it. I'm not even sure why we are discussing it, because UEFI itself can be modified. Why on earth would MSoft think they could prevent that?

It's laughable.

[Renew Deal]

15. No

It means that if you buy a machine with UEFI hardware, you will have trouble installing certain OS's until the OS software catches up. This article is presented as MS is closing people out when in reality MS is ahead of the game.

[dixiegrrrrl]

17. "ahead of the game."

Help me understand how MS is ahead of the game
( sorry for being so dreadfully illiterate about some computer concepts).

It sounds as if Linux is locked out until software is developed to overcome the MS hardware issue?

[Renew Deal]

18. UEFI is not Microsoft technology

"The Unified EFI Forum or UEFI Forum (where UEFI stands for Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) is an alliance between several leading technology companies to modernize the booting process. The board of directors includes representatives from eleven "Promoter" companies: AMD, American Megatrends, Apple, Dell, HP, IBM, Insyde Software, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, and Phoenix Technologies."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_EFI_Forum

Some microsoft products are already designed to support UEFI. Other products from Microsoft and others need to be updated to support it.

[dixiegrrrrl]

20. Helpful, thanks.

[kenny blankenship]

19. No that is not it. The UEFI "feature" of loading only OSen preinstalled by PC maker is the problem

Linux supports UEFI. However if the UEFI firmware is allowed to boot only the digitally signed OS installed by the OEM manufacturer, and the option to turn this "feature" off is omitted from the motherboard setup program, then it doesn't matter how much Linux supports UEFI. In order to run anything but the preinstalled Windows, the UEFI firmware must be hacked. That isn't a question of Linux having to catch up, but of OEM vendor and MSFT anticompetitive collusion.

This is very similar to the problem of "jailbreaking" phones, You own hardware that you've paid for, but the preinstalled OS maker only wants you to run their approved applications on it.

[Aerows]

35. I give it about 10 minutes upon release

before it gets defeated. UEFI is also hackable. It's absolutely hilarious that people think that it couldn't be bypassed.

[TroglodyteScholar]

37. Bingo...

Thanks for the concise explanation.

[tama]

38. I've been looking

for computers free of the pre-installed MSoft virus, but they are very hard to find, nearly impossible. There is demand but not supply, so why is "corporated free market" not working? D'uh...

[Rosco T.]

14. It Can be turned off...

and the Linux people are not in panic mode...

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/242865/linux_foundation_secure_boot_need_not_be_a_problem.html

[Occulus]

27. The article specifies that it won't be a problem IF it can be turned off,

IF UEFI is implemented properly, and makes a lot of comments along the lines of "the linux foundation says this SHOULD be how it's done".

That's way too many if's and should's for me to feel particularly reassured.

[Aerows]

36. I'm not worried in the slightest

I'd like to see them TRY. It's hilarious that they think they could even try. I dare them.

[madokie]

16. F**k 'm

They'll get my Linux install when the pry it out of my cold dead hands

When I switched to Linux it was like I had a new computer and I'd put this 9 year old MMX technology processored computer up against any of the newer ones running microshit

[L0oniX]

25. I was a solid BSD user until I tried Ubuntu. BSD is the best for a server but Ubuntu is at the top..

...of the list at Distrowatch.com ...and for good reason. I never have had it so easy to install an OS and it accepted all my hardware ...phone ...flash drive ...printer ...network printer ...scanner ...wide screen LCD ...sound ...I mean everything works. Tons of free apps too.

[madokie]

26. Ubuntu is my fav too

I've tried 'm all but none comes close to ubuntu in ease of use, of install and just plain assed faster at anything I do. I have AutoCad on ubuntu using wine and it runs faster and better than it did on microshaft. It took a little work but once I figured it out it hasn't hiccuped once. Ubuntu is a good solid operating system and I'm pleased pink that I made the switch from microshaft. I have my firewall running but nothing else and I've not had a problem with anything getting on my operating system like I used to with microshit even though I'd have several anti this and anti thats running to try to keep me safe. None of them really worked as I'd still get trash on my computer and wind up having to reinstall to get rid of the shit. Now when I reinstall ubuntu its because I'm upgrading to the newer version only and not because I have too.

[L0oniX]

28. +1

[mactime]

45. Personally I prefer Fedora

I am having a hard time with the Ubuntu desktop layout. But I did install ArtistX last week-end and that is a video/graphics/audio distro built on Ubuntu so I will give it another try

[UpInArms]

29. BSD = Blue Screen of Death?

just curious

thanks

[Aerows]

32. BSD is a Unix variant

Not BSOD which is Blue Screen of Death. BSD is also what Mac variants are based upon.

[UpInArms]

39. thank you for that - I was confused

:hi:

[Aerows]

33. Love Distrowatch.com

Still, I think this article is hyperbole from hell. ANYTHING, and I do mean ANYTHING can be hacked. It would be beyond simple to get UEFI to allow booting into other OSes, including Windows 8. Just more hype from Seattle. How did Windows Advantage work out for them?

