On 10/02/11 17:27, ropers wrote:
> On 2 October 2011 18:57, Nick Holland wrote:
...
>> A lot of us in the open source world do a lot with "recycled" computers
>> -- computers that have lived out their first life cycle, and now being
>> used for less demanding applications (i.e., non-windows). Thi
On 2 October 2011 21:57, Dave Anderson wrote:
> In the absence of biasing factors I think you're right, but AFAICT what
> some people are concerned about is Microsoft _requiring_ vendors to lock
> down the boot process in this way in order to put a 'Windows 8 approved'
> (or whatever exactly it is
On 2 October 2011 18:57, Nick Holland wrote:
> If they got your money and you are complaining about something
> you KNEW was the case at the time of purchase (or you didn't return the
> machine when you found out the "limitation")
That's why manufacturers of restrictive, DRM-ridden hardware try t
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011, Nick Holland wrote:
>On 10/02/11 11:32, Matt S wrote:
>> That was my concern exactly. That I would be unable to put the OS of my
>> choice on hardware that I bought. This is precisely why I don't own an iPad
>> or iPhone - I want ownership of what I bought.
>
>And that there
On 10/02/11 11:32, Matt S wrote:
> That was my concern exactly. That I would be unable to put the OS of my
> choice on hardware that I bought. This is precisely why I don't own an iPad
> or iPhone - I want ownership of what I bought.
And that there is the answer.
Complain all you want, if you s
n for
those that want to use Windows 8?
To:
misc@openbsd.org
Sent: Sunday, October 2, 2011 5:26 AM
Subject: Re: UEFI BIOS
What some fear is that some Microsoft OEM partner do a lazy job with a
minimal UEFI interface without the possibility to disable secure boot.
In
What some fear is that some Microsoft OEM partner do a lazy job with a
minimal UEFI interface without the possibility to disable secure boot.
In that case, if secure boot block unsigned os at boot, it would be
impossible to install other os than Windows 8.
I have too often see BIOS missing lot
Yeah, honestly Microsoft has even said already, there will be no nagging the
only feature you lose by not using secured booting is the swift boot. if you
flip
secured UEFI off it just makes windows 8 go into standard boot. fear
mongering
is not needed, and in the end if a secured boot loader is ne
On 2 October 2011 08:03, LeviaComm Networks wrote:
> First off, the UEFI boot will *not* prevent other OS's from booting, it
will
> only pop up a message saying that the boot process was not secure, just
like
> how you can run unsigned code and it will only pop up a box stating as
much.
> It woul
On 01-Oct-11 13:40, Matt S wrote:
Has anyone been following Microsoft's recent attempts to muscle OEMs into
using the secureboot feature of UEFI or is this just a load of media hot air?
Are there any plans for OpenBSD to support UEFI?
Thanks
First off, the UEFI boot will *not* prevent other
10 matches
Mail list logo
