Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#121

Post by drivebyacct2 » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 5:47 PM UTC

mjg59 wrote: post #66

The quotations say nothing of the sort. A vendor could provide a dual-boot device providing they have an Android bootloader signed with Microsoft's signing key, which is a service that Microsoft will be providing. A more open question is whether any of the existing Linux vendors will be doing this. Fedora is willing to use Microsoft's signing service for x86 because users will be able to disable the feature or enrol…

The service is NOT provided for ARM devices.

edit: I'm sorry to see the child comment downvoted. I am under the impression that user key enrollment is disallowed, but I'm actually not seeing an mechanism by which Microsoft can prevent the signature of ARM based bootloaders.

That having been said, I don't completely understand ARM devices to know if it's plausible to sign an ARM bootloader with the MS key.

edit2: The person y'all downvoted is the guy who wrote the blogpost outlining the Fedora way of handling this issue: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12368.html

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#122

Post by mjg59 » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 5:58 PM UTC

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #121

mjg59 wrote: post #66

The quotations say nothing of the sort. A vendor could provide a dual-boot device providing they have an Android bootloader signed with Microsoft's signing key, which is a service that Microsoft will be providing. A more open question is whether any of the existing Linux vendors will be doing this. Fedora is willing to use Microsoft's signing service for x86 because users will be able to disable the feature or enrol…

The service is NOT provided for ARM devices. edit: I'm sorry to see the child comment downvoted. I am under the impression that user key enrollment is disallowed, but I'm actually not seeing an mechanism by which Microsoft can prevent the signature of ARM based bootloaders. That having been said, I don't completely understand ARM devices to know if it's plausible to sign an ARM bootloader with the MS key. edit2: The…

You have anything to back up that assertion? It doesn't match what I've been told.

Edit: Right, user key enrolment is impossible on the ARM devices, but we've had no indication that the signing service will be restricted to x86-only.

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#123

Post by mjg59 » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:00 PM UTC

gioele wrote: post #115

Maybe it is the right time to make all this rage converge into contributions to coreboot [1]. A free working alternative is the only practical way out of this future kind of subjection. Google has already contributed core for some current Ivy Bridge chipsets. It would be nice if coreboot received more testing and development from a broader audience. [1] http://coreboot.org

The problem is not the availability of a free alternative. Hardware vendors could already simply choose not to implement secure boot - the default policy is a single configurable switch during the build. The problem is that vendors believe they can make more money by selling hardware that meets Microsoft's requirements. Coreboot doesn't do anything to help there.

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#124

Post by dattaway » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:21 PM UTC

McGlockenshire wrote: post #120

gioele wrote: post #115

Maybe it is the right time to make all this rage converge into contributions to coreboot [1]. A free working alternative is the only practical way out of this future kind of subjection. Google has already contributed core for some current Ivy Bridge chipsets. It would be nice if coreboot received more testing and development from a broader audience. [1] http://coreboot.org

Coreboot is a good thing, but it's going to be hard to succeed without hardware vendor support, and that will be hard to build unless people actually want the product. I work for a VAR. Our preferred vendor was one of the first to market with motherboards that expressly supported Coreboot. We're supporters of OSS, and so are our customers, so we figured that they'd be popular. We sold only a handful over about two ye…

Shopping for coreboot devices is frustrating. Google returns products containing pictures of legs.

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#125

Post by brudgers » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:29 PM UTC

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #112

brudgers wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "A more open question is whether any of the existing Linux vendors will be doing this." The Market Economics Fairy predicts that they will not given the limited number of people who are interested in dual booting a tablet and the diversity of device configurations likely to be manufactured.

Limited number? Quite a few enthusiasts will buy x86 tablets JUST for this purpose. Sure, enthusiasts, but enthusiasts also drive Linux to some extent.

The enthusiast market + the small business market for Linux is so small that no significant manufacturer builds Linux laptops for the consumer segment. The enthusiast Linux tablet market will probably be rather smaller.

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#126

Post by Symmetry » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:32 PM UTC

tjoff wrote: post #87

amalcon wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your router probably is running Linux already. Most commodity routers do.

You guys are completely missing my point. Even though my router might be an arm-computer that runs linux - I can't even run linux on the damn thing (that binary blob that is shipped with the router could be any OS for I care, it's not as if my experience will be any better or worse if runs linux or DOS when everything is locked down and all I get access to is a simple webserver with an administrative page on)... Just…

You actually _can_ in fact run sorts of Linux other than Android on your phone: http://linuxonandroid.blogspot.com/

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#127

Post by pooriaazimi » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:34 PM UTC

Zak wrote: post #118

pooriaazimi wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate MS just as the next guy. But Open Thinking (tm) people should no seek freedom (as in speech) through restricting other's (namely, MS) freedom. They have the right to do what they feel like, and we have the choice whether or not to buy them. (I'm not being snarky)

Criticism is not the same as attempting to restrict Microsoft's freedom. Telling others "these guys placed an arbitrary limitation on their product to hinder competition; you should not do business with them" is the free-market way to influence a company's behavior.

I completely agree, and that's what I personally do. I just disagree with some people's opinion that 'Microsoft has no right to do such and such, it's my device. I bought it and so I can do whatever the hell I want to do with it'.

That's not exactly what the grand-grandparent was saying, and I'm not against what he says; I just wanted to add my comment (which I thought would be downvote to oblivion, but funnily, has now a double-digit vote count!!)

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#128

Post by brudgers » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 6:43 PM UTC

jack12 wrote: post #117

brudgers wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Metro is a set of UI guidelines, not a set of programming tools. Applications built using the Silverlight Framework (not to be confused with the browser plugin) should be suitable for cross platform development because CLR runs on both platforms. CLR remains Microsoft's way of integrating the "write once, run anywhere" philosophy within the Windows ecosystem in order to deal with legacy issues.

Are you sure you're not describing cross-platform with Windows Phone instead of Windows 8? I thought for Windows 8, Microsoft is pushing WinRT as the cross-platform solution, and that "binaries" crossing from x86/x64 to arm will work as-is for javascript, as-is (if pure) for CLR, and with no modifications but requiring recompilation for native (C/C++) WinRT apps.

If you're writing in C/C++ rather than C#, then you're off the CLR ranch, so to speak. It's like saying Java isn't portable because a program links to custom libraries written in C.

That said, rumor has it that the next version of Windows Phone will not be Silverlight (though XAML and Silverlight are fairly similar), but based on WinRT.

That's a good thing because it will allow Windows Phone Apps to better integrate Javascript.

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#129

Post by tmzt » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 7:24 PM UTC

mjg59 wrote: post #122

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The service is NOT provided for ARM devices. edit: I'm sorry to see the child comment downvoted. I am under the impression that user key enrollment is disallowed, but I'm actually not seeing an mechanism by which Microsoft can prevent the signature of ARM based bootloaders. That having been said, I don't completely understand ARM devices to know if it's plausible to sign an ARM bootloader with the MS key. edit2: The…

You have anything to back up that assertion? It doesn't match what I've been told. Edit: Right, user key enrolment is impossible on the ARM devices, but we've had no indication that the signing service will be restricted to x86-only.

So your understanding is that manufacturers will still be able to add their own "instant boot" capability for media playback or quick access to contacts, but will have to have the system image signed by Microsoft to do this?

Re: Microsoft Bans Linux/Android Dual-Booting on Windows 8 ARM Devices

#130

Post by tmzt » Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 7:32 PM UTC

liquidsnake wrote: post #11

tjoff wrote: post #9

We've yet to see any mobile device where running another OS than the bundled one have been anything but a nightmare. This is done everywhere, android manufacturers constantly try to lock users in their own android shell, not to mention apple. These devices are not multipurpose devices, they are built for a specific purpose and tailormade for that and nothing else. It is not in any sense equivalent to desktop/laptop-c…

Exception: HP Touchpad. ICS runs great on it.

Because the touchpad had a fairly open bootloader and we built a more versatile one for it based on the same code base (moboot). The bootloader in the OMAP chip also allows booting from usb and does not require the second stage be signed.