Have you signed this petition?

[Gone fishing]

Have you signed this petition on restricted boot? http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement

If not why not?

[Paqman]

If not why not?

Their heart is in the right place, but I don't think the FSF is the right organisation to stand any chance of getting action on this. They're a fringe group with a reputation for shrill and somewhat ineffective campaigns. They're not representative of the majority of computer users, so have no mandate to demand change.

If this was being advanced by a group that was able to engage effectively with manufacturers and Microsoft, I'd be happy to sign.

[DoubleClicker]

I signed but I agree that it is basically a meaningless gesture

[zombifier25]

Agree with Paqman. FSF are usually viewed as extremist, and although I respect RMS and his philosophy, their method is crude and too black-and-white.

I would wait until the European Union (which does not do well with monopoly) do something about it.

[KiwiNZ]

No, I have no issue with secure boot

[Carborundum]

No, I have no issue with secure boot
If you read the partition, you will notice that the FSF also has no issue with secure boot. They only take issue with restricted boot.

[Gone fishing]

KiwiNZ why do you think it is not an issue, Canonical do and it will mean not using Grub2 and MS signed Keys in the efilinux boot loader a less than ideal solution, Redhat are non too happy and will use a signed kernel, as MS will not allow users to modify the keys on ARM systems Redhat won't be supporting secure boot on ARM (i.e Fedora will not work on ARM systems using secure boot). The Linux Foundation has concerns as does FSF, it will undoubtedly make it harder for smaller distros.

I have no doubt that maleware using MS keys will soon be made use of in maleware and not protect MS systems from boot virus (currently an almost non existent problem). This is more about harming competitors than protecting Windows.

[KiwiNZ]

KiwiNZ why do you think it is not an issue, Canonical do and it will mean not using Grub2 and MS signed Keys in the efilinux boot loader a less than ideal solution, Redhat are non too happy and will use a signed kernel, as MS will not allow users to modify the keys on ARM systems Redhat won't be supporting secure boot on ARM (i.e Fedora will not work on ARM systems using secure boot). The Linux Foundation has concerns as does FSF, it will undoubtedly make it harder for smaller distros.

I have no doubt that maleware using MS keys will soon be made use of in maleware and not protect MS systems from boot virus (currently an almost non existent problem). This is more about harming competitors than protecting Windows.

There are commercial solutions, petitions are not a solution.

[Gone fishing]

I would be delighted to hear what these commercial solutions are, I think however, it maybe misguided to rely on the benevolence of large corporations such as Microsoft.

Personally I believe it would be naive in the extreme to think a petition is the solution to a problem. However, as a mechanism for razing public awareness that a problem exists and that people are opposed to the issue a petition is a small but helpful contribution.

Lobbying and public opinion, particularly knowledgeable opinion can be very powerful levers of change.

I find it odd that people wouldn't sign the petition because it is by FSF, I would say that FSF are mistaken in certain things, this is not one of them. Signing the petition does not mean one agrees with Richard Stallman in all things - One should not cut off ones nose to spite ones face.

[Simian Man]

Petitions almost never work and certainly not those of the FSF. I agree with Zombifier that if anyone has the desire and influence to change this it will be the EU.

[vasa1]

I would be delighted to hear what these commercial solutions are, ...
Paying to get the key ...

[Gone fishing]

Paying to get the key ...

Thats what I fear.


I agree with Zombifier that if anyone has the desire and influence to change this it will be the EU.

If the EU is going to challenge this, it is more likely if European companies and knowledgeable opinion is opposed.

[vasa1]

I signed but I agree that it is basically a meaningless gesture
I disagree. Whether anything comes of it or not, if we believe in something and there's an easy way to express ourselves why not?

As for the FSF versus large corporates, I rather be wrong by believing FSF than right by believing certain large corporates which have repeatedly shown their "trustworthiness".

[alexfish]

I don't sign petitions that present only one argument

Secure boot is essential.

[Carborundum]

Secure boot is essential.
For what?

[Dr. C]

for what?drm

[nec207]

What does this mean that you cannot have Linux on these new computers running windows 8?:confused:

[Gone fishing]

What does this mean that you cannot have Linux on these new computers running windows 8?

It's not quite as bad as that on x86 computers you should be able to disable secure/restricted boot and run any Linux/BSD/Haiku. Ubuntu and Redhat (Fedora) have a less than ideal work round if you wish to boot using secure / restricted boot that involves using MS keys I don't know about BSDs Haiku etc.

