LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-20-2012, 10:11 PM   #1
liltux
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Posts: 39

Rep: Reputation: 2
Microsoft locking hardware


I am starting this thread to get some interesting feedback from people on Microsoft's attempt, or success, at getting hardware vendors to force boot locking and making it hard to take a once windows pc and run linux. I, for one, dont know much on this topic. Just from what i have seen online here and there. I know if and when this comes to pass I imagine there will be cracks and hacks out there as a work around. I feel it is extremely unnecessary and just not right, but then again I'm not a businessman. So here it is, fact or fiction, truth or rumor, I am interested to hear some others thoughts.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 09:04 AM   #2
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Moderator response

Moved: This thread is more suitable in <General> and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 10:10 AM   #3
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Member Response

Hi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by liltux View Post
I am starting this thread to get some interesting feedback from people on Microsoft's attempt, or success, at getting hardware vendors to force boot locking and making it hard to take a once windows pc and run linux. I, for one, dont know much on this topic. Just from what i have seen online here and there. I know if and when this comes to pass I imagine there will be cracks and hacks out there as a work around. I feel it is extremely unnecessary and just not right, but then again I'm not a businessman. So here it is, fact or fiction, truth or rumor, I am interested to hear some others thoughts.
Actually Microsoft is not locking anything out. The 'UEFI' protocol has been discussed at length here at LQ. It will be OEM that controls the hardware and whether the user will have the means to override the secure boot. Which to date the user will be able to provide the key for UEFI and modify to suit. Do some searching before attempting to open another can of worms.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 10:26 AM   #4
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,038
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Here's a can of worms for you, Gary, or an ARMful at least:
http://www.osnews.com/story/25507/Mi...s_8_Using_UEFI
 
Old 01-21-2012, 10:51 AM   #5
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by onebuck View Post
Hi,

Actually Microsoft is not locking anything out. The 'UEFI' protocol has been discussed at length here at LQ. It will be OEM that controls the hardware and whether the user will have the means to override the secure boot. Which to date the user will be able to provide the key for UEFI and modify to suit. Do some searching before attempting to open another can of worms.
onebuck, last time the UEFI topic was discussed here you essentially called all the concerns raised as FUD.
Can you please comment on the article that brianL posted?

Last edited by easuter; 01-21-2012 at 10:54 AM. Reason: link to source post
 
Old 01-21-2012, 12:08 PM   #6
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Member response

Hi,

Do not purchase if it does not allow you access. It is the users choice. If one cannot make choices as to purchase then complains that I cannot run my desired software on said device because the machine is dedicated to use one designated operating system. Your choice, do not buy it. You as a user have to decide what you wish to purchase. A FORD is a FORD and you cannot make a FORD into a Chevy!

Just like any other device for purchase, research to meet your needs. If a OEM does not allow you to modify then do not buy that particular item. $$ do control whether the device will be popular. If the many Microsoft users decide they want said control for that device then so be it. 'UEFI' is long over due and will benefit the computer industry. We have the need for a new BIOS extension and 'UEFI' will help when used.

Quote:
from http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2...with-uefi.aspx
Who is in control?

At the end of the day, the customer is in control of their PC. Microsoft’s philosophy is to provide customers with the best experience first, and allow them to make decisions themselves. We work with our OEM ecosystem to provide customers with this flexibility. The security that UEFI has to offer with secure boot means that most customers will have their systems protected against boot loader attacks. For the enthusiast who wants to run older operating systems, the option is there to allow you to make that decision.
A demonstration of this control is found in the Samsung tablet with Windows 8 Developer Preview that was offered to //BUILD/ participants. In the screenshot below you will notice that we designed the firmware to allow the customer to disable secure boot. However, doing so comes at your own risk. OEMs are free to choose how to enable this support and can further customize the parameters as described above in an effort to deliver unique value propositions to their customers. Windows merely did work to provide great OS support for a scenario we believe many will find valuable across consumers and enterprise customers.
Look at the screen shot for the BIOS (Figure 5 - Samsung PC secure boot setting).

