What's wrong with agreeing to the EULA?
At least in previous versions of Windows you could click "no" to the EULA and you could use the draconian terms as an argument to get a Windows refund.
Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
51–60 of 178 posts
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why this comment is being downvoted. Certainly, agreeing clicking through the EULA isn't ideal, but is it anything other than a theoretical nuisance? I'm genuinely curious - does there exist some relevant and concerning precedent here? If this turns out to actually become an issue, it would probably harm Microsoft more than anyone - and would be a boon to manufacturers willing to bundle Linux on pre-built…
If you agree to the EULA, then you can't get a refund for the Windows license that comes with the computer.
This would actually be a wonderful case that i'm sure lawyers would love to take on.
Given your actual intent is to get the keyboard working enough to boot from CD (or whatever), not to agree to the agreement, and you didn't actually avail yourself of any of the benefits of the software, any retailer on the other side would have a hard time winning any class action lawsuit.
Among other things, assent must be meaningful
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#53It appears to me that both System.Fundamentals.Firmware.FirmwareSupportsUSBDevices System.Fundamentals.Firmware.FirmwareSupportsBootingFromDVDDevice are required for Windows Logo Certification for both Windows 7 and 8: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/jj1... Doesn't that directly contradict the hypothetical scenario presented in the article? Additionally, there's Windows 8 hardware out there a…
Additionally, as point (18) on the page you linked to states: Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. Doesn't this mean that (definitely on certified non-ARM systems, and possibly on some ARM systems) you…
This is idiotic. The requirement should be that the user can disable it entirely OR replace the private key. And it should require implementation of an optional password protection.
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
It means you can have a crazy BIOS screen heavy with customised images that looks all 3li7e and stuff for the gamer crowd. My PC has one such thing, and it's garbage. I managed to find out how to put it into some sort of 'information' mode with less graphics and more info... but isn't a BIOS screen supposed to be a wholly info thing anyway?
That has absolutely nothing to do with Secure Boot. If anything, what you're talking about has more to do with EFI
Not even EFI, just regular BIOS...
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#55What are the benefits of Secure Boot?
It prevents you from using Windows Loader to pirate Windows. (That's a benefit... to Microsoft.)
They're absolutely out of their fucking minds if they think this is a good idea. People are already slowly oozing towards better operating systems, and if they actually manage to remove the possibility to run their shitty OS without any cost, they're totally screwed.
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#56Someone should probably update this article with the above finding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_of_Microsoft_Windows
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's saying that the entire USB system won't be initialized, which means no keyboards that use USB.
Is it even that common to find hardware that will take a non-USB keyboard anymore? I've got some, but it's old .
Any/all motherboards serious about gaming with have a PS/2 port due to N-key rollover and interrupt-speed typing.
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#58How can Microsoft prove that you agreed to the EULA? AFAIK, they don't upload your acceptance to a server (accepting works without a network connection). So once you wipe the system and install another OS, you've also eliminated any evidence that you accepted the EULA, so how could Microsoft start a legal action against without evidence that you accepted the EULA?
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It prevents you from using Windows Loader to pirate Windows. (That's a benefit... to Microsoft.)
They're absolutely out of their fucking minds if they think this is a good idea. People are already slowly oozing towards better operating systems, and if they actually manage to remove the possibility to run their shitty OS without any cost, they're totally screwed.
Shitty OS? This is not OS X we are talking about!
Re: Secure Boot isn't the only problem facing Linux on Windows 8 hardware
#60What are the benefits of Secure Boot?
Secure Boot is ostensibly a security feature, making it impossible to load kernel-level code that hasn't been signed by an authority recognized by the device's hardware. The idea is that this makes it harder for nefarious actors to do nefarious things to your system, because they'll be blocked from the most basic access to the system hardware and be forced through normal OS security channels. In practice, of course,…
Secure Boot isn't about lock-in, at least not on PCs. To qualify for the Windows Logo program, it must be possible to disable Secure Boot.