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

Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

softwarefreedom.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 133 posts

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#31

Post by dangrossman »

vena wrote: post #26
throwaway64 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so what, that does not change the reality of the situation for the people that buy the devices. EDIT: I am a device user, not a hardware OEM, like im certain most of the posters here are, to users of the device it really does not matter at all WHO is forcing the lockdown, the fact that it happens is the issue. Not sure why that very obvious point garners downvotes.

It very much changes the issue. That is not an OS developer requiring third-party hardware OEMs prevent loading another OS as part of their licensing agreement. This is fairly specific anti-competitive behaviour, it's not an issue of locking devices in general.

This doesn't prevent the OEMs from doing anything, it only prevents the end users from doing things. The OEM can have two versions of every tablet/phone they make, one that's Windows-certified with UEFI and another identical one that's not Windows-certified that they can offer with Android, Linux, or whatever. All this agreement says is that you can't sell Windows on a device that can be flashed with a different OS afterwards.

So this creates devices sold with Microsoft software that can only run Microsoft software. It does not stop anyone from selling devices with other operating systems, even the same manufacturers with identical hardware. Should Microsoft not be allowed to offer these computers? If consumers don't like it they can vote with their dollars and buy the Android/Ubuntu/WebOS tablet -- they just can't buy the Windows one then delete Windows and install Ubuntu.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#32

Post by resnamen »

dangrossman wrote: post #14
X-Istence wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple manufacturers both the hardware and the software and then sell it, there is no 3rd party involved in this transaction. Microsoft builds the OS and licenses it to a manufacture, they build the device and sell it. At least 3 parties involved. Microsoft's requirements need to be met to be able to license Windows 8 for tablets. Microsoft is forcing manufacturers to lock down their devices or else they aren't allowe…

> Google doesn't make any requirements on the manufacturers to lock their devices down. But they do. Google has many requirements and if you don't meet them, you won't be licensed the Google apps. That's the same thing Microsoft is doing here. You can choose to make a tablet that doesn't meet their requirements, you just can't sell it with Windows if you do so. Microsoft isn't preventing anyone from making products o…

They don't expect manufacturers to lock down the devices. Their flagship devices, which are supposed to set the bar for other Android phones, are deliberately not locked down to set an example.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#33

Post by sjs »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #2

iPad has or had a monopoly in the tablet market, but where are/were the cries for an open bootloader? Where were the complaints to governments? Motorola and HTC phones/tablets ship with locked bootloaders while leveraging the hard work of F/OSS developers for free. Not to mention the Nook tablet/Kindle Fire which ship with a locked bootloader who get a free pass. Note that this will be the same set of people who will…

People have hacked iPads and iPhones to run Android. And nobody actually uses it because there is no hardware back button, etc.

When hardware and software are a cohesive unit it's hard to run something generic on the hardware, or run the software on some other hardware. That is not the case for Windows, Linux, and Android, which is why people feel differently about that ecosystem.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#34

Post by wmf »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #17

And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8. Can we rehash all the dozen posts about this from months ago when people swore up on down that Microsoft wasn't going to do... well, what the rest of us expect at this point?

I thought most of the discussion last time was about x86; I've never heard of UEFI for ARM and I suspect most haven't either.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#35

Post by recoiledsnake »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #17

And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8. Can we rehash all the dozen posts about this from months ago when people swore up on down that Microsoft wasn't going to do... well, what the rest of us expect at this point?

>And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8.

Why is it Microsoft's responsibility to make Linux run on the hardware that runs their software? What is your stance on Nook Tablet, Kindle Fire etc.? Why shouldn't they be able to secure their OS against jailbreaking and malware just like Apple does?

If they're forced to not have restriction by the government, I propose that the government force Apple and other vendors to open up their hardware, so that Windows 8 and Linux can run on them.

>Can we rehash all the dozen posts about this from months ago when people swore up on down that Microsoft wasn't going to do... well, what the rest of us expect at this point?

I believe they were referring to x86 machines, not ARM.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#36

Post by cooldeal »

kennywinker wrote: post #8
dangrossman wrote: post #4

Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly in the tablet or phone markets. Heck, it's barely a market participant. If Apple doesn't have to let people install Windows on an iPad, then the same should apply to Microsoft. This time, there's no "but there's a monopoly and the rules are different for monopolies" excuse.

But we're not talking about just phones and tablets... "[...] yesterday, Qualcomm announced plans to produce Windows 8 tablets and ultrabook-style laptops built around its ARM-based Snapdragon processors" Those will be locked out as well. This is exactly what Cory Doctorow was talking about in his article the other day about "the war on general purpose computing" - ( http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html )

Sorry, that war was fought and lost won with the iPhone and iPad.