Be sure to read the whole entry: Protecting the pre-OS environment with UEFI

FUD and rumors are driving things to the extreme. Get your facts then discuss.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 12:17 PM   #7
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 3,086

Rep: Reputation: 789Reputation: 789Reputation: 789Reputation: 789Reputation: 789Reputation: 789Reputation: 789
We're talking about ARM devices: phones, mostly. If my memory serves me right, only about 10% have Windows. So what if you can't put Linux on them? Can you put Linux on a Blackberry? Can you put Windows on an iPad?

Microsoft's "generous" decision not to apply this to ordinary computers was simply out of their hands: it's the hardware and firmware manufacturers who decide how they boot, as has been explained in other threads.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 12:40 PM   #8
easuter
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Slackware64 13.0, Slackware64 13.1
Posts: 538

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by onebuck View Post
Hi,

Do not purchase if it does not allow you access. It is the users choice. If one cannot make choices as to purchase then complains that I cannot run my desired software on said device because the machine is dedicated to use one designated operating system. Your choice, do not buy it.
Here you completely ignore the fact that people may not be aware of alternatives when they purchase hardware.
When I started experimenting with Linux I used the hardware I had, and for the most part didn't have any barriers placed in my way. However I still had problems with devices that didn't provide any Linux drivers, and didn't have the surplus cash to just run out and replace all of them with Linux-friendly alternatives.

You can't ignore the chilling effect this will have on people who might be interested in alternative software once they discover it but are then barred from easily giving it a try.

Quote:
You as a user have to decide what you wish to purchase. A FORD is a FORD and you cannot make a FORD into a Chevy!
Sorry but that analogy is ridiculous when it comes to computers. Your phone is essentially a scaled down general-purpose computer. A car does only one thing, a computer has so many more uses than just being used to make phone calls or send messages when deployed as a phone.
Turning computers into appliances poses a serious risk to the freedom you have as a user to do what you want with the hardware you payed for with your own cash.

Quote:
Just like any other device for purchase, research to meet your needs. If a OEM does not allow you to modify then do not buy that particular item. $$ do control whether the device will be popular.
This goes back to my first point: MS are setting barriers up for anyone who was unaware of alternatives from leaving their walled garden.

Quote:
If the many Microsoft users decide they want said control for that device then so be it. 'UEFI' is long over due and will benefit the computer industry. We have the need for a new BIOS extension and 'UEFI' will help when used.

Look at the screen shot for the BIOS (Figure 5 - Samsung PC secure boot setting).

Be sure to read the whole entry: Protecting the pre-OS environment with UEFI

FUD and rumors are driving things to the extreme.
FUD...very funny. It's not Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt once yours fears have already been confirmed.
Microsoft has a very small market share on ARM devices and what they are doing with their UEFI terms on ARM is essentially using their power in an anticompetitive manner. If they made software for ARM devices that outstripped the competition, then there would be no need for this type of tactics.

Basically they can't compete with the quality of their software so they're "strong-arming" OEMs into handing them marketshare on silver platter and automatically locking users into what they bought to prevent them from leaving.

Quote:
Get your facts then discuss.

You should take your own advice.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 01:47 PM   #9
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Member response

Hi,

I do have my facts straight!

Fear mongers and their what ifs will do no one any good. So everyone needs to provide the means for alternatives? BS!

As I said before do not purchase if it does not suit you. And my analogy with FORD is good from this perspective since you seem to want to force a company to not produce because of YOUR wish to produce a device and not lock it for personal uses instead of their needs to provide a secure device. FORD would not produce Chevy parts unless it was profitable. And it would not be profitable to remake a FORD into a Chevy.

