Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While this currently concerns only to Windows 8 tablets and smartphones, soon we will be seeing netbooks and PCs with ARM processors. Micro$oft is flexing its muscle again to eliminate the competition and limit consumer's choice.
As Glyn Moody points out, Microsoft has wasted no time in revising its Windows Hardware Certification Requirements to effectively ban most alternative operating systems on ARM-based devices that ship with Windows 8.
The Certification Requirements define (on page 116) a "custom" secure boot mode, in which a physically present user can add signatures for alternative operating systems to the system's signature database, allowing the system to boot those operating systems. But for ARM devices, Custom Mode is prohibited: "On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode. Only Standard Mode may be enable." [sic] Nor will users have the choice to simply disable secure boot, as they will on non-ARM systems: "Disabling Secure [Boot] MUST NOT be possible on ARM systems." [sic] Between these two requirements, any ARM device that ships with Windows 8 will never run another operating system, unless it is signed with a preloaded key or a security exploit is found that enables users to circumvent secure boot.
<SNIP>
Before this week, this policy might have concerned only Windows Phone customers. But just yesterday, Qualcomm announced plans to produce Windows 8 tablets and ultrabook-style laptops built around its ARM-based Snapdragon processors. Unless Microsoft changes its policy, these may be the first PCs ever produced that can never run anything but Windows, no matter how Qualcomm feels about limiting its customers' choices. SFLC predicted in our comments to the Copyright Office that misuse of UEFI secure boot would bring such restrictions, already common on smartphones, to PCs. Between Microsoft's new ARM secure boot policy and Qualcomm's announcement, this worst-case scenario is beginning to look inevitable.
This is nothing new coming from Microsoft. I have been multi booting OSes for decades and even back in the MS NT days it would wipe any other OS from your system during install.
The key back then was to partition the HD, install MS on one partition and then go do your multi boot stuff with other OSes and a boot manager.
There are other options out there besides MS and I hope people take advantage of them and speak with their wallets and show MS that they are no longer the bully in the schoolyard.
This is nothing new coming from Microsoft. I have been multi booting OSes for decades and even back in the MS NT days it would wipe any other OS from your system during install.
The key back then was to partition the HD, install MS on one partition and then go do your multi boot stuff with other OSes and a boot manager.
There are other options out there besides MS and I hope people take advantage of them and speak with their wallets and show MS that they are no longer the bully in the schoolyard.
So what?
If a consumer wants to install other operating systems on one of these devices they should instead buy another device that allows it.
There is no bigger bully today than Apple. No one can legally install IOS on a non-Apple computer. If they could there would be no such thing as a Hackintosh.
99% of the people who buy an ARM device running Windows 8 want the function of the complete package. They aren't interested in running another OS on it.
Chiming in before the mod locks this thread down to say that Apple does the same crap and no ones says a word. Good for Microsoft!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
This is nothing new coming from Microsoft. I have been multi booting OSes for decades and even back in the MS NT days it would wipe any other OS from your system during install.
The key back then was to partition the HD, install MS on one partition and then go do your multi boot stuff with other OSes and a boot manager.
There are other options out there besides MS and I hope people take advantage of them and speak with their wallets and show MS that they are no longer the bully in the schoolyard.
You're right MS is no longer the bully, Apple has now taken their place.
Also, it doesn't matter how many "people" speak with their wallets, MS is not going anywhere so long as businesses are still using them. At this point, even if Apple went after the business market it would prohibitively expensive for businesses to switch to Apple systems.
Last edited by ShadowCaver; 01-18-2012 at 07:41 PM..
Sprint tells MSFT that they are not excited about WM phones, because the greatest reason for returns is "User Experience."
MSFT is just trying to offer a better UE.
You can multiboot Apple and Linux even on the old PPC based Macs and the Mac software didn't get all antsy about it.
If there's a linux port for that device then it's just a matter of finding some boot manager as well.
There is no MAC software that queries if other OSes are on the device. So how can you say that Apple has their hardware locked down ?
As far as iPod there are several open source projects to port Linux to the iPod.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bs13690
You're right MS is no longer the bully, Apple has now taken their place.
Also, it doesn't matter how many "people" speak with their wallets, MS is not going anywhere so long as businesses are still using them. At this point, even if Apple went after the business market it would prohibitively expensive for businesses to switch to Apple systems.
Not really because emulators aren't that expensive and some are even free.
OpenOffice will read/write/save in MS format and that is free on all software platforms.
I work in a corporate scenario that started out Windoze based but now have Mac, Linux and Windows users and we can all email and share docs with no problem.
Last edited by ShadowCaver; 01-18-2012 at 07:40 PM..
As far as iPod there are several open source projects to port Linux to the iPod.
Why is this interesting? Who besides some bored Linux geek would care?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
There is no MAC software that queries if other OSes are on the device. So how can you say that Apple has their hardware locked down ?
IOS is not licensed for use on any computer not manufactured by Apple. That is a legal lockdown if not technical.
Apple hardware allows other OSs because Apple found it commercially advantageous to do so. In other words Mac users wanted Windows on the same box. So Apple decided to satisfy that demand.
Last edited by ShadowCaver; 01-18-2012 at 07:41 PM..
IOS is not licensed for use on any computer not manufactured by Apple. That is a legal lockdown if not technical.
Apple hardware allows other OSs because Apple found it commercially advantageous to do so. In other words Mac users wanted Windows on the same box. So Apple decided to satisfy that demand.
But Microsoft doesn't own the hardware. Therein lies the difference.
When Apple was PPC based you could only install Linux.
Once Apple went Intel then you could install Linux and Windows with the help of bootcamp which provided traditional BIOS for Windows to boot.
Apple went with EFI.
And this thread is about OS software not letting any other OS software coexist on the same device.
Last edited by HappyTexan; 01-18-2012 at 04:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