On Windows Arm machines it's worse you wont be able to run Fedora you maybe able to run Ubuntu.

If MS get away with this it will be worse on Windows 9 they've seen the lock down that Apple has and they want the same.

[Paqman]

If MS get away with this it will be worse on Windows 9 they've seen the lock down that Apple has and they want the same.

I don't think it's Apple that they've got their eye on. The whole reason they won't allow it to be turned off on ARM is to try and stop Android from eating up the whole ARM tablet market beyond the Ipad. It's Google they're doing this to hurt.

[nec207]

I don't think it's Apple that they've got their eye on. The whole reason they won't allow it to be turned off on ARM is to try and stop Android from eating up the whole ARM tablet market beyond the Ipad. It's Google they're doing this to hurt.

But can they do that or will the antitrust be all over tham?

[Bandit]

Have you signed this petition on restricted boot? http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement

If not why not?

Because I get this..


CiviCRM Profile Create
Sorry. A non-recoverable error has occurred.
The requested Profile (gid=37) is disabled OR it is not configured to be used for 'Profile' listings in its Settings OR there is no Profile with that ID OR you do not have permission to access this profile. Please contact the site administrator if you need assistance.

I would like to sign it though.

[codingman]

Nope.

Why?

It is Microsoft poop related.

[Paqman]

But can they do that or will the antitrust be all over tham?

Given that Microsoft are starting from third place and 0% market share in the ARM race, I don't think there's any justification for an antitrust suit. Besides, what other OSes can you put on an Android tablet or an Ipad? The ARM software ecosystem is not a level playing field, it's a lot of little walled gardens.

[Gone fishing]

Bandit

Oops they must have a problem, however, if you create a non member account you will be able to sign the petition https://my.fsf.org/associate/join/am_register_form1

[Dr. C]

Given that Microsoft are starting from third place and 0% market share in the ARM race, I don't think there's any justification for an antitrust suit. Besides, what other OSes can you put on an Android tablet or an Ipad? The ARM software ecosystem is not a level playing field, it's a lot of little walled gardens.

Ubuntu https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM can be installed on ARM "devices" that are in reality computers and provide the full desktop expereince. Microsoft knows it cannot provide the full desktop experience on ARM and it needs to keep the one family of operating systems that can, namely GNU/Linux out of the platform. I mean Ubuntu can even turn a smart phone into a desktop computer.
In every dual-core phone, there’s a PC trying to get out. http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/android

The anti-trust case agaist Microsoft becomes very strong once the PC is let out of ARM "devices" such as smart phones and tablets.

[Lucradia]

I signed it, but sent an email stating I don't want to subscribe to the mailing list (as they require you to do so.)

[vasa1]

There are commercial solutions, petitions are not a solution.
I'm not sure that anyone here claimed that petitions are a solution nor do I see the point in stating that "petitions are not a solution".

[Lucradia]

There are commercial solutions

Like?

[Gone fishing]

I don't think it's Apple that they've got their eye on. The whole reason they won't allow it to be turned off on ARM is to try and stop Android from eating up the whole ARM tablet market beyond the Ipad. It's Google they're doing this to hurt.

Paqman I get your point and agree - however, my point was not that they are trying to hurt Apple, rather they see Apples secure, locked down walled gardens and are envious they would like the same too. If they get it that is very bad for alternative OSes, ARM is on the rise and possibly the x86 on the decline.

[Paqman]

Paqman I get your point and agree - however, my point was not that they are trying to hurt Apple, rather they see Apples secure, locked down walled gardens and are envious they would like the same too. If they get it that is very bad for alternative OSes, ARM is on the rise and possibly the x86 on the decline.

I agree. Microsoft are still making plenty of money from their traditional areas of strength, but it can't be fun for them watching Apple gobble up all the new markets and cart away all the cash.

Regarding lockdown, Apple and Microsoft are unlikely to be friendly with any attempts to hack their gear. Google at least tolerate the custom ROM scene on Android, which could be worse. The main player that hasn't really shown their hand yet is Amazon. Looks like a pretty tough landscape for Linux to try and gain traction on TBH. A strategic alliance with Android like Canonical are trying seems like a smart move given how tightly the big players control access to the devices.

[Gone fishing]

Paqman I agree, I think it might be time for Ubuntu to have some Ubuntu branded hardware, Ubuntu boxes, Ubuntu TV, Ubuntu ARM devices (I think Ubuntu on a duel core net-book-transformer kind of thing would be cool and potentially offers more real computer experience than Android, and a combination of the Android and Ubuntu could be very cool).