If you as a hacker wish to purchase then hardware/software integration on your purchased device then so be it. Your attempt will hopefully get the desired effect but I am sure that you would be flushing money down the toilet. This argument is moot as far as I am concerned.

Freedom goes for everyone. Freedom of choice, freedom to produce a device as they desire. Your freedom to ignore the device.

As to your reference to Linux and your endeavors. Your problem if the hardware does not work or provided with proper drivers or modules. Not guaranteed. So how can you argue the point;
Quote:
You can't ignore the chilling effect this will have on people who might be interested in alternative software once they discover it but are then barred from easily giving it a try.
No manufacture/software producer is required to produce a product as set by some parties that are not affiliated with the product development.

OpenSource is great but as a community they/we can not dictate to a manufacture or software developer who is producing a device for their specific needs. My answer as stated before: Be sure to make a purchase that suits YOUR needs and requirements.
Quote:
Turning computers into appliances poses a serious risk to the freedom you have as a user to do what you want with the hardware you payed for with your own cash.
If you are speaking of present hardware that you own then you failed in the research. Public's right(s) to ignore. You cannot force a company to produce a product as you see fit. That is unless you happen to be a major stock holder and control the company. Everything is stock driven or private enterprise to produce or provide product(s).

Quote:
This goes back to my first point: MS are setting barriers up for anyone who was unaware of alternatives from leaving their walled garden.
Again, do not purchase or support Microsoft. Unawareness falls to the purchaser for failure to research. Just because Gnu/Linux is free and available doesn't mean all computing devices must provide the means to use that as a alternative OS.
Quote:
FUD...very funny. It's not Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt once yours fears have already been confirmed.
Microsoft has a very small market share on ARM devices and what they are doing with their UEFI terms on ARM is essentially using their power in an anticompetitive manner. If they made software for ARM devices that outstripped the competition, then there would be no need for this type of tactics.

Basically they can't compete with the quality of their software so they're "strong-arming" OEMs into handing them marketshare on silver platter and automatically locking users into what they bought to prevent them from leaving.
There are loads of ARM devices that do not use nor support Microsoft. Android comes to mind. No, Microsoft is developing a piece of software that will use hardware that is ARM based and developed by OEM(s) for the use of their software. If that OEM wishes to continue providing hardware that uses Microsoft then they must meet design requirements/needs as required by Microsoft. You are compounding by saying all ARM devices will be controlled by Microsoft. Untrue! Again FUD!

Do us all a favor an do a Google or DuckDuckGo for ARM based devices that use Android (Linux) and then Microsoft. Market share is to Android. Do not buy Microsoft driven hardware that is secure booted and does not allow the user to modify UEFI. Buy a device that will allow the desired effects. Problem solved!

In actuality this discussion is nothing more than some people that fear Microsoft is dictating by providing a design to a OEM that will produce overall control of computing. The control of individual pieces of hardware to use only their software is their right. It too is the individuals right to ignore or not purchase that same device. Market driven.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 02:01 PM   #10
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,038
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Gary
What about if someone wants to put ARMedslack on something that already has Windows on it? Shouldn't they have the same rights over hardware they've bought as someone with an x86?
 
Old 01-21-2012, 03:10 PM   #11
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Member response

Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
Gary
What about if someone wants to put ARMedslack on something that already has Windows on it? Shouldn't they have the same rights over hardware they've bought as someone with an x86?
No, not if they purchased the device and did not know the restrictions. Research before purchase. You have every right to freely use ARMedslack but you do not have the rights to dictated that manufacture must suit your immediate needs or change design criteria to suit.

My meaning is that You acquired ARMedslack with expectations to use on any ARM device but a manufacture/developer produces another ARM device, it does not mean you can dictate that usage of your OS must be made possible to use on that device(Microsoft or anybody else). Nothing saying you cannot hack the hardware/software personally unless you signed a device contract with a provider. Then you will pay the penalty for violation of the contract.

