Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[John Oliver]

On 23/09/11 20:33, paul sutton wrote:

On 23/09/11 20:25, Avi Greenbury wrote:

Juan J. wrote:


On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:

On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:

Just read the following. Comments?


yeah, it is potentially very nasty.

Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to
run applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS
AND what people actually run on it.

Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
that to happen?


Why? It's not anti-competetive per se, it's just something that can be
used to be anti-competetive.

Banning signed bootloaders on the grounds of competition would be akin
to banning torrents on the grounds of piracy.

That's not to say there aren't other reasons to ban it, though.


Well as we can't get it banned easily lets find a way to educate people
properly about it so they know about it and how it may affect them

Paul



Is that not anti-competitive in the same way that the supposed 'secret 
API' was deemed anti-competitive (although that did turn out to not exist).




--
*John Oliver*
jp.oli...@ntlworld.com
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[paul sutton]

On 23/09/11 20:25, Avi Greenbury wrote:
> Juan J. wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>>> On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:
 On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
> Just read the following. Comments?
>
 yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
>>> Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to
>>> run applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS
>>> AND what people actually run on it.
>> Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
>> that to happen?
>>
> Why? It's not anti-competetive per se, it's just something that can be
> used to be anti-competetive.
>
> Banning signed bootloaders on the grounds of competition would be akin
> to banning torrents on the grounds of piracy.
>
> That's not to say there aren't other reasons to ban it, though.
>
Well as we can't get it banned easily lets find a way to educate people
properly about it so they know about it and how it may affect them

Paul



-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Avi Greenbury]

Juan J. wrote:

> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
> > On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:
> > > On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
> > >> Just read the following. Comments?
> > >>
> > > yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
> > 
> > Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to
> > run applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS
> > AND what people actually run on it.
> 
> Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
> that to happen?
> 

Why? It's not anti-competetive per se, it's just something that can be
used to be anti-competetive.

Banning signed bootloaders on the grounds of competition would be akin
to banning torrents on the grounds of piracy.

That's not to say there aren't other reasons to ban it, though.

-- 
Avi

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Avi Greenbury]

Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
> Now whether Windows 8 will even be a factor in this I don't know. 
> Certainly AFAIK (as above) many large corporations have not yet
> upgraded to Windows 7, even though it's been out for nearly two years
> now and XP comes out of support in 30 months

As time goes on, the chances of them upgrading *increase*. Nobody
upgraded to Vista, some to 7, more will upgrade to 8.
u
Perhaps some of those upgrades will be to something other than Windows,
but I suspect most places still tied to XP will also be tied to things
that speak Exchange and Active Dirctory and MSOOXML fluently.

-- 
Avi

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Bea Groves]

Hi!

You can say that again! The biggest problem I have is to try to get
people to distinguish between 'Microsoft skills' and 'computer skills' -
and that's a huge uphill struggle. The problem is: it's a situation
exacerbated by the fact that the whole education sector is virtually a
'Windows-only' zone. Humph!

On 23/09/11 18:47, paul sutton wrote:

>>
> 
> Not to mention saying IE to  mean the whole internet,  getting MS word
> mixed up with Windows and a whole load more oddities which shows how bad
> teaching is and that is both adult ed and i guess schools to some extent.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 

-- 
Beatrix E. Groves
BA Hons (Educ) LCGI MAPTT MIFL QTLS
President, Institute for Learning (IfL)
General Secretary, Association of Part-Time Tutors (APTT)
<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>
Email:  beagro...@gmail.com
Web:http://www.beagroves.net
Blog:   http://beagroves.tumblr.com
<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>~<>

Random Quote of the Day (chosen by my computer) ->

"We find that at present the human race is divided into one wise man,
nine knaves, and ninety fools out of every hundred. That is, by an
optimistic observer. The nine knaves assemble themselves under the
banner of the most knavish among them, and become 'politicians'; the
wise man stands out, because he knows himself to be hopelessly
outnumbered, and devotes himself to poetry, mathematics, or philosophy;
while the ninety fools plod off under the banners of the nine villains,
according to fancy, into the labyrinths of chicanery, malice and
warfare. It is pleasant to have command, observes Sancho Panza, even
over a flock of sheep, and that is why the politicians raise their
banners. It is, moreover, the same thing for the sheep whatever the
banner. If it is democracy, then the nine knaves will become members of
parliament; if fascism, they will become party leaders; if communism,
commissars. Nothing will be different, except the name. The fools will
be still fools, the knaves still leaders, the results still
exploitation. As for the wise man, his lot will be much the same under
any ideology. Under democracy he will be encouraged to starve to death
in a garret, under fascism he will be put in a concentration camp, under
communism he will be liquidated."

