Vista to make dual booting difficult

[arunsub]

The Register reports (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/27/schneier_infosec/) that security features built into Vista will make setting up PCs to boot in either Linux or Windows far more difficult due to feature hardware-based encryption, called BitLocker Drive Encryption. "You could look at BitLocker as anti-Linux because it frustrates dual boot," according to security guru Bruce Schneier.

[Insane]

I wont be upgrading to Vista anyway. (and I use win and lin). The point is that Vista just looks to intense for my PC to handle. It will probably break it or something

[BoyOfDestiny]

The Register reports (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/27/schneier_infosec/) that security features built into Vista will make setting up PCs to boot in either Linux or Windows far more difficult due to feature hardware-based encryption, called BitLocker Drive Encryption. "You could look at BitLocker as anti-Linux because it frustrates dual boot," according to security guru Bruce Schneier.

Now you know why I don't read the register... This stuff would pretty much stop any other OS from dual booting too... Sensationalism...

[mjm115]

The Register reports (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/27/schneier_infosec/) that security features built into Vista will make setting up PCs to boot in either Linux or Windows far more difficult due to feature hardware-based encryption, called BitLocker Drive Encryption. "You could look at BitLocker as anti-Linux because it frustrates dual boot," according to security guru Bruce Schneier.

Security and ANY Microsoft software shouldn't be in the same sentence. This isn't a feature. It's a tactic to discourage people from putting other OSes on the system. Think about it. If both Windows 2000 and XP had bootloaders (although not nearly as extensive as LILO and GRUB) that allowed other OSes to be installed, why would they all of a suddedn decide to encrypt it?

Just one extra reason why I won't be to going back to Windows. also, did you read about one of the so-called features (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1931914,00.asp) of Vista? Uh, last time I checked Linux has been doing this for years and Mac since OS X. But they're touting it as a feature.

This is a direct attack on Linux. It has nothing to do with features or innovation. Its a tactic. We all know, of course, that soon a way will be discovered around this, like their licensing and validation schemes.

[arunsub]

Ya. It's a tactic to stop people from using other OSes.

[BoyOfDestiny]

Ya. It's a tactic to stop people from using other OSes.

I think MS is doing a pretty good job so far in terms of keeping people from wanting to use their new one ;)

http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS4486500315.html

Note, I don't think they will do what the article advises, but the links in the article are a great read...

[arunsub]

Good article and a good idea.

[NeghVar]

Can anyone say anti-competitive business practices. Microsoft is hurting and they know it. They are turning out features that don't add anything, bug filled programs and over priced garbage.

Vista will be a disastour, there is nothing they can do to fix it. Even Microsoft fanboys hate it. It complicates things to much. They bombard users with security notices so much that people will just ignore them and blindly click yes to anything.

I'm glad the EU is calling them on all of this. Now if only those dumb Americans would figure it out.

[warp99]

"Information is not kept secret because it is important, but in fact is important because it is kept secret." James Flynn representing CCIA describing Microsoft's claim of IP at the EU Microsoft appeal. ;)

[aundwer]

Just like Windows XP never was, Vista is not an option for me. I'm still using Win2000, and when the Dapper becomes stable, it will become the only OS on my desktop systems, and on my parents desktop.

[GeneralZod]

I swear, this place is becoming worse than slashdot! :)


This is a direct attack on Linux.


Doubtful, what with it being a) completely under the user's control and b) (so I've heard) off by default. Also, it does absolutely nothing to prevent dual-booting - merely, if you use it, you won't be able to read the Window's files you've chosen to encrypt.



It has nothing to do with features or innovation.


Innovation? No. Features? Yes. It's a very useful feature that, incidentally, Linux provides:

http://koeln.ccc.de/archiv/drt/crypto/linux-disk.html

as does OS X which, as we have seen, doesn't exactly go out of its way to stop dual-booting ;)

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/filevault/


We all know, of course, that soon a way will be discovered around this

Like just not using this wholly optional feature in the first place. I must be a master hacker! :D