If anything, Microsoft is better in the sense that it offers more share of the app cost to the developers and also doesn't charge tithes like Apple does on content.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#37

Post by ekianjo »

melling wrote: post #13
daeken wrote: post #3

I've been a Microsoft fanboy for a long time, and I've been speaking out about the Secure Boot brouhaha because there was effectively no evidence that they were actually attempting to lock anyone out, but this is simply inexcusable. Sad.

You can't seriously be surprised by this. Microsoft can't be trusted until their desktop monopoly is destroyed. I guess the US vs Microsoft is 14 years old this year. Maybe we've all forgotten how Microsoft destroyed all other PC OS'es and how Windows wouldn't run without Internet Explorer; Microsoft claimed it was part of the OS and there was no way to remove it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microso…

> It shouldn't be a PC vs Mac world today. It should be PC, Mac, BeOS, OS/2, Linux, etc.

There are a number of small, niche systems around the world that few people know about. When something gets broad popularity it is natural to see only a few systems get the cake, the cream of the cake and the cherry on it while the others get the crumbs. "He who has more, gets more" if you know the saying.

In the 80s you had a free market situation with personal computers and litterally hundred of brands to choose from. All incompatible. And only a few brands made it through the years, with the IBM PC standard getting the first place.

Fast Market growth favors big players.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#38

Post by drivebyacct2 »

wmf wrote: post #34
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #17

And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8. Can we rehash all the dozen posts about this from months ago when people swore up on down that Microsoft wasn't going to do... well, what the rest of us expect at this point?

I thought most of the discussion last time was about x86; I've never heard of UEFI for ARM and I suspect most haven't either.

Now I'm curious to find the old revision of this document, but the linked article seems (to me) to imply that the new no-uefi-secure-exemptions provision was added to an existing discussion of UEFI/ARM. I could be wrong, and I'm not sure the distinction matters significantly, the discussion here on HN was pretty clearly in regard to Microsoft's intentions with UEFI and whether it was about being anti-competitive or truly for security.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#39

Post by sounds »

vena wrote: post #26
throwaway64 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so what, that does not change the reality of the situation for the people that buy the devices. EDIT: I am a device user, not a hardware OEM, like im certain most of the posters here are, to users of the device it really does not matter at all WHO is forcing the lockdown, the fact that it happens is the issue. Not sure why that very obvious point garners downvotes.

It very much changes the issue. That is not an OS developer requiring third-party hardware OEMs prevent loading another OS as part of their licensing agreement. This is fairly specific anti-competitive behaviour, it's not an issue of locking devices in general.

@dangrossman

you've just made exactly the point vena was making: "it only prevents the end users from doing things." Using OEM requirements for Windows-certified ARM devices is very similar to the bundling requirements Microsoft was convicted of in US v Microsoft.

Also, what you're suggesting with "The OEM can have two versions of every tablet/phone" places the costs on the OEM, where margins are razor thin. Be fair - put the burden on Microsoft to stop creating artificial barriers to entry.

In addition, Microsoft responded in US v Microsoft (1998) to the requirement to unbundle IE by offering to "offer manufacturers a choice: one version of Windows that was obsolete, or another that did not work properly." Now is it fair to offer OEMs this same choice -- ship with Windows 7 or deliberately break the device so it cannot boot properly? I don't believe that's fair.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#40

Post by drivebyacct2 »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #35
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #17

And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8. Can we rehash all the dozen posts about this from months ago when people swore up on down that Microsoft wasn't going to do... well, what the rest of us expect at this point?

>And that's how Microsoft killed ARM based netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets, etc that could potentially run Linux because most OEMs will want to have them licensed for use with Windows 8. Why is it Microsoft's responsibility to make Linux run on the hardware that runs their software? What is your stance on Nook Tablet, Kindle Fire etc.? Why shouldn't they be able to secure their OS against jailbreaking and malware just…

>Why is it Microsoft's responsibility to make Linux run on the hardware that runs their software? What is your stance on Nook Tablet, Kindle Fire etc.?

I disapprove of Android vendors locking their bootloaders as well. However, this is an entirely different landscape. Microsoft's penetration on laptops and netbooks means that they have the ability to block out competing operating systems unless OEMs (that have to negotiate contracts with Microsoft) go out of their way to provide a different model with a differently implemented UEFI. Considering the number of manufacturers selling Linux computers now, that seems unlikely.

Regardless, I even granted that there isn't a business reason for them to be friendly to competing operation systems, it's just disappointing to see them resorting to this. I have to wonder if it's in part because of how far behind they are in terms of phones/tablets.

>I believe they were referring to x86 machines, not ARM.

Does it matter? The conversations that were playing out were discussing Microsoft's intentions wrt to UEFI.

Post reply on HN