— T.H. White

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[paul sutton]

On 23/09/11 18:43, Juan J. Martínez wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 18:07 +0100, paul sutton wrote:
>>> 
>>> When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs
>>> they frequently say to me that
>>> Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer'
>>> and if you change the OS it
>>> won't work properly any more. This could
>>> make that current misconception
>>> actually true!
>>
>> Sounds like something we need to address.
> I agree. It's like that "Mac and PC", when they mean "Mac and Windows".
>
> Regards,
>
> Juan
>

Not to mention saying IE to  mean the whole internet,  getting MS word
mixed up with Windows and a whole load more oddities which shows how bad
teaching is and that is both adult ed and i guess schools to some extent.

Paul


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Juan J.]

On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 18:07 +0100, paul sutton wrote:
> 
> > 
> > When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs
> > they frequently say to me that
> > Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer'
> > and if you change the OS it
> > won't work properly any more. This could
> > make that current misconception
> > actually true!
> 
> 
> Sounds like something we need to address.

I agree. It's like that "Mac and PC", when they mean "Mac and Windows".

Regards,

Juan

-- 
jjm's home: http://www.usebox.net/jjm/
blackshell: http://blackshell.usebox.net/
en_GB@blog: http://engbblog.wordpress.com/


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[paul sutton]

>
> When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs they frequently
> say to me that
> Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer' and if you
> change the OS it
> won't work properly any more. This could make that current
> misconception
> actually true!
>


Sounds like something we need to address.

Paul
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Simon Greenwood]

On 23 September 2011 16:59, Tony Pursell wrote:

>
>
> On 23 September 2011 16:20, James Morrissey wrote:
>
>> This appeared on the OMGUbuntu site earlier today:
>>
>>
>> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/09/microsoft-attempt-address-windows-8-linux-worries/
>>
>> james.
>>
>> On 23 September 2011 16:05, gazz  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 00:06 +0100, Alan Bell wrote:
>>> > On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
>>> > > Just read the following. Comments?
>>> > >
>>> > yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
>>> > To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do this
>>> > secure boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it off, exactly
>>> > like the google chromebooks do, they have a switch to turn off the code
>>> > signing requirement so you can run unsigned operating systems. The OLPC
>>> > also has this exact same feature, but you can get a dev key and turn it
>>> off.
>>> > The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering to
>>> > include an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of machines
>>> > (probably quite mainstream high volume ones) that won't run anything
>>> but
>>> > the pre-installed Windows 8 or above.
>>> > The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to run.
>>> > This means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware sales, the
>>> > industry likes that) and means that more manufacturers will fail to
>>> > include an off switch for the secure boot. If the market doesn't punish
>>> > them by people avoiding these pre-bricked computers then they will keep
>>> > doing it. Microsoft will carefully not require OEMs to fail to include
>>> > an off switch, because that would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and
>>> > VMware and so on can include the public keys and provide a secure boot
>>> > environment, or run unsigned code for developing drivers and running
>>> > Linux, but you won't be running Linux on the hardware, only
>>> virtualised.
>>> > It is kind of like the current trend for using up 4 primary partitions
>>> > and not creating extended partitions to make dual booting harder, but
>>> > this one you potentially can't get round. I can see a time when you
>>> have
>>> > to get a laptop chipped to run Linux like you would a DVD player to do
>>> > multi region.
>>> >
>>> > Alan.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Yes, agree this is what is likely to happen. It would effectively
>>> confine Linux back to a small, techie ghetto - and that's assuming that
>>> it will still be possible to buy motherboards without the keys or with
>>> an 'off' switch.
>>>
>>> When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs they frequently say to me that
>>> Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer' and if you change the OS it
>>> won't work properly any more. This could make that current misconception
>>> actually true!
>>>
>>> What's Canonical's view on this? It seems tempting to team up with a
>>> producer such as Aleutia to ensure that unlocked PCs are still out there
>>> - and with an 'eco' selling point.
>>>
>>> Paula
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. James Morrissey
>> Senior Research Officer
>> Refugee Studies Centre
>> Department of International Development
>> University of Oxford
>>
>>
>> It seems to me that Secure Boot, in principal, is a Good Thing and that
> all operating systems should offer it.  Its all about how it is implemented
> and the provision of an opt-out where needed.
>
> From what I have read it would be a good thing if Ubuntu came with Secure
> Boot.  So my question is - is this possible?  Is there anything to stop
> Ubuntu and other main stream distros providing it?
>
>
No, not at all. The issue would be whether the PC makers would include the
distro's key in their machines. There's an analogy with SSL certificates,
the component of a website that secures communication between you and it:
anyone can produce a certificate for a website. What makes it work is having
that certificate correctly identified by your web browser. The same will
apply to UEFI. In theory anyone could secure an OS if the firmware is
sufficiently open but realistically assurance will mean that it isn't.

