decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Of course not! | 211 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Of course not!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 19 2012 @ 03:35 PM EDT
> if it means that Linux users are forced to use
second rate then its a least a partial victory for MS.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all computers and
motherboards manufactured after October will be locked out to suit Microsoft's
aims of world domination.

While OEMs will need to comply with MS's demands for those sold _with_ Windows
8, the difference between a computer with secure boot and one without is simply
firmware. Even those with secure boot can have it turned off or even disabled.

Certainly if you buy a Windows 8 machine there will be some inconvenience in
making it dual boot, or replacing Windows, but why would you send MS money just
to overwrite or not use their product ? Just buy a machine with no secure boot,
and no Windows, which can be _identical_ except for firmware or even just a
setting in BIOS.

Most corporates will want machines to run their image of XP or 7, these will
_not_ boot if secure boot is enabled. OEMs will have to offer that option, or
die.

Board manufacturers are not bound to Microsoft, they will make whatever their
customers (the OEMs and others) order. For a particular design of motherboard
they will make them for Windows 8 and for others with different sub-designations
indicating the firmware installed.

You should also note that Windows 8 will be able to boot on machines without
secure boot otherwise there would be no retail boxed sales. This means that the
OEMs and retail could offer machines with secure boot already off, or have their
techo disable it at sale.




[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Of course not! - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 04:28 PM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )