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

241–250 of 257 posts

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

#241

Post by farcical_tinpot »

dang wrote: post #213
farcical_tinpot wrote: post #129

I wondered when Matthew Garrett would pipe up and deepthroat Microsoft again. He duly obliges. When I first heard this I thought this was what I always thought would eventually happen with Secure Boot, but we haven't quite arrived at that point yet. Give it time when we eventually end up with critical mass. What seems to be happening is similar to Kaby Lake in reverse. You restrict hardware and drivers needed to no o…

> I wondered when Matthew Garrett would pipe up and deepthroat Microsoft again. He duly obliges. Personal attacks (and that's an ugly one) are not allowed on HN. Nor is name-calling ("so stupid it isn't even funny, but Matthew likes defending stupid"). We ban accounts that do this, so please don't. You can easily make your point civilly and we'll all be better for it.

I'm not the first person to accuse Matthew of this I'm afraid, and use exactly those words.

If you're going to censor comments then feel free to do so for the nonsensical articles you post ;-). Nothing of what Matthew has posted explained anything or provided any kind of semi-credible reason for this for any kind of reasonably technical audience.

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

#242

Post by dang »

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #241
dang wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wondered when Matthew Garrett would pipe up and deepthroat Microsoft again. He duly obliges. Personal attacks (and that's an ugly one) are not allowed on HN. Nor is name-calling ("so stupid it isn't even funny, but Matthew likes defending stupid"). We ban accounts that do this, so please don't. You can easily make your point civilly and we'll all be better for it.

I'm not the first person to accuse Matthew of this I'm afraid, and use exactly those words. If you're going to censor comments then feel free to do so for the nonsensical articles you post ;-). Nothing of what Matthew has posted explained anything or provided any kind of semi-credible reason for this for any kind of reasonably technical audience.

Not being first hardly makes it ok.

I don't know about Microsoft and Lenovo laptops. I do know that you have to follow the HN rules the same as everyone else does. I wouldn't call that 'censorship' any more than, say, traffic laws, but YMMV. The point is, if you can't or won't be civil then you can't comment here.

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

#243

Post by youdontknowtho »

pdkl95 wrote: post #209
youdontknowtho wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 threa…

Some of us believe its a bad idea to sacrifice your principles...

You don't know me friend. That's not the kind of thing that I would ever say to someone lightly.

Your last line reads like some manifesto from the 90's. it's naïve in the extreme. The future will be controlled with force. Just like the past. How do you think the materials that make the computers are mined, extracted, and turned into the parts that make your shiny toy? Force.

The idea that you are a freedom fighter is so laughable. Jesus Christ, that's so pathetic that I'm having a hard time thinking that you aren't trolling.

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

#244

Post by youdontknowtho »

minikites wrote: post #234
pdkl95 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 threa…

>If there is a point to this word salad, I am not parsing it. It seems off topic? The point I took from this is that people who believe they're fighting for freedom in and through software only care about freedom for rich (in a global measure) people who live in developed nations and are happy to ignore the much larger quantity of people worldwide who live under far more restrictive and harsh circumstances.

That's pretty much exactly it. Thanks for that.

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

#245

Post by paulddraper »

hatsix wrote: post #96
captainmuon wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the old distinction between "should do legally" and just "should do". Of course I don't believe they should be forced to do anything. But then I reserve the right to be indignant about this. And I also think it is a bit stupid: Lenovo had a reputation for having serious business Laptops. They cared about power-user customers who wanted to configure everything, and they had good Linux support. Either they messed…

You can still install Linux on all of their 'serious business laptops'... including the Thinkpad Yoga. The only reason this is a "screw-up" is because someone posted it here and the tech media got outraged... there are MANY other Ideapad/Y-series laptops that have very poor Linux support. https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Lenovo_Thinkpad_Yoga_26... Their laptop brands are VERY distinct, and have been for a long wh…

Even Thinkpads are getting crappy. I couldn't replace my Wifi card because the signature didn't match or some such crap.

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

#246

Post by colemickens »

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #239
colemickens wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, it wasn't a bullshit statement from a rep - it was a very clear statement from a rep, in black and white, that has not been retracted or clarified by Lenovo in any way. It's always funny when people choose not to believe verbatim statements and explanations put right in front of them. Literally nothing about this sentence is correct. Support reps know nothing , and nameless support reps that throw out statements…

> Literally nothing about this sentence is correct. Sorry, but literally everything about it is correct. What a great adjective. > Support reps know nothing, and nameless support reps that throw out statements like that with no explanation Errrrr, no. Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true. This doesn't come out of nowhere. >I can't believ…

>"Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true."