s/

-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"Is this your sanderling?"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Tony Pursell]

On 23 September 2011 16:20, James Morrissey wrote:

> This appeared on the OMGUbuntu site earlier today:
>
>
> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/09/microsoft-attempt-address-windows-8-linux-worries/
>
> james.
>
> On 23 September 2011 16:05, gazz  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 00:06 +0100, Alan Bell wrote:
>> > On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
>> > > Just read the following. Comments?
>> > >
>> > yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
>> > To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do this
>> > secure boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it off, exactly
>> > like the google chromebooks do, they have a switch to turn off the code
>> > signing requirement so you can run unsigned operating systems. The OLPC
>> > also has this exact same feature, but you can get a dev key and turn it
>> off.
>> > The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering to
>> > include an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of machines
>> > (probably quite mainstream high volume ones) that won't run anything but
>> > the pre-installed Windows 8 or above.
>> > The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to run.
>> > This means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware sales, the
>> > industry likes that) and means that more manufacturers will fail to
>> > include an off switch for the secure boot. If the market doesn't punish
>> > them by people avoiding these pre-bricked computers then they will keep
>> > doing it. Microsoft will carefully not require OEMs to fail to include
>> > an off switch, because that would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and
>> > VMware and so on can include the public keys and provide a secure boot
>> > environment, or run unsigned code for developing drivers and running
>> > Linux, but you won't be running Linux on the hardware, only virtualised.
>> > It is kind of like the current trend for using up 4 primary partitions
>> > and not creating extended partitions to make dual booting harder, but
>> > this one you potentially can't get round. I can see a time when you have
>> > to get a laptop chipped to run Linux like you would a DVD player to do
>> > multi region.
>> >
>> > Alan.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk
>> >
>> >
>> Yes, agree this is what is likely to happen. It would effectively
>> confine Linux back to a small, techie ghetto - and that's assuming that
>> it will still be possible to buy motherboards without the keys or with
>> an 'off' switch.
>>
>> When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs they frequently say to me that
>> Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer' and if you change the OS it
>> won't work properly any more. This could make that current misconception
>> actually true!
>>
>> What's Canonical's view on this? It seems tempting to team up with a
>> producer such as Aleutia to ensure that unlocked PCs are still out there
>> - and with an 'eco' selling point.
>>
>> Paula
>>
>>
>> --
>> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. James Morrissey
> Senior Research Officer
> Refugee Studies Centre
> Department of International Development
> University of Oxford
>
>
> It seems to me that Secure Boot, in principal, is a Good Thing and that all
operating systems should offer it.  Its all about how it is implemented and
the provision of an opt-out where needed.

>From what I have read it would be a good thing if Ubuntu came with Secure
Boot.  So my question is - is this possible?  Is there anything to stop
Ubuntu and other main stream distros providing it?


Tony
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[James Morrissey]

This appeared on the OMGUbuntu site earlier today:

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/09/microsoft-attempt-address-windows-8-linux-worries/

james.

On 23 September 2011 16:05, gazz  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 00:06 +0100, Alan Bell wrote:
> > On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
> > > Just read the following. Comments?
> > >
> > yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
> > To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do this
> > secure boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it off, exactly
> > like the google chromebooks do, they have a switch to turn off the code
> > signing requirement so you can run unsigned operating systems. The OLPC
> > also has this exact same feature, but you can get a dev key and turn it
> off.
> > The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering to
> > include an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of machines
> > (probably quite mainstream high volume ones) that won't run anything but
> > the pre-installed Windows 8 or above.
> > The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to run.
> > This means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware sales, the
> > industry likes that) and means that more manufacturers will fail to
> > include an off switch for the secure boot. If the market doesn't punish
> > them by people avoiding these pre-bricked computers then they will keep
> > doing it. Microsoft will carefully not require OEMs to fail to include
> > an off switch, because that would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and
> > VMware and so on can include the public keys and provide a secure boot
> > environment, or run unsigned code for developing drivers and running
> > Linux, but you won't be running Linux on the hardware, only virtualised.
> > It is kind of like the current trend for using up 4 primary partitions
> > and not creating extended partitions to make dual booting harder, but
> > this one you potentially can't get round. I can see a time when you have
> > to get a laptop chipped to run Linux like you would a DVD player to do
> > multi region.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> > --
> > Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk
> >
> >
> Yes, agree this is what is likely to happen. It would effectively
> confine Linux back to a small, techie ghetto - and that's assuming that
> it will still be possible to buy motherboards without the keys or with
> an 'off' switch.
>
> When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs they frequently say to me that
> Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer' and if you change the OS it
> won't work properly any more. This could make that current misconception
> actually true!
>
> What's Canonical's view on this? It seems tempting to team up with a
> producer such as Aleutia to ensure that unlocked PCs are still out there
> - and with an 'eco' selling point.
>
> Paula
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>



-- 
Dr. James Morrissey
Senior Research Officer
Refugee Studies Centre
Department of International Development
University of Oxford
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[gazz]

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 00:06 +0100, Alan Bell wrote:
> On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
> > Just read the following. Comments?
> >
> yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
> To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do this 
> secure boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it off, exactly 
> like the google chromebooks do, they have a switch to turn off the code 
> signing requirement so you can run unsigned operating systems. The OLPC 
> also has this exact same feature, but you can get a dev key and turn it off.
> The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering to 
> include an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of machines 
> (probably quite mainstream high volume ones) that won't run anything but 
> the pre-installed Windows 8 or above.
> The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to run. 
> This means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware sales, the 
> industry likes that) and means that more manufacturers will fail to 
> include an off switch for the secure boot. If the market doesn't punish 
> them by people avoiding these pre-bricked computers then they will keep 
> doing it. Microsoft will carefully not require OEMs to fail to include 
> an off switch, because that would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and 
> VMware and so on can include the public keys and provide a secure boot 
> environment, or run unsigned code for developing drivers and running 
> Linux, but you won't be running Linux on the hardware, only virtualised. 
> It is kind of like the current trend for using up 4 primary partitions 
> and not creating extended partitions to make dual booting harder, but 
> this one you potentially can't get round. I can see a time when you have 
> to get a laptop chipped to run Linux like you would a DVD player to do 
> multi region.
> 
> Alan.
> 
> -- 
> Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk
> 
> 
Yes, agree this is what is likely to happen. It would effectively
confine Linux back to a small, techie ghetto - and that's assuming that
it will still be possible to buy motherboards without the keys or with
an 'off' switch. 

When I'm talking to voluntary sector orgs they frequently say to me that
Microsoft Windows is 'part of the computer' and if you change the OS it
won't work properly any more. This could make that current misconception
actually true! 

What's Canonical's view on this? It seems tempting to team up with a
producer such as Aleutia to ensure that unlocked PCs are still out there
- and with an 'eco' selling point. 

Paula


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[alan c]

On 22/09/11 22:31, paul sutton wrote:
> How do you educate people about this new technology built in to BIOS's
> without boring people,.confusing people with what they see as compex
> jargon or worse coming across as paranoid.  All of which is counter
> productive, 

This is the genius of the strategy, from an anti FLOSS point of view.
It continues to show that whatever MS appears to be, the crocodile is
actually not asleep and has some pretty smart moves  available.
-- 
alan cocks
Ubuntu user

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

On 22/09/2011 22:31, paul sutton wrote:

Well there seems to be a market for PC's minus an OS now,


I suppose it all depends on what your target "market" is. It would be 
interesting to find out the ratio of computers (and by that term I mean 
both laptops and desktops) used in business to that of home non-business 
use.
Certainly in large corporations the process tends to be "buy whatever 
machines we need and we'll image them with our own volume-licensed 
disks". In that case I suspect that any EFI restrictions won't matter 
because what they image them with will comply with the EFI requirements 
purely for the sake of speed and ease of imaging. (For example my wife 
received a new laptop last year that had Windows 7 stickers on it yet 
was imaged by the company with XP). If the numbers of machine in use in 
corporate settings (and I know that certainly the vast majority of MS 
Office installations are in corporate settings so it would be logical to 
assume the same for machines)  is a lot greater than than those in homes 
then I suspect that the major OEM vendors aren't going to bother (in 
terms of ROI) to make any sort of significant numbers of machines with 
no OS.
That again leaves us in a no win situation because only the 
knowledgeable, the "hobbyists" and converted are going to bother to 
search out a bare-bones machine to install their own OS on.
Again - what actually happens will be driven in the main by the largest 
group of users, and I suspect that is the Corporate sector...
Now whether Windows 8 will even be a factor in this I don't know. 
Certainly AFAIK (as above) many large corporations have not yet upgraded 
to Windows 7, even though it's been out for nearly two years now and XP 
comes out of support in 30 months


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[paul sutton]

On 22/09/11 21:14, richard wrote:
> another possibility is that more places may offer computers with linux
> installed or without OS (and cripple gadget) because there will then be
> a market for them to people like us, if we can't just buy any old pc and
> put our favourite distro on it.
>

Well there seems to be a market for PC's minus an OS now,  problem is
there a lot of real hard core techies probably build their own
systems,   I can well sort of,  but chose to buy a new system from
ebuyer (emachines 1401) which works really well. 

How do you educate people about this new technology built in to BIOS's
without boring people,.confusing people with what they see as compex
jargon or worse coming across as paranoid.  All of which is counter
productive, 

unless it makes their life harder as a windows user,   will people care
or will they just accept it, and carry on.  Do people care about how
facebook operates as long as they can use facebook.

if it helps, my new ubuntu poster gives the web addy of the Uk ubuntu
list,  so people can join and ask for help, from there people can direct
to their local LInux user group. 

Paul



-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[richard]

another possibility is that more places may offer computers with linux
installed or without OS (and cripple gadget) because there will then be
a market for them to people like us, if we can't just buy any old pc and
put our favourite distro on it.
> 



-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[John Oliver]

On 22/09/11 10:50, alan c wrote:

On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:

We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
adapt"

The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
or marketing is the elephant in the room.

1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
(apologies to Descartes).

2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
distributed model.

To me, the upshot of this decision (if it is allowed to go through)* , 
is that it will simply make it much harder for the non-technical user 
who might decide to try Linux, to do so. I started using Ubuntu, 
personally, after my Windows XP "exploded" (a bit), and so I googled 
Linux, and found Ubuntu.


I do not think that any non-technical user of a computer is likely to 
want to even go into the BIOS, let alone possibly remove a cover and 
looking for small switches. It does act, in my view, as something that 
won't prevent non-technical users from installing, but make it seem too 
hard for them to continue bothering.


* I do, however, believe that the move by Microsoft will see fierce 
competition, and possibly even legal contest, from groups such as the 
FSF or the European Competition Commission, or the EFF. Additionally, 
many OEM's, especially on server systems, do support Linux, or variants 
thereupon, and will possibly disagree. It does make me wonder if big 
OEM's will start pulling out of things like the Windows Logo Program, 
but I'm not sure if it's likely, as the lack of that little sticker 
could indeed make prospective buyers worried, or uncertain.**


** This makes me think of this as another method of spreading FUD, but 
perhaps that's only me.


Regards,
John Oliver


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Juan J.]

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:12 +0100, paul sutton wrote:
> [...]
> >> As Alan says, in the short term though, Linux will have to adapt to EFI
> 
> what does EFI mean,?

Extensible Firmware Interface (was developed by Intel, now it's UEFI and
it's supposed to be "more open"... but I think most of the time people
uses EFI term instead of UEFI). 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface

It's a replacement for the BIOS.

Regards,

Juan

-- 
jjm's home: http://www.usebox.net/jjm/
blackshell: http://blackshell.usebox.net/
en_GB@blog: http://engbblog.wordpress.com/


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[paul sutton]

>>
>> On the other hand, the success of the iPad and other tablets has
>> blurred the distinction between PC and phone and the tablet-type
>> device may supersede the PC more in the coming years, something which
>> Microsoft have seen and responded to by finally porting Windows to
>> ARM, something which Unity is intended also to address. The
>> traditional PC may end up playing a smaller role in the hardware
>> ecosystem than it has previously.
>>
>> As Alan says, in the short term though, Linux will have to adapt to EFI

what does EFI mean,?

Paul


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Paul Sutton]

On 22/09/11 13:13, Juan J. Martínez wrote:

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:

On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:

Just read the following. Comments?


yeah, it is potentially very nasty.

Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to run
applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS AND what
people actually run on it.

Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
that to happen?

Actually any judge can argue that dual boot it's a reasonable thing you
can do with your computer, because you get different functionalities
with different operative systems.

I think Microsoft would have a problem them.


by which time the system will be set in and those who think that IE is 
the internet will simply not care as long as it works, until they want 
to actually do something different by which time it will be too late.

Regards,

Juanjo




Who said judges were reasonable, we

Paul


--
Paul Sutton Cert SLPS (Open)
http://www.zleap.net


17th September 2011 - Software freedom day



--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

On 22/09/2011 13:13, Juan J. Martínez wrote:

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:

On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:

Just read the following. Comments?


yeah, it is potentially very nasty.

Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to run
applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS AND what
people actually run on it.

Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
that to happen?

Actually any judge can argue that dual boot it's a reasonable thing you
can do with your computer, because you get different functionalities
with different operative systems.

I think Microsoft would have a problem them.


I certainly hope that will be the case, but the legal system hasn't 
exactly curbed a lot of MS's dubious practices in the past, has it?


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

On 22/09/2011 13:01, alan c wrote:

On 22/09/11 12:50, Simon Greenwood wrote:

On 22 September 2011 11:53, alan c  wrote:


On 22/09/11 11:14, Simon Greenwood wrote:

On 22 September 2011 10:50, alan c  wrote:


On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:

We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
adapt"

The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
or marketing is the elephant in the room.