I have been experimenting with several different Android tablet devices lately. Easily modified to suit my needs. Not that different than using Gnu/Linux on PC equipment. The items that were purchased, I researched and then selected the device(s) that met my criteria. Any harm done, was no foul. Revert and start over or patch to correct the fault/error(s). Nothing prevented the usage as I set for the device(s).

Just because you can purchase any device out right doesn't mean that device will be/can be used in multiple environments. I have not read the license/contract for any Microsoft Phone devices but from past experience(s) for their contract(s), I am sure they have stipulations for alternate usage/out right restriction.

Patiently waiting to get my hands on a few Raspberry Pi. Now that is a device waiting for ARMedslack to be installed on.

I would never purchase a phone, Netbook ,Tablet, laptop or even a PC device that could not be used as I see fit. Most 'UEFI' equipment that I personally have used provide the means via OEM utilities to control the system. Thus allowing the introduction of a key for alternate use. There are x86 PCs' with a locked secure boot but the OEM does allow the change via system utilities. Some netbooks are locked, I just do not purchase nor suggest to anyone to purchase unless they are told specifically the system is locked.

I have several iPad2 and feel no need to modify. Meets my needs as setup by Apple thus no desire to modify.

Again, buyer be-aware!
 
Old 01-21-2012, 03:21 PM   #12
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,038
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by onebuck View Post
Patiently waiting to get my hands on a few Raspberry Pi. Now that is a device waiting for ARMedslack to be installed on.
Unless Microsoft® get to it first.

P.S.
I'm beginning to think you might be an agent provocateur, working undercover for Microsoft®.

Last edited by brianL; 01-21-2012 at 03:41 PM.
 
Old 01-21-2012, 03:58 PM   #13
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 11,214
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437Reputation: 1437
Member response

Hi,

Never going to happen! Read the site information for Raspberry Pi.

I just do not believe in bashing a company when there is no need. Microsoft has been a profitable company that does business practices that some people out right hate. Microsoft User base is large, Gnu/Linux is looking better by the day.

To me, Microsoft produces tools that people can use at a cost for willing users. Just like the Open Source community produces free tools that people can use but at a different cost.

If you feel that I fit;
Quote:
I'm beginning to think you might be an agent provocateur, working undercover for Microsoft®.
You are sadly mistaken. I just believe a person should have choices and with those choices there will be some sort of restriction(s) or obligation(s) from all parties.

For you to call me a provocateur is like: 'the kettle calling the pot Black'.

My experience with Microsoft is from the beginning. Not always in agreement with their practices. Much richer users have brought them to task(s) for some of their wrong doings.
 
Old 01-22-2012, 01:46 AM   #14
liltux
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Posts: 39

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2
Onebuck,
Obviously I did not perform much research. I had performed a poor search of LQ, and nothing popped up of interest. So hence my original post. Apologies for any "worms" let out. I will take your advise in consideration in the future.

Everyone,
Although I did enjoy the different perspectives on the subject, it is apparent onebuck's point is the clearest. Companies, whomever they are, are in business to make money. In that goal, if they make decisions their customers do not like, then the customer either does not purchase their product or request a different product, or both.
 
Old 01-22-2012, 05:59 AM   #15
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Knowing M$, their plan is to lock all devices. So far, Intel stopped them from locking out x86 machines. Some ARM devices have been locked as posted above.

Boycott any locked device, not just ones locked by M$.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Microsoft Denies Locking out Linux Stories LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-26-2011 03:50 PM
LXer: VMware rains hardware deals on Microsoft's parade LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-26-2008 11:40 AM
Athlon locking up after hardware upgrade/Debian reinstall Storm16 Linux - Hardware 0 05-20-2006 09:43 PM
LXer: Microsoft study finds Linux to have no advantage on older hardware LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-09-2006 09:16 PM
Microsoft Hardware on Linux DarkHawke Suse/Novell 1 10-19-2004 07:10 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:28 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration