GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Not illegal but maybe anti-competitive if they require it for the only OS they sell. Since the Republicans dropped most of the anti-trust stuff against MS you'll have to rely on EU courts to do something about it if so.
If I read it correctly though it appears to only affect dual boot systems so it won't have much impact for business. We either have servers dedicated to Unix/Linux or Windows.
My understanding of trusted computing is that the encryption features in the CPU are only used if the operating system chooses to use them. So you should still be able to dual-boot, *I think*
However this would make accessing your windows documents via linux impossible as they would all be encrypted with 128-bit encryption
In any event hell will freeze over before I purchase a trusted computing platform for home use.
They've come up with disk-encryption, and a FUD press-release, all in one neat package. Linux has had this for years, but never tried to turn it into "the end of the world as we know it."
Alas, there is a fundamental and inescapable problem with disk-encryption systems, and that is the fact that the plaintext encryption-key must be stored somewhere. Locate that key, and the encryption is nonexistent.
Furthermore, y'know, disk drives break. They're not supposed to, but they do. And sometimes you have to move them. Disk-encryption can make these things a royal pain in the ... on any system.
Hmmm - seems I once heard someone say "Bye, bye Windows - Hello OS/2".
I suspect Windows death is like that of Unix. Unix has been predicted to be going away any day now since 1970. There will always likely be a niche for Windows. Also remember Windows got where it is now not because of technical superiority but because of marketing superiority (even if you don't like their methods).
Also supportability is a big issue for commercial entities. I recall once having worked on A/UX which was Apple's Unix that allowed for seamless integration between their System 7 and Unix (maybe that was the basis for the current Mac OS?). However after evaluating it despite loving the way it worked (it truly was SEAMLESS) I recommended we not use it because at the time the System 7 side knew nothing about the Unix and vice-versa.
Oops - I forgot to bash it by calling it Windoze - where are my manners?
Originally posted by masonm *yaaawn*
Oh, sorry. did someone say something?
Oh, I see, Vista, never mind.
Congratulations, masonm! Due to your continued display of advanced humor, you've been selected to alpha test our L-2 tinfoil hat, code named In-VISTA-ble! Well done, masonm, we applaud your efforts!
Sincerely,
Otto Von Schnitzelpuskracengisheitmeyer
President of Marketing, Detectotronix
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.