1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
(apologies to Descartes).

2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
distributed model.



Marketing, maybe, promotion not. I would argue that that is pretty much

why

Ubuntu exists, to create a user-friendly Linux and to encourage its use.

Community was the single most important reason why I personally
started to use Ubuntu.
This is almost a word of mouth thing. Person direct to person. I am
not saying we cannot  do anything at all, just that evidence suggests
that we are not going to win with ONLY existing strategies.

Promotion: how is marketing different from promotion? Do microsoft
have a marketing department and a promotion department?
Our lack of experience in these matters is painful.
--


That's a good philosophical question. Microsoft has marketing and Linux has
advocacy. I wouldn't say there's a lack of experience, just not a single
monolithic business that pushed Linux on the desktop, which where Windows is
concerned, has been Microsoft's policy for a good 20 years.

There's no shortage of companies marketing the benefits of Linux on the
server side: HP, Oracle and IBM to name the biggest, but the argument is
always the cost benefit of migration.

The biggest barrier to get over on the desktop is that Windows is just
there, that people think of IE as 'The Internet' and that Word is the only
way to do word processing. People still want it to Just Work, which is where
Apple gets it right with a Unix based operating system, albeit with a
increasingly proprietary desktop on a very limited subset of hardware. When
there's a Linux-based desktop that does that, a decent part of the battle
will be won.

So, on the grounds that if we 'continue to do what we have always
done', we 'get what we always got', what then?
I think that the major problem is this: MS and Windows is SO ingrained 
into the public consciousness (fuelled by what certainly in the past 
were undoubted very rapacious and dubious business practices) that's 
it's going to be a VERY hard job to change public perception.
The general public ARE swayed by what they see advertised, whether on TV 
or in magazines. All the people who go for "designer" label clothing 
etc. THEY are the sort of people who drift along to PC World and get 
sold - a Windows machine, a) because there is no choice and b) because 
they don't know and don't care whether Linux exists or not.
I think that there does have to be some sort of advertising campaign - I 
would suggest on the security and no viruses angle - but until that 
happens them I'm afraid that Linux is going to be the preserve of server 
applications and the already converted...


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Juan J.]

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:06 +0100, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
> On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:
> > On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
> >> Just read the following. Comments?
> >>
> > yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
> 
> Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to run 
> applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS AND what 
> people actually run on it.

Don't you think laws regulating anti-competitive conduct will prevent
that to happen?

Actually any judge can argue that dual boot it's a reasonable thing you
can do with your computer, because you get different functionalities
with different operative systems.

I think Microsoft would have a problem them.

Regards,

Juanjo



-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

On 22/09/2011 00:06, Alan Bell wrote:

On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:

Just read the following. Comments?


yeah, it is potentially very nasty.


Even more so when the next step could be to require signed keys to run 
applications - then MS could control the hardware and the OS AND what 
people actually run on it.



--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[alan c]

On 22/09/11 12:50, Simon Greenwood wrote:
> On 22 September 2011 11:53, alan c  wrote:
> 
>> On 22/09/11 11:14, Simon Greenwood wrote:
>> > On 22 September 2011 10:50, alan c  wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:
>> >> > We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
>> >> > install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
>> >> > adapt"
>> >>
>> >> The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
>> >> or marketing is the elephant in the room.
>> >>
>> >> 1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
>> >> compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
>> >> (apologies to Descartes).
>> >>
>> >> 2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
>> >> distributed model.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Marketing, maybe, promotion not. I would argue that that is pretty much
>> why
>> > Ubuntu exists, to create a user-friendly Linux and to encourage its use.
>>
>> Community was the single most important reason why I personally
>> started to use Ubuntu.
>> This is almost a word of mouth thing. Person direct to person. I am
>> not saying we cannot  do anything at all, just that evidence suggests
>> that we are not going to win with ONLY existing strategies.
>>
>> Promotion: how is marketing different from promotion? Do microsoft
>> have a marketing department and a promotion department?
>> Our lack of experience in these matters is painful.
>> --
>>
> 
> That's a good philosophical question. Microsoft has marketing and Linux has
> advocacy. I wouldn't say there's a lack of experience, just not a single
> monolithic business that pushed Linux on the desktop, which where Windows is
> concerned, has been Microsoft's policy for a good 20 years.
> 
> There's no shortage of companies marketing the benefits of Linux on the
> server side: HP, Oracle and IBM to name the biggest, but the argument is
> always the cost benefit of migration.
> 
> The biggest barrier to get over on the desktop is that Windows is just
> there, that people think of IE as 'The Internet' and that Word is the only
> way to do word processing. People still want it to Just Work, which is where
> Apple gets it right with a Unix based operating system, albeit with a
> increasingly proprietary desktop on a very limited subset of hardware. When
> there's a Linux-based desktop that does that, a decent part of the battle
> will be won.

