UEFI a death of slow suffocation for Linux

[woodsmoke]

“Yes, you can disable it. But 'disabling' something that's 'secure' makes you bad.” Besides as Malmose told me, “the keystroke(s) needed to get Linux to run on machines post-2012 will be simple at first,

becoming increasingly complex at a non-shocking rate.

It's a monumental shift at OEM level.” Malmrose fears that this will desktop Linux “too difficult to new users,

[and this will cause] slow death by suffocation” for Linux.

And the obligatory supplication that "we need hardware vendors".

THERE IS discussion with a company that does, indeed, provide open computers:

Malmrose thinks we can avoid a "Greek Tragedy “ by recognizing that Linux needs hardware vendors, like ZaReason,

“who can keep things open, [who keep our collective foot in the door at the factories.”

Malmrose insists that it isn't about her particular company. “There is 0 profit.

If we ever did have profit, we would donate to support the EFF, FSF, Software Freedom Conservancy, LinuxFests, GNOME Foundation, various conferences, the works.

Hopefully someday there will be but most months it's a stretch to make payroll.”

http://www.zdnet.com/another-way-aro...em-7000000829/

woodsmoke

[GreyGeek]

....
slow death by suffocation

Now you know what Ballmer meant when he talked about "cutting off their air supply" as a method of competing.

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

[woodsmoke]

nice one GG! You can always be depended upon to bring insight to a situation.

woodsmoke

[whatthefunk]

Or Linux distros can go the Fedora route and get a key. Im not saying its the best option, but it is an option and it will make it easy for beginners to boot Linux.

[GreyGeek]

Or Linux distros can go the Fedora route and get a key. Im not saying its the best option, but it is an option and it will make it easy for beginners to boot Linux.

That "seems" like a good solution, but it places the keys to the kingdom of Linux into Microsoft's hands, something they've been wanting to get their hands on for a LONG time. If the major Linux distros agree to buy the $99 keys it will encourage the PC hardware makers to just release one kind of PC, that with UEFI on it. Once the source for open BIOS PCs has dried up and Linux distros are dependent on "their" keys, all it will take to shut Linux down is for Microsoft to expand its "ARM" statement to include ALL EUFI devices.

IMO, the driving purpose behind Mono was to create a .NET dependent desktop on Ubuntu, at the time the world's most recognized and popular Linux distro. I've outlined the steps in other posts, but there were plans afoot to convert GTK+ to GTK#, and eventually to create Mono C# libraries that talked to the libc6 directly, bypassing GTK+ altogether. That would have created a Mono DE, but one always a release or two behind .NET. Eventually, when everyone had put all their eggs into the Ubuntu/Mono basket, the rug would have been pulled out from under it, when Microsoft would do to Linux what it had done to Apple with SilverLight. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the London Stock Exchange crashed big time, revealing that .NET could not meet either the stability requirements nor the speed requirements that the Linux solution had mastered five years before, and which the LSE bought, lock, stock and barrel.