[Gold Metal Flake]

22. Noob question...

I have a Compaq Presario 700 just laying around. It works fine. New HD with XP (was ME originally). I set it up to use as a cheap "theft-proof" (due to age) browser for when we take vacations. Since I have another laptop that I actually take on vacations I was thinking about wiping the drive on the Presario and loading some sort of linux as a first time experiment. Will this Ubuntu work OK and the Presario? Just D/L the OS from Ubuntu's website, burn on a disc sort of thing?

[L0oniX]

24. You can d/l and burn the live version to see if you like it ...then install from the live CD.

[Aerows]

30. Good luck with that

Too many people, myself included, dual boot. That will go over like a lead balloon. I DARE Microsoft to attempt to prevent me from installing Linux based upon my MB's BIOS.

Seriously, I DARE them. They can't even prevent a phone from getting hacked into Android, and suddenly people think they can hijack UEFI to prevent a Linux build? LMAO. Try it.

[jtuck004]

34. Sigh. I am finally seriously thinking about adding a new laptop

(probably ASUS, still evaluating) to my small stable of older machines, and I want to run Ubuntu again.

One more thing to watch for. :crazy:

Thank you for the heads up.

[DainBramaged]

40. Not the case, it's to protect the boot sector, but it can be turned off

Red Hat, Canonical and the Linux Foundation have laid out a set of recommendations for hardware vendors in hopes of preserving the ability to install Linux on Windows 8 machines. Windows 8 machines should ship in a setup mode giving users more control right off the bat, the groups argue.

As we reported last month, Windows 8 computers that ship with UEFI secure booting enabled could make the task of replacing Windows with Linux or dual-booting the two operating systems more difficult. In order to get a “Designed for Windows 8” logo, PCs must ship with secure boot enabled, preventing the booting of operating systems that aren't signed by a trusted Certificate Authority.

Hardware vendors can give users the option of disabling the secure boot feature—but they could also decline to do so, making it impossible to run a non-Windows operating system. In practice, it seems unlikely that dual-boot scenarios will be prevented entirely, but Linux vendors and the Linux Foundation are worried about how UEFI secure booting will be implemented.

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/10/the-right-to-dual-boot-linux-groups-plead-case-prior-to-windows-8-launch.ars


No need to get the panties in a bunch, and if Windows 8 even makes it by 2013 I'll be surprised since corporate America isn't ready to jump again.


More hand wringing over nothing.....Jesus I thought you folks built your own anyway.........

[kenny blankenship]

43. Unless it can't. Some hardware has already shipped on which it CANNOT be turned off

With the result that only an OS bootloader signed with a key installed in UEFI firmware from the PC manufacturer will run. Perhaps the PC manufacturer failed to anticipate that the user might wish to run an OS not shipped from their factory, or failed to anticipate the consequences of not enabling the option to turn off "SecureBoot" in their setup program. But that would be lending them the benefit of a doubt that presumes they are very ignorant and careless.

If you are familiar with BIOS setup on a variety of machines, then you should know there's no automatic certainty that options present on one machine will be present on another machine, even if the basic BIOS vendor (Phoenix, AMI, etc) are the same.

The second article linked to in the OP references a HP slimline PC product in which SecureBoot is NOT an option that can be turned off in the HP setup program as shipped.

[DainBramaged]

44. Here's the point, if you need to dual boot, don't buy one that doesn't

Thr FIRST thing I do with a new machine here is change the bios settings. And since I have no need to dual boot, I just don't care.

I posted a study just last week, all forms of Linux are less than 5% of all operating systems, so I who don't have an need to dual boot should worry?


best bet, buy a recent refurb or build your own. Why should I be concerned?

[kenny blankenship]

46. If you "just don't care" nothing I could say would change that. But maybe the LAW would interest you

it is illegal under the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts to tie operating system software purchases to computer hardware purchases. This is why the first article predicts (albeit incorrectly) that SecureBoot will not be used to lock out other operating systems besides the preinstalled Windows and successor MS OS products.

You would never even have HEARD of Microsoft or Windows if IBM had not been restrained from tying the IBM PC platform to an IBM OS.

The point is, the existing antitrust law is meant to restrain anticompetitive practices of abusive monopolists, for the benefit of consumers at large, now and in the future, and does not merely consult the pleasure of those who are currently complacent as pigs in shit with whatever locked in products the reigning rent-seeking monopolists want to foist on them.

[Shagbark Hickory]

41. Um you left out the part of the headline where it says "But They Won't"

Not sticking up for them but you make it seem like this is imminent.

[L0oniX]

47. Check the second link.

[hunter]

42. It will be used for Digital Rights Management. Just watch.

Sure, you'll be able to turn UEFI off but then your music, games, videos, and software won't run... for your own "protection" of course. And there's some truth to that. It's easy for users to screw up current computers with malware if they are not vigilant.

Getting certain software and media to run on UEFI computers will be akin to jailbreaking an iPhone/iPad or building a "hackintosh."

It would have been nice if the Intel originated consortium had delivered a simple, rational, and elegant boot and firmware system, but commercial interests were covetous of Apple's tight control of their platforms and wanted more than that. There's quite a few cooks in this kitchen already.

We've already reached the place where general purpose computers are differentiated from appliance computers. Most computer users don't install their own operating systems. Intel/Microsoft, and all the corporations dependent upon that platform, would very much like to follow in the path of Apple by selling hardware and software systems customers can't mess with.