Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems • Hacker News Board

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

#201

Post by tw04 » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 12:57 AM UTC

PieterH wrote: post #102

tw04 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going so far as to install Linux on a laptop that shipped Windows, flashing the BIOS isn't a big deal at all. The real problem is that it took a third-party to fix the BIOS rather than Lenovo releasing a "BIOS for Linux" directly. I get not wanting to expose it from the factory to keep a user from screwing themselves, but there's no reason not to provide it to the power user.

I disagree. I'm happy to install Linux from a USB stick. I'm not happy reflashing a BIOS. Have installed many, many laptops with Linux (ironically, my all time favorites are older Lenovos like the X220). I've not once flashed a BIOS. Not being able to change the OS on a laptop severely reduces its aftermarket value too. My laptop originally ran Windows. I bought it second hand to run Linux on.

Flashing a BIOS takes about 1/10th the time and effort of installing Linux.

Unless you're under the age of about 25 I'm not sure how you've never once flashed a BIOS unless you aren't in tech. Pretty much every new server from Dell/HP/Cisco/IBM/name your vendor requires a BIOS flash at least once in it's lifetime. Usually at the time of acquisition for HBA compatibility.

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

#202

Post by NetStrikeForce » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 12:59 AM UTC

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #166

NetStrikeForce wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Answering you and Hydraulix989: Because Internet forums. That's why. Search for "I can't install Windows 10 on my Lenovo Whatsyourface" and you'll get "Change this super secret setting to AHCI". And who's going to be doing those searches? Everyone, but specially people less computer savvy. The ones that know enough are here discussing Lenovo's decision. Again, just to clarify: I'm not trying to defend Lenovo. What th…

Every other chipset and motherboard in existence has had that option and it hasn't affected anyone adversely. There is no less of two evils. There isn't any evils here.

That's not what the article claims. Apparently there are indeed two evils here:

Lower performance for everyone or no drivers for Linux.

I take you know more than the article's author, in which case I'd be interested in reading your analysis as I'm not an expert.

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

#203

Post by NetStrikeForce » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 1:01 AM UTC

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #169

NetStrikeForce wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Why should Lenovo let 99% of their users use sub-par drivers when they reinstall Windows?

Because providing that option doesn't give anyone sub-par drivers? Also, the power saving stuff is bollocks. I never thought I would see the day when anyone would recommend using a bullshit fake RAID driver for power saving reasons.

Please refer to my other response to you. It would be awesome to read your analysis of the drivers and the underlying hardware.

I base my opinion on what experts call facts as I'm not a hardware expert myself.

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

#204

Post by michaelmrose » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 1:19 AM UTC

6nf wrote: post #183

alexmat wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the minuscule group they just shat on is the same group of people who make purchasing decisions and recommendations for a ton of consumers. Even if someone doesn't run Linux, laptops that support it have often proven to be more reliable and have a higher resell value. For everyone asking me what laptop they should buy, I'll be sure to let them know how disorganized and confused Lenovo support tends to be.

If 1% of your customers cause 10% of support tickets, it might be profitable to stop selling to those customers. Lenovo has no obligation to you or anyone else.

Firstly, companies spend a pretty penny to associate their brand with vague positive platitudes. In the first place being associated with something negative even if their populace doesn't understand the technicalities can be worth more than 1% of your business.

Second tech savvy users influence others.

Thirdly supposing you publish sufficient tech specs as to enable the kernel to support your hardware I'm guessing linux users actually require less not more tech support.

Windows users repeatedly trash their own machines with malware and pick up the phone to call their oem. Linux users google the error message and open a bug on the project that actually doesn't work's site.

I'm not even sure where your hostile attitude comes from. Lenovo just dropped the ball.

Magic windows bios raid modes have existed for the 13 years I've been using linux and I have never seen one that didn't include a switch in the bios to disable it.

What you are incorrectly framing as lenovo righteously dumping entitled linux fanboys is in fact just Lenovo not knowing how to design a computer which given repeated mistakes in recent years is hardly shocking.

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

#205

Post by michaelmrose » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 1:24 AM UTC

13of40 wrote: post #20

huhtenberg wrote: post #15

Yeah, sure, Microsoft is now all white and fluffy. Best friends forever. How about we pay some attention to the second part of: Lenovo's firmware defaults to "RAID" mode and ** doesn't allow you to change that ** Power savings or not, but locking down storage controller to a mode that just happens to be supported by exactly one OS has NO obvious rational explanation. Either Lenovo does that or Windows does. This has…

Why doesn't Linux support it? Is "RAID" mode based on some spec that was only provided to Microsoft and kept secret from everyone else?

Linux has its own methodology for providing raid and the raid modes provided by motherboard makers are in general terrible junk that nobody including windows users should use. Even if the information necessary to implement support were available which it generally is not it would be worth less than nothing.

Everyone's hardware supports communicating with drives in a standard fashion not providing a way to enable this given that the hardware already supports it is wholly and totally lenovos fault.

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

#206

Post by sqldba » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 1:42 AM UTC

Click bait. It's one interpretation masquerading as the truth while decrying the other interpretation.

Until Lenovo issue a proper, detailed, official statement we need to keep the pressure on.

Self aggrandising posts like this don't help.

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

#207

Post by simplexion » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 2:29 AM UTC

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #193

simplexion wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean UEFI. Not BIOS.

Almost everyone uses BIOS as a metonymy for UEFI, even the people like @djpohly and the bios-mods.com community (the URL here is telling) who recently reverse engineered Lenovo's UEFI for us to mod and hack AHCI into working again.

I'm just going to update the BIOS on my Smartphone then.

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

#208

Post by Hydraulix989 » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 3:14 AM UTC

simplexion wrote: post #207

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost everyone uses BIOS as a metonymy for UEFI, even the people like @djpohly and the bios-mods.com community (the URL here is telling) who recently reverse engineered Lenovo's UEFI for us to mod and hack AHCI into working again.

I'm just going to update the BIOS on my Smartphone then.

Interestingly enough, it's somehow okay to say that GBA and PSX consoles have "BIOSes" (a dumped "BIOS" is required for emulating both), but smartphones only have bootloaders and "recoveries."

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

#209

Post by pdkl95 » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 4:24 AM UTC

youdontknowtho wrote: post #122

pdkl95 wrote: post #51

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. Th…

Wow. Man, come on. The disturbing level of contempt is almost the sole property of the "Linux == Freedom" crowd. I mean seriously, the level of outrage about systemd alone is off the rails. Bring up Microsoft and I'm somehow complicit in oppressing people because I use their software? (But somehow the rare earth minerals in devices and the contributions to modern electronics of the defense budget don't somehow make u…

> The disturbing level of contempt is almost the sole property of the "Linux == Freedom" crowd.

That's patently incorrect and you know it. FYI: You're showing that kind of contempt right now. My point isn't even related strongly to Free Software; it was an observation that a lot of people don't like early warning systems, which is bad for security. Shooting the messenger when they bring a warning of a possible threat is a terrible idea if you want to continue to receive warning messages. Deciding if that was the goal for some people is left as an exercise to the reader.

> I mean seriously, the level of outrage about systemd alone is off the rails.

Off topic and irrelevant, though if you actually read the real, substantive complaints against systemd they tend to focus on forced upgrades from unnecessary tight integration between components and disruption of working code. The contempt in these arguments is usually from the people that try to shut down any discussion that isn't blindly accepting systemd.

> Bring up Microsoft and I'm somehow complicit in oppressing people because I use their software?

I never said anything of the sort. Pretending to be a victim is unbecoming.

> [stuff about rare earth minerals, the defense budget, GPS]

If there is a point to this word salad, I am not parsing it. It seems off topic?

> I used to be such a hard core Linux fan when I was younger.

Some of us still believe it's a bad idea to sacrifice your principles for convenience and a few shiny baubles.

> people complaining about this really make me think that we are all so isolated in our little worlds

The future will be shaped by those that control computation and the internet. This means defending computation and communication that isn't controlled by one entity is one of the most important tasks of this generation. In the future, everything is a computer. Some of us think it's important to fight for freedom now, before that happens, because the problem is only going to get harder.

If you've given up that fight, that's fine. Just please stand aside because other people are still trying to fight for a free and open future.

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

#210

Post by fenomas » Thu, Sep 22, 2016, 4:32 AM UTC

Meta: It seems really odd that this has been relegated to page two, considering that "MS and Lenovo secret agreement" headlines sat on the top page most of yesterday, largely unsubstantiated.

I could be crazy, but HN's algos seem much too aggressive about hiding articles due to flags. It often feels like the most interesting articles are to be found 2-3 spots into the second page.