Linus Torvalds: I will not change Linux to “****-****** Microsoft”

[tgalati4]

The issue is:

Turn off secure boot, install linux and it will boot, but Win8 will not. Turn on secure boot, Win8 will boot, but linux will not. It makes dual-booting a pain without some in-kernel, microsoft-controlled certification. That's the main issue that Linus has. There is no good, third-party solution, nor is there a clean work-around. In this case, we (the linux community) really do have to follow (or perform some bodily function) what microsoft demands.

[matt_symes]

IMO, as a technology, the idea is great.

It would be much better in the hands of a truly independent body though.

[UltimateCat]

The Linux Foundation has released a Windows Secure Boot fix.

And BTW, it's not exactly for a beginner to use and understand.

http://www.zdnet.com/linux-foundatio...ix-7000011084/

Also; for what it's worth in another Linux group that I belong to their are a lot of folks that are highly P***** - off about this after purchasing a new computer with Win's 8 on it. Some in fact have returned the computer for a full refund from the manufacturer.

I heard that some computer manufacturers are not giving folks the option of purchasing a computer w/o an OS on it. At least Tiger Direct stopped-
Don't know about the rest.

[MadmanRB]

The issue is:

Turn off secure boot, install linux and it will boot, but Win8 will not. Turn on secure boot, Win8 will boot, but linux will not. It makes dual-booting a pain without some in-kernel, microsoft-controlled certification. That's the main issue that Linus has. There is no good, third-party solution, nor is there a clean work-around. In this case, we (the linux community) really do have to follow (or perform some bodily function) what microsoft demands.

We shouldn't have to though.

we should fight this move not cater to it.

[slickymaster]

IMO, as a technology, the idea is great.

It would be much better in the hands of a truly independent body though.

Agree with you 100%.

[nikonian]

Maybe the Linux community needs to wake up and realise that, whether "good or bad"(?), the mainstream use Macs and Windows PCs - the machine manufacturers main objective is not to market platforms for tinkerers and geeks; their main objective is to create uniform, consistent and predicable products for the masses, who just want prolific and easily installable software to work with little, if any fuss at all. Do you think the "average" user knows about, let alone cares about a bootloader, any more than the average customer in "PC World" or "Target" care about what code created their video drivers? Of course not.

Linux is amazing, but lest we forget, Mac OS X and Windows are dominant, and Linux is a long way off from becoming anything near a competitive threat to Apple or Microsoft - I'm sorry if that is not what you wanted to hear as Linux lovers, but them's the hard facts. iPhone users don't generally install Linux or Android on their iPhones, because it is nigh-on impossible, but do the majority of owners care? Of course not.

[MadmanRB]

But why restrict if linux really is "not a threat"?
Its clear to me that linbux is a threat to MS if thery are the ones pulling the strings on secureboot.

[nikonian]

But why restrict if linux really is "not a threat"?
Its clear to me that linbux is a threat to MS if thery are the ones pulling the strings on secureboot.

Who knows?

The bottom line is, they don't care about Linux, and from their perspective, they are not obliged to care about it.

[leclerc65]

Ubuntu already has a get around (I think Fedora too), the other distros' users might have to wait

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/it...S-1804203.html

[First Taste Hooks You]

Apple has it in their Macs and have for awhile, as I see it on my 2007 MacBook when I boot Ubuntu, but it says it is not on. But on my current motherboard it made dual booting a pain and I gave up and just leave Windows 7 on it and Ubuntu 12.10 on my MacBook. As it is in control of Microsoft it is a problem and used to benefit their main product not so much to protect its users as it is sold to us as. Intel designed it to protect against booting of unsigned code, still I hear faking a signing is not too hard.