Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

At least with Linux we make the bricks!

Originally Posted by jamison20000e By risk of making a brick. There are companies that do (or use to(?) do) it for you, if you send the right brand laptops.

So it costs money, and it's limited to laptops.

Originally Posted by rigor I'm aware of discounted "Upgrade" versions of Windows, but upgrading free? Please give the details.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-f...how-to-get-it/

MS want everyone on Windows 10, it's that simple. This is why they're "containerising" Linux with WSL2 and why they've cosied up to the Linux foundation and donated so much money. There was one important factor which drove Linux adoption on the desktop: The cost and hassle of replacing an EoL Windows install and Windows 10 has been MS' approach to removing that. But MS is still bound to the major OEMs and has to play their game to some extent (to ensure they don't start pumping out boxes preinstalled with Ubuntu for example - they've done this before and it was my opinion then that it was a "political" move and I still believe that). While MS reputation as the bogeyman is deserved, Acer, Asus, HP, Lenovo, etc are very much part of this "cartel" which keeps Windows and x86, firmly rooted in place.

The Windows 10 web page gives the "official" advice to the prospective user that their hardware might not be up to the job via a simple multiple choice questionnaire - the reality is that I have upgraded 10 year old boxes from 7 to 10 and the latter seems far more optimised and responsive.

Originally Posted by rigor So it costs money, and it's limited to laptops.

Libreboot is one that im aware of... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libreboot

Originally Posted by jamison20000e Libreboot is one that im aware of... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libreboot

Thanks. However, I get the impression that it is important to get into the related articles, to read the section that begins "There are a number of reasons why binary blobs can be problematic.". I get the impression that type of thing is relied on with the approach. As it is, installing a new version of a Linux "distro." on a UEFI machine was somewhat painful; had to discover that I didn't just have to disable "secure boot", but also say no to "Trusted Grub", to get it to work. But at least the somewhat motherboard specific, standard BIOS, is still there. In particular, over the years I've had plenty of problems with Proprietary NVidia drivers. So I'd prefer to stay away from the proprietary "binary blobs". In particular when the article mentions NVidia, as it does.

Originally Posted by cynwulf https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-f...how-to-get-it/ MS want everyone on Windows 10, it's that simple. This is why they're "containerising" Linux with WSL2 and why they've cosied up to the Linux foundation and donated so much money. There was one important factor which drove Linux adoption on the desktop: The cost and hassle of replacing an EoL Windows install and Windows 10 has been MS' approach to removing that. But MS is still bound to the major OEMs and has to play their game to some extent (to ensure they don't start pumping out boxes preinstalled with Ubuntu for example - they've done this before and it was my opinion then that it was a "political" move and I still believe that). While MS reputation as the bogeyman is deserved, Acer, Asus, HP, Lenovo, etc are very much part of this "cartel" which keeps Windows and x86, firmly rooted in place. The Windows 10 web page gives the "official" advice to the prospective user that their hardware might not be up to the job via a simple multiple choice questionnaire - the reality is that I have upgraded 10 year old boxes from 7 to 10 and the latter seems far more optimised and responsive.

Thanks!

I've never really dove into Nvidia drivers for Linux, nor Intel?

Originally Posted by rigor Thanks. However, I get the impression that it is important to get into the related articles, to read the section that begins "There are a number of reasons why binary blobs can be problematic.". I get the impression that type of thing is relied on with the approach. As it is, installing a new version of a Linux "distro." on a UEFI machine was somewhat painful; had to discover that I didn't just have to disable "secure boot", but also say no to "Trusted Grub", to get it to work. But at least the somewhat motherboard specific, standard BIOS, is still there. In particular, over the yeThere are a number of reasons why binary blobs can be problematic.ars I've had plenty of problems with Proprietary NVidia drivers. So I'd prefer to stay away from the proprietary "binary blobs". In particular when the article mentions NVidia, as it does.

There is a difference between a binary "blob", such as the nvidia proprietary display driver and the device firmwares used on various hardware devices - the main difference is that the "blob" actually runs natively as part of the OS, while device firmware does not - it runs on the device itself.

While libreboot have sought to address the issue of the system BIOS/UEFI usually being a closed source firmware image (and unlike the parent project (coreboot), apparently excluded all closed source firmware), albeit only supporting a very small number of specific boards, they have not resolved the bigger problem of "open hardware", nor can they ever hope to do so.

So while it might be nice to run a "free BIOS", it does seem somewhat of a token approach, when you consider that the CPU microcodes, IME firmware, wired and wireless NIC firmware and a whole plethora of other device firmware are closed source.

Open hardware is the way to go, make yourself a Arduino UNO!

Or, e.g; https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.sla...uestions/12065
https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/novena

3d printers anyone...

There is a reputable source out there saying XP source code has been leaked.
Hopefully, this source code might help wine developers fix some of the long standing wine bugs.

Originally Posted by elcore There is a reputable source out there saying XP source code has been leaked. Hopefully, this source code might help wine developers fix some of the long standing wine bugs.

Wine developers are not allowed to look at leaked Windows source code. Same for ReactOS devs.

Originally Posted by Meow1234 Wine developers are not allowed to look at leaked Windows source code. Same for ReactOS devs.

But depending on their location, they are allowed to reverse engineer the binaries and look at that code, right?

Yeah, here we only call it freedom... what we make is evolving.

Innovation can come more from need than greed and war.

I believe the source has been released under NDAs before and there have been other historic leaks, so it's entirely possible that those "reverse engineering" compatibility layers for Windows already had access to some of this. This doesn't mean they simply copied code verbatim, but it would have aided their efforts tremendously.

Originally Posted by XavierP Put all of your informed or uninformed opinions here. Now 10% better than kicking the cat!

I've always liked the quote that said something to the effect "Windows has set computer science back 20 years."