BIOS booting vs. EFI booting

Laserbeak · 05-17-2017, 04:29 PM

I'm putting this in Linux, but it could apply to any OS/hardware. In a system that can boot EFI or BIOS (usually implemented as an emulator in an EFI system), is there any real difference once the OS is booted as to which one it was booted in? I.e., is it worth the time to spend to get an OS booted natively into EFI if it's becoming a pain rather than just letting it boot in BIOS emulation mode?

AwesomeMachine · 05-17-2017, 06:27 PM

The real need for UEFI is the GPT partitioning method. Otherwise, once the system is up and running there's not much difference.

dave@burn-it.co.uk · 05-20-2017, 07:35 AM

That is seconded.

hazel · 05-20-2017, 08:17 AM

The main argument against booting in legacy mode is that uefi chips won't continue to provide that option forever. The Linux community had better work out ways of booting natively while we still have a fallback.

dave@burn-it.co.uk · 05-20-2017, 09:14 AM

That can be changed. UEFI chips can already be booted into "unsupported" OS's
If MS and Red Hat start to realise how important the Home market is to their developement of new things they can sell, they will stop using a "security" feature that only makes it difficult for the very people they need to use their product.
It was never a "security" feature and if it was intended to be, I'm glad MS and RH are not prevalent in the security market place.