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

Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

mjg59.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 257 posts

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#51

Post by pdkl95 »

There has been a disturbing level of contempt for the people that were concerned about the future of Free Software. There has been a major shift towards more locked down platforms for years ever since iOS was accepted by the developer community. With Microsoft locking down Secure Boot on ARM and requiring it for Windows 10, it is prudent to be extra vigilant about anything strange that happens in the boot process. The alternative is to ignore potential problems until they grow into much larger problems that are harder to deal with.

Obviously vigilance implies some amount of false positives. It is easy to dismiss a problem once better information is available. It's great that this Lenovo situation is simply a misunderstanding about drivers, but that doesn't invalidate the initial concern about a suspicious situation.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#52

Post by sqeaky »

johansch wrote: post #14
christogreeff wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was fascinating how quickly people condemned Microsoft without applying any critical thinking to the issue. I tend to not read commments on articles anymore, where Microsoft is blamed for something. Reminds me of Slahdot.

They do have a quite strong record of abuse. It will take them another generation to shake that, at least. You knew that when you chose that particular ecosystem. (Why else would you defend them here?)

I came here to say this. I am not sure why you got downvoted so much.

They have behaved in negative ways for a long time they will need to behave differently for quite a long time before they are trusted again.

They have cleaned up many but not all of their behaviors. They are still abusing patents against smaller android distributors. If they care about their patents they would sue Google or the AOSP steering group (or whoever runs it). If they were actually with an open ecosystem they wouldn't be doing those lawsuits.

In the context of Microsoft's behavior, blaming them is not an unreasonable default stance. Though when evidence does come along to the contrary someone holding such a stance must be willing to change it or be wrong.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#54

Post by intopieces »

FTA:

"For a consumer device, why would you want to? The number of people buying these laptops to run anything other than Windows is miniscule."

This is a really poor argument, and slightly disingenuous. Sometimes, people change their use for a device. Maybe they want to explore linux in the future, maybe they want to sell the laptop to someone who wants to use it for linux...

That the blame is being possibly misdirected ought not to detract from the fact that blame is necessary. If users don't vocally oppose measures like this, the industry will assume that this kind of restriction is reasonable. It's not. Yes, power management is important, but anyone who puts linux on their laptop will quickly learn there are limitations to the features of that device that were originally tailored to the OS the device shipped with. That's a good lesson, and a good opportunity for a community to develop around the device (if it's good enough) to mitigate those deficiencies and adapt them for the particular linux distro.

In short, Lenovo is at fault for not being up front about this limitation, for not explaining it, and for not devoting at least some resources to mitigating for their potential linux-inclined users.

Then again, perhaps a linux-inclined user might also be one of the many that don't trust Lenovo after their self-signed certificate scandal.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#55

Post by raesene9 »

huhtenberg wrote: post #30
simbalion wrote: post #16

edit: the truth has been censored because I spoke harshly of those looking to perpetuate evil.

No idea who are the dolts^H^H^H^H^H kind people who have downvoted you into light gray, but you are bloody right. Just look at their complete and utter disregard to everyone's privacy demonstrated by Windows 10. Remember all the shady shit Microsoft pulled to shovel W10 down everyone's throat, including "x", the cancel, being treated as "Yes, upgrade". How short and selective of a memory you should have to then claim…

Critical thinking led me to believe this story was false.

The option in question wasn't cloaked under "security" or "encryption" as many lock-downs are, but instead an unsupported disk mode.

The evidence that it was a "secret conspiracy" was a quote from a low-level customer support rep. You really think that that kind of information is provided to the thousands of rep's at that level... It would leak instantly if that was the case.

So Occam's razor applies. By far the more likely explanation, in this case, is a hardware incompatibility between Linux and the Lenovo configuration.

do corp's (including Lenovo and Microsoft ) do shitty stuff to users, sure of course they do. Does that mean people should jump to conclusions without adequate evidence... no.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#56

Post by simbalion »

raesene9 wrote: post #55
huhtenberg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No idea who are the dolts^H^H^H^H^H kind people who have downvoted you into light gray, but you are bloody right. Just look at their complete and utter disregard to everyone's privacy demonstrated by Windows 10. Remember all the shady shit Microsoft pulled to shovel W10 down everyone's throat, including "x", the cancel, being treated as "Yes, upgrade". How short and selective of a memory you should have to then claim…

Critical thinking led me to believe this story was false. The option in question wasn't cloaked under "security" or "encryption" as many lock-downs are, but instead an unsupported disk mode. The evidence that it was a "secret conspiracy" was a quote from a low-level customer support rep. You really think that that kind of information is provided to the thousands of rep's at that level... It would leak instantly if th…

edit: the truth has been censored because I spoke harshly of those looking to perpetuate evil.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#58

Post by sctb »

simbalion wrote: post #28
Sanddancer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't hard to figure out what's happening if you read everything that went on. Windows itself doesn't install on these computers unless you have special drivers in the boot medium that aren't included with Windows 10. Why would Microsoft sabotage their own OS like that if this were something done to stymie other OSes?

Nice strawman. What's happening is Microsoft broke the law, again. And some folks are playing devil's advocate. So be it, I hope y'all enjoy burning in hell. That's the only story here.

> So be it, I hope y'all enjoy burning in hell.

Please don't comment like this here.

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#59

Post by zanny »

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #37

Their spin that it is "our super advanced Intel RAID chipset" really plays in their favor, given that their BIOS uses a single goto statement to intentionally block access to the ability to set this chipset into the AHCI compatible mode that the hardware so readily supports, as evidenced by the REing work and the fact that other OSes detect the drive after the AHCI fix using the custom-flashed BIOS. So, why are they…

Its actually no problem not to be backwards compatible with your "crazy new super advanced hardware".

Except when that CNSAH is holistically proprietary and black box, with no documentation, no announcement of it, no schematics or free drivers or anything. "We made this black box that you aren't allowed to know how it works but you aren't supporting it so you are in the wrong".

Re: Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems

#60

Post by raesene9 »

captainmuon wrote: post #50
raesene9 wrote: post #4

Also worth noting Lenovo's official statment on the matter http://www.techrepublic.com/article/lenovo-denies-deliberate... confirming that they have not blocked the installation of alternate operating systems. It was a shame to see the initial posts this morning hit the top of the page without any more evidence than a single customer support rep. who was unlikely to realistically have inside knowledge of some kind of…

That's just nitpicking. They blocked the enabling of a setting which allows Linux to see the hard disk. They went out of their way to make a firmware change that has the effect that you cannot run Linux - unless you flash your BIOS or you write a driver. In my book, they effectively blocked the installation of Linux. Now, there are two options. 1) to support this hardware correctly, you'd need to make complex changes…

Should Lenovo provide a driver. Let's be honest, that's a commercial decision and entirely up to them if they want to support Linux installs on this hardware.

Why should a commercial company be forced to provide support for a platform?

If they advertise the hardware as supporting Linux then sure they absolutely should be required to support it. If they don't, then why should they have to support it?

Post reply on HN