So, on the grounds that if we 'continue to do what we have always
done', we 'get what we always got', what then?
-- 
alan cocks
Ubuntu user

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Simon Greenwood]

On 22 September 2011 11:53, alan c  wrote:

> On 22/09/11 11:14, Simon Greenwood wrote:
> > On 22 September 2011 10:50, alan c  wrote:
> >
> >> On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:
> >> > We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
> >> > install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
> >> > adapt"
> >>
> >> The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
> >> or marketing is the elephant in the room.
> >>
> >> 1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
> >> compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
> >> (apologies to Descartes).
> >>
> >> 2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
> >> distributed model.
> >>
> >>
> > Marketing, maybe, promotion not. I would argue that that is pretty much
> why
> > Ubuntu exists, to create a user-friendly Linux and to encourage its use.
>
> Community was the single most important reason why I personally
> started to use Ubuntu.
> This is almost a word of mouth thing. Person direct to person. I am
> not saying we cannot  do anything at all, just that evidence suggests
> that we are not going to win with ONLY existing strategies.
>
> Promotion: how is marketing different from promotion? Do microsoft
> have a marketing department and a promotion department?
> Our lack of experience in these matters is painful.
> --
>

That's a good philosophical question. Microsoft has marketing and Linux has
advocacy. I wouldn't say there's a lack of experience, just not a single
monolithic business that pushed Linux on the desktop, which where Windows is
concerned, has been Microsoft's policy for a good 20 years.

There's no shortage of companies marketing the benefits of Linux on the
server side: HP, Oracle and IBM to name the biggest, but the argument is
always the cost benefit of migration.

The biggest barrier to get over on the desktop is that Windows is just
there, that people think of IE as 'The Internet' and that Word is the only
way to do word processing. People still want it to Just Work, which is where
Apple gets it right with a Unix based operating system, albeit with a
increasingly proprietary desktop on a very limited subset of hardware. When
there's a Linux-based desktop that does that, a decent part of the battle
will be won.

s/

-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"Is this your sanderling?"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[alan c]

On 22/09/11 11:14, Simon Greenwood wrote:
> On 22 September 2011 10:50, alan c  wrote:
> 
>> On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:
>> > We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
>> > install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
>> > adapt"
>>
>> The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
>> or marketing is the elephant in the room.
>>
>> 1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
>> compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
>> (apologies to Descartes).
>>
>> 2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
>> distributed model.
>>
>>
> Marketing, maybe, promotion not. I would argue that that is pretty much why
> Ubuntu exists, to create a user-friendly Linux and to encourage its use.

Community was the single most important reason why I personally
started to use Ubuntu.
This is almost a word of mouth thing. Person direct to person. I am
not saying we cannot  do anything at all, just that evidence suggests
that we are not going to win with ONLY existing strategies.

Promotion: how is marketing different from promotion? Do microsoft
have a marketing department and a promotion department?
Our lack of experience in these matters is painful.
-- 
alan cocks
Ubuntu user

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Simon Greenwood]

On 22 September 2011 10:50, alan c  wrote:

> On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:
> > We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like
> > install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will
> > adapt"
>
> The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
> or marketing is the elephant in the room.
>
> 1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
> compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
> (apologies to Descartes).
>
> 2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
> distributed model.
>
>
Marketing, maybe, promotion not. I would argue that that is pretty much why
Ubuntu exists, to create a user-friendly Linux and to encourage its use.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"Is this your sanderling?"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[alan c]

On 22/09/11 09:47, Paul Sutton wrote:
> We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like 
> install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will 
> adapt"

The FLOSS world's lack of competence, or even appetite, for publicity
or marketing is the elephant in the room.

1) FLOSS, GNU/Linux etc, 'marketing' is pretty well non existent
compared to non free products. 'I advertise, therefore I exist'
(apologies to Descartes).

2) Of all things, marketing is -very- unsuited to the free libre,
distributed model.

