Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 494 posts

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#261

Post by MawNicker »

transfire wrote: post #167
aangjie wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're quoting Hanlon's Razor.. But this could also be Hanlon's Dodge( https://cluelesscreationcorporation.quora.com/When-the-burea... )... I'm not saying it is, but it could be.

Never knew this principle had a name. Will have to try to remember it. Of course for us plebeians, it is oft heard "ignorance is no excuse".

I would love a resource that related the various notions, expressions and idioms of society in the way that you just did. The sophistication of this association is well beyond anything machine learning can do. Except for maybe to crawl the internet and determine it was a relevant association stated by some human somewhere.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#262

Post by slipstream- »

xg15 wrote: post #250
makaronin wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the original reddit thread, you would understand that this is not just a drivers issue. Lenovo intentionally programmed their BIOS so that it reverts any changes to RAID mode making it impossible to install Linux.

True - but as the other HN thread (that I can't seem to find anymore > will write one. On the other hand, Microsoft could have easily gotten a much more "robust" lockdown - by simply demanding mandatory, unchangeable Secure Boot like on the ARM tablets. But they didn't do that.

>On the other hand, Microsoft could have easily gotten a much more "robust" lockdown - by simply demanding mandatory, unchangeable Secure Boot like on the ARM tablets. But they didn't do that.

Didn't you hear that Secure Boot is basically broken?

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#263

Post by leereeves »

UK-AL wrote: post #249
mikkom wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it was confirmed that the computer is locked to windows due to ms/lenovo contract http://imgur.com/a/niewu

Yes, because a low level customer support agent is going to be privy to a secret agreement. In reality the agent probably misunderstood what's bring asked.

Low level customer support agent is probably working off a script.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#264

Post by ansible »

beagle3 wrote: post #239
ioltas wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link. Seeing such companies makes me confident that there will be always alternatives whatever the limitations put by so-said-brand manufacturers are.

It shouldn't make you confident. In the economy of scales involved, it takes very little for system76 to disappear and dell to stop selling linux laptops.

There are a bunch of Linux laptops for sale these days, they're called "Chromebooks".

You can install crouton to get a regular Linux environment.

There are limitations, of course. Especially if you want a lot of processing power. The primary places I use my Chromebook are where I have Internet connectivity, so I decided not to carry around all the computer power I need on a regular basis.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#265

Post by UK-AL »

leereeves wrote: post #263
UK-AL wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because a low level customer support agent is going to be privy to a secret agreement. In reality the agent probably misunderstood what's bring asked.

Low level customer support agent is probably working off a script.

They probably looked for word linux in a script, and typed in the answer.

In reality the script read, "can I buy this with linux installed?", the answer would be only "windows 10 signature edition".

They probably don't even know what linux is.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#266

Post by vlehto »

coldtea wrote: post #196
wazoox wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was it okay to prevent me to do what I want to something I own ? Absolutely never ever. Region locking of DVDs, DRMs of all sorts, smartphones locking are plain, shameless abuse. It's however particularly unacceptable to lock down what used to be open.

> When was it okay to prevent me to do what I want to something I own? Ever since not preventing you also meant not preventing others, and thus malware, exploits, pwnage, stolen data and passwords, etc. And ever since what you wanted to do was hurting others (e.g. not driving while drunk, even if its your car) or violating other's copyright.

Interestingly alcometer locks on cars and speed limiters are very rare. Except for minorities, like truck or taxi drivers. Small groups of voters, so politicians can do what they wish with them.

Seems like it's "okay" when you can get away with it. But not okay when large group of people get some slight inconvenience.

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#267

Post by coldtea »

0x0 wrote: post #259
coldtea wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So they did lie when they said "Microsoft Loves Linux". No, the title and "secret agreement" theory is just BS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor > Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. MS hasn't been the boss of anyone much ever since 2005 or so... http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

Isn't the Microsoft key the only mandatory key in UEFI Secure Boot? So I guess they are still the boss of the (non-Apple) modern x86 PC architecture.

So, add a distro's keys (to the firmware) or use a distro signed with the default (MS) key.

Or get those Linux community to organize, and establish some body to create, and secure, keys for Linux that will be installed by default alongside MSs.

As someone who suffered from at least a couple BIOS-based malware back on Windows PCs back in the day, I'm all for securing the bootloaders...

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#268

Post by kobayashi »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #213

I see lots of folks referencing the Dell XPS laptops. Just as a FWIW, here is another option: https://system76.com/ As per my opinion on this, I'd rather see people not have knee-jerk reactions to Lenovo screwing up Linux support and people rushing for "alternatives", but rather make a concerted effort to support companies focused on Linux-supported hardware (for the long-term). Also, this story combined with the HP…

Missed the HP printer story. Mind linking?

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#269

Post by vlehto »

dx034 wrote: post #162
Yaggo wrote: post #13

Just out of curiosity, what's the rationale for MS & Lenovo to do this, why to risk PR? The number of people wanting to install Linux is marginal and they are already "on the wrong side".

I guess they just wanted to lock out Windows 7/8. They don't gain anything by denying Linux to a few people. But preventing that the buyer can downgrade to Windows 7 fits exactly to their strategy and makes sense for Microsoft. Also, an agreement to lock out Linux might not be legal from an antitrust perspective, whereas an agreement to restrict usage to the current version of the OS is much less critical.

Why lock on 7? (Probably same reason than promoting free 10, but I didn't get that either.)

Re: Linux can’t be installed on a recent Lenovo laptop

#270

Post by paulintrognon »

DanBC wrote: post #247
paulintrognon wrote: post #210

The worst part is the reaction from Lenovo in my opinion. They just locked the thread reporting the issue on their forum, not saying anything about the problem itself but instead threatened the community to turn the pre-approval option on. This really makes me angry and makes me want to boycott their products. I really hope this issue will spread so that Lenovo learn that they made a bad move on this one. It also mad…

> not saying anything about the problem That's incorrect. Someone from Lenovo had already posted in the thread saying that it had been escalated.

I was talking about the last post, sorry if that wasn't clear. My point was, if other people have the same problem and find the thread, they will not read 19 pages and rather go to the last one to see where's the issue at. And there they will find nothing that answers their question. Lenovo staff could have at least have said "it is a known issue" / "it is a driver issue" / "We have an agreement with Microsoft"... Whatever the reason is.
Post reply on HN