What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement".

>"An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to misinterpretation."

So let me get this straight... a nameless employee writing a single sentence with no explanation or justification... you'll accept as absolute truth. But the company issues AN ACTUAL PRESS RELEASE describing the technical reasoning... and you're just willing to completely dismiss and ignore that?

>"As usual we get someone who wants to tell us that black is white and that a manufacturer miraculously using buggy fake RAID drivers is now the done thing. For performance. Or power management. Or whatever the reason happens to be."

What the "buggy, fake drivers" are you talking about? Just making shit up now? Are you REALLY contending that the NVMe devices don't work better under RAID mode, despite the fact that it's a widely researched and accepted fact with whitepaper to boot?

Please stop, this is embarrassing. Go troll somewhere else. I won't be participating in this conversation further, it's clearly a complete waste of time.

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

#247

Post by NetStrikeForce »

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #238
NetStrikeForce wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It would be awesome if you knew what you were talking about ;-).

We're all just waiting for you to enlighten us. Go ahead, show us what you've got :-)

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

#248

Post by farcical_tinpot »

colemickens wrote: post #246
farcical_tinpot wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Literally nothing about this sentence is correct. Sorry, but literally everything about it is correct. What a great adjective. > Support reps know nothing, and nameless support reps that throw out statements like that with no explanation Errrrr, no. Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true. This doesn't come out of nowhere. >I can't believ…

> "Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true." What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement". > "An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to misinterpretation." So let me get this st…

> What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement".

Ahhh, the anti-conspiracy theorist who doesn't want to see a spade in front of him.

You have an employee at a company who has given a very short, to-the-point, precise reason as to why they can't do something. This hasn't been through an edit filter, been past lawyers or anyone else who has seen this as a problem. It's an honest statement that they probably didn't think would blow up into anything major.

> But the company issues AN ACTUAL PRESS RELEASE describing the technical reasoning... and you're just willing to completely dismiss and ignore that?

They're not going to admit that they couldn't do this because they had an agreement with Microsoft in an 'official' statement are they, you idiot?

> What the "buggy, fake drivers" are you talking about? Just making shit up now?

You haven't the faintest idea what they are talking about. 'Fake RAID' drivers (do try reading) are well known to be incredibly buggy because the RAID implementation is not in software in the OS or in hardware, it's shoehorned into the driver. The are not well tested or well maintained. Linux doesn't have these drivers....because it just doesn't need them. It already has a perfectly good RAID implementation of its own.

> Are you REALLY contending that the NVMe devices don't work better under RAID mode, despite the fact that it's a widely researched and accepted fact with whitepaper to boot?

What a load of utter dogshit. Single disk systems are run under AHCI for very good practical reasons. If you have multiple disks, then you can go ahead and look at various RAID implementations. I also wish people luck if they ever want to image their disk for recovery or try and read it in any other system.

> Please stop, this is embarrassing. Go troll somewhere else.

No, you're embarrassing yourself because you haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about and obviously haven't read what's been written.

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

#249

Post by farcical_tinpot »

dang wrote: post #242
farcical_tinpot wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the first person to accuse Matthew of this I'm afraid, and use exactly those words. If you're going to censor comments then feel free to do so for the nonsensical articles you post ;-). Nothing of what Matthew has posted explained anything or provided any kind of semi-credible reason for this for any kind of reasonably technical audience.

Not being first hardly makes it ok. I don't know about Microsoft and Lenovo laptops. I do know that you have to follow the HN rules the same as everyone else does. I wouldn't call that 'censorship' any more than, say, traffic laws, but YMMV. The point is, if you can't or won't be civil then you can't comment here.

You're the one publicising him and funnelling traffic to his blog, but, hey, ho.

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

#250

Post by dang »

farcical_tinpot wrote: post #248
colemickens wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Support reps do not throw out incredible specific, crystal clear and precise statements like that unless they're true." What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement". > "An extremely clear statements has been made that is not open to misinterpretation." So let me get this st…

> What alternative reality do you live in? A short unsubstantiated single sentence-fragment from an unnamed, untitled support employee on a random fucking forum is not a "precise statement". Ahhh, the anti-conspiracy theorist who doesn't want to see a spade in front of him. You have an employee at a company who has given a very short, to-the-point, precise reason as to why they can't do something. This hasn't been th…

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the HN guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop.
Post reply on HN