-- 
alan cocks
Ubuntu user

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Paul Sutton]

On 22/09/11 09:42, Simon Greenwood wrote:



On 22 September 2011 00:06, Alan Bell > wrote:


On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:

Just read the following. Comments?

yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do
this secure boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it
off, exactly like the google chromebooks do, they have a switch to
turn off the code signing requirement so you can run unsigned
operating systems. The OLPC also has this exact same feature, but
you can get a dev key and turn it off.
The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering
to include an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of
machines (probably quite mainstream high volume ones) that won't
run anything but the pre-installed Windows 8 or above.
The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to
run. This means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware
sales, the industry likes that) and means that more manufacturers
will fail to include an off switch for the secure boot. If the
market doesn't punish them by people avoiding these pre-bricked
computers then they will keep doing it. Microsoft will carefully
not require OEMs to fail to include an off switch, because that
would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and VMware and so on can
include the public keys and provide a secure boot environment, or
run unsigned code for developing drivers and running Linux, but
you won't be running Linux on the hardware, only virtualised. It
is kind of like the current trend for using up 4 primary
partitions and not creating extended partitions to make dual
booting harder, but this one you potentially can't get round. I
can see a time when you have to get a laptop chipped to run Linux
like you would a DVD player to do multi region.


There are current factors that may give hope: for the one the major 
component makers such as Samsung and LG are proving to be less OS 
bound than previously, certainly in the mobile phone sector: all the 
Korean companies produce both Android and Windows phones as well as 
making their own OSes such as Samsung's Bada, so may be less willing 
to bind themselves to Windows for their PCs, perhaps more so if the 
X86 Android port is successful, becomes official and remains free.


On the other hand, the success of the iPad and other tablets has 
blurred the distinction between PC and phone and the tablet-type 
device may supersede the PC more in the coming years, something which 
Microsoft have seen and responded to by finally porting Windows to 
ARM, something which Unity is intended also to address. The 
traditional PC may end up playing a smaller role in the hardware 
ecosystem than it has previously.


As Alan says, in the short term though, Linux will have to adapt to 
EFI (Macs have had this since the switch to x86 and you can run Linux 
on them with few problems) but if the time comes that signing becomes 
necessary, the growth of Linux may be such that it can't be ignored as 
an alternative desktop and that there will a key pair or pairs available.


s/
--
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"Is this your sanderling?"

We would have to do a lot of awareness raising and support things like 
install days to get round things like this.   as the borg say "we will 
adapt"


paul

--
Paul Sutton Cert SLPS (Open)
http://www.zleap.net


17th September 2011 - Software freedom day


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] efi boot, Windows 8 and Linux

[Simon Greenwood]

On 22 September 2011 00:06, Alan Bell  wrote:

> On 21/09/11 23:29, Bea Groves wrote:
>
>> Just read the following. Comments?
>>
>>  yeah, it is potentially very nasty.
> To be Windows 8 certified computers will have to be able to do this secure
> boot thing. Most will include an option to turn it off, exactly like the
> google chromebooks do, they have a switch to turn off the code signing
> requirement so you can run unsigned operating systems. The OLPC also has
> this exact same feature, but you can get a dev key and turn it off.
> The problem is that some manufacturers might start not bothering to include
> an off switch. So that would creep in as a set of machines (probably quite
> mainstream high volume ones) that won't run anything but the pre-installed
> Windows 8 or above.
> The big problem is that Windows 9 might *require* secure boot to run. This
> means it won't run on older machines (driving hardware sales, the industry
> likes that) and means that more manufacturers will fail to include an off
> switch for the secure boot. If the market doesn't punish them by people
> avoiding these pre-bricked computers then they will keep doing it. Microsoft
> will carefully not require OEMs to fail to include an off switch, because
> that would be anti-competitive. Virtualbox and VMware and so on can include
> the public keys and provide a secure boot environment, or run unsigned code
> for developing drivers and running Linux, but you won't be running Linux on
> the hardware, only virtualised. It is kind of like the current trend for
> using up 4 primary partitions and not creating extended partitions to make
> dual booting harder, but this one you potentially can't get round. I can see
> a time when you have to get a laptop chipped to run Linux like you would a
> DVD player to do multi region.
>
>
There are current factors that may give hope: for the one the major
component makers such as Samsung and LG are proving to be less OS bound than
previously, certainly in the mobile phone sector: all the Korean companies
produce both Android and Windows phones as well as making their own OSes
such as Samsung's Bada, so may be less willing to bind themselves to Windows
for their PCs, perhaps more so if the X86 Android port is successful,
becomes official and remains free.

On the other hand, the success of the iPad and other tablets has blurred the
distinction between PC and phone and the tablet-type device may supersede
the PC more in the coming years, something which Microsoft have seen and
responded to by finally porting Windows to ARM, something which Unity is
intended also to address. The traditional PC may end up playing a smaller
role in the hardware ecosystem than it has previously.

As Alan says, in the short term though, Linux will have to adapt to EFI
(Macs have had this since the switch to x86 and you can run Linux on them
with few problems) but if the time comes that signing becomes necessary, the
growth of Linux may be such that it can't be ignored as an alternative
desktop and that there will a key pair or pairs available.

s/
-- 
Twitter: @sfgreenwood
"Is this your sanderling?"
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/