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

91–100 of 133 posts

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#91

Post by dangrossman »

tikhonj wrote: post #81
cooldeal wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about you try iOS where you can't even install a competing browser, forget about one being bundled. Why is that legal? Because Windows was deemed a monopoly in the late 1990s. Since Win32 programs won't even run on ARM tablets, I fail to see how what you point out is relevant at all. >Also, what you're suggesting with "The OEM can have two versions of every tablet/phone" places the costs on the OEM, where margins…

Just because Apple is more evil than Microsoft does not me we should give Microsoft a free pass. This is exactly the sort of detrimental behavior everybody except Apple/Microsoft would be better off without.

There are two different "we"s here. There's "we" as in constituents of a government this article wants to regulate this activity, then there's "we" as in potential consumers of these products. I'm merely arguing that, unlike this blog/article/whatever, we should not be pushing government to deny Microsoft's right to enter into agreements with manufacturers to make secure boot a requirement for certain Windows-certified devices. The other "we" can make moral judgements of the practice, I have no problem with that.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#92

Post by recoiledsnake »

eropple wrote: post #85
cooldeal wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The ability to run x86 apps is irrelevant It is very relevant. Can you tell why the EU requires Windows to display a browser selection box on first boot to Europeans, but is okay with iOS totally BANNING the use of non-Safari browser engines? >Full-fledged Linux desktop distributions have been available for ARM desktops, laptops, nettops, etc. for a long time. Microsoft is entering this existing market with a produc…

> is okay with iOS totally BANNING the use of non-Safari browser engines? http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/opera-mini-web-browser/id3637...

Sorry, that's not a browser, it can't even run Javascript. It is basically a web proxy.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mini Unlike ordinary web browsers, Opera Mini fetches all content through a proxy server that reformats web pages into a format more suitable for small screens.[32] A page is compressed, then delivered to the phone in a markup language called OBML (Opera Binary Markup Language).

Browsers like Firefox and Opera Mobile are explicity banned by Apple.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#93

Post by mattgreenrocks »

burgerbrain wrote: post #22
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?

"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?" This is almost the worst part of it for me. Those people get to play "the voice of reason" at the time, but they don't receive any of the deserved ridicule when their fantasy world doesn't pan out.

It's almost as if being Right On The Internet doesn't mean anything in the real world!

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#94

Post by recoiledsnake »

burgerbrain wrote: post #80
recoiledsnake wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

"make Linux run" You mean: "not prevent Linux from running" But hey, to address what seems to be your point... Lets have a reality check. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. So quick to forget...

Microsoft is nowhere close to being a monopoly on ARM tablets. x86 programs(that make MS dominant on PCs) won't even run on Windows 8 ARM tablets. You seem to have misspelled Apple.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#96

Post by nl »

cooldeal wrote: post #82
nitrogen wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARM laptops and netbooks and PCs won't run x86 apps, so I fail to see how MS's penetration will allow them to block out competing operating systems. The ability to run x86 apps is irrelevant. Full-fledged Linux desktop distributions have been available for ARM desktops, laptops, nettops, etc. for a long time. Microsoft is entering this existing market with a product that anticompetitively excludes Linux from the mark…

>The ability to run x86 apps is irrelevant It is very relevant. Can you tell why the EU requires Windows to display a browser selection box on first boot to Europeans, but is okay with iOS totally BANNING the use of non-Safari browser engines? >Full-fledged Linux desktop distributions have been available for ARM desktops, laptops, nettops, etc. for a long time. Microsoft is entering this existing market with a produc…

Why is it not anti-competitive for Apple to ship their hardware with a completely locked bootloader?

Because there is a large market for non-iOS based phones.

The market for non-Windows based laptops is much, much smaller (basically OS X).

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#97

Post by nl »

cooldeal wrote: post #68
sounds wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@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…

How about you try iOS where you can't even install a competing browser, forget about one being bundled. Why is that legal? Because Windows was deemed a monopoly in the late 1990s. Since Win32 programs won't even run on ARM tablets, I fail to see how what you point out is relevant at all. >Also, what you're suggesting with "The OEM can have two versions of every tablet/phone" places the costs on the OEM, where margins…

Since Win32 programs won't even run on ARM tablets

Actually, they will if they are recompiled to target WindowsARM: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8254846/does-windows-8-ar...

Also, .NET applications will run on ARM.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#98

Post by recoiledsnake »

nl wrote: post #96
cooldeal wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The ability to run x86 apps is irrelevant It is very relevant. Can you tell why the EU requires Windows to display a browser selection box on first boot to Europeans, but is okay with iOS totally BANNING the use of non-Safari browser engines? >Full-fledged Linux desktop distributions have been available for ARM desktops, laptops, nettops, etc. for a long time. Microsoft is entering this existing market with a produc…

Why is it not anti-competitive for Apple to ship their hardware with a completely locked bootloader? Because there is a large market for non-iOS based phones. The market for non-Windows based laptops is much, much smaller (basically OS X).

>Because there is a large market for non-iOS based phones

What about tablets?

>The market for non-Windows based laptops is much, much smaller (basically OS X).

ARM laptops are way different. For starters, they wont run any programs that run on other laptops.

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#99

Post by recoiledsnake »

melling wrote: post #86
cooldeal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It shouldn't be a PC vs Mac world today. I thought we were living in a post-PC world? Restricting Microsoft here would unfairly advantage Apple's continuing monopoly of tablets.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on tablets and Google doesn't have a monopoly on search, but people always throw them out as such. Microsoft, however, has the monopolies (plural). Btw, here are the numbers to prove that the iPad is not a monopoly. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/dec/25/ipad-tablet... Wouldn't it be great if Windows only had a 65%-70% market share?

The install base is what matters, not sales numbers for a short time period.

>Google doesn't have a monopoly on search,

Maybe you would like to look at a few real world numbers like these ones:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3458947

Re: Microsoft confirms UEFI fears, locks down ARM devices

#100

Post by nl »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #98
nl wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it not anti-competitive for Apple to ship their hardware with a completely locked bootloader? Because there is a large market for non-iOS based phones. The market for non-Windows based laptops is much, much smaller (basically OS X).

>Because there is a large market for non-iOS based phones What about tablets? >The market for non-Windows based laptops is much, much smaller (basically OS X). ARM laptops are way different. For starters, they wont run any programs that run on other laptops.

What about tablets?

Q4 2011 tablet numbers: 11.1m iPad/6m Android (including Kindle Fire and Nook)[1]

ARM laptops are way different. For starters, they wont run any programs that run on other laptops.

.NET programs will run fine. Win32 programs can be recompiles with a WinARM target (the Win32 APIs still exist in ARM Windows[2])

[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/dec/25/ipad-tablet...

[2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8254846/does-windows-8-ar...

Post reply on HN