[libreoffice-marketing] MS plans to force OEMs to add boot feature that blocks use of Linux and free software.

users
#1

Please read the linked article. [below]

If Microsoft gets away with this, then no computer that has a Windows 8
logo on it will not be able to boot from free OSs like Linux. This will be
part of the BIOS. You might not be able to run free software like
LibreOffice, if it goes to the extreme end.

I should think that is illegal under competition law.

To me, if MS get away with forcing OEMs to make it so their systems cannot

run Linux, then it is another anti-trust violation for MS. Billy boy is
going back to court about unfair practices from the 90's, so if people do
not step up now to convince OEMs that we will not buy their products if they
implement the free OS and software blocker at the BOOT LEVEL, then we cannot
buy any new computers for Linux.

We can buy new computers, just not those that come with Windows. Might even
be an advantage since there will be a niche market in supplying hardware
that is not restricted in that way. I might start a new business :slight_smile:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-

#2

Please read the linked article. [below]

If Microsoft gets away with this, then no computer that has a Windows 8
logo on it will not be able to boot from free OSs like Linux. This will be
part of the BIOS. You might not be able to run free software like
LibreOffice, if it goes to the extreme end.

I should think that is illegal under competition law.

To me, if MS get away with forcing OEMs to make it so their systems cannot

run Linux, then it is another anti-trust violation for MS. Billy boy is
going back to court about unfair practices from the 90's, so if people do
not step up now to convince OEMs that we will not buy their products if they
implement the free OS and software blocker at the BOOT LEVEL, then we cannot
buy any new computers for Linux.

We can buy new computers, just not those that come with Windows. Might even
be an advantage since there will be a niche market in supplying hardware
that is not restricted in that way. I might start a new business :slight_smile:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-

Above link is broken, but the problem is that, how many OEM's will deem it profitable to manufacture 2 different versions of their systems. That also eliminates dual booting M$ and OpenSource OSes on the same PC. This will also impact the MoBos manufacturers as they already make 2 versions of their product to support Intel and AMD now it'll have to be 4 versions. I don't think that'll happen. It's more likely, if M$ gets their way, one will have to some how hack the boards which will more than likely nullify any warranties which will then send OpenSource back to just hobbyists and such and non acceptance by others.

#3

This is very serious. This can't be happening. What can be done to prevent this attack on peoples right of freedom - freedom to choose a tool of choice. This is wrong

#4

Come on people, please do a little research before spreading FUD...

This is an OPTION in the BIOS, one that can be TURNED OFF.

Any systems manufacturer that disallowed the ability to turn it off would be committing commercial suicide imnsho...

Yes, there is some *potential* for this becoming a problem in the dustant future, but not in the next 5 or 10 years...

#5

My comments were based on articles written when this first hit. At that time M$ was pushing for no option available to disable this function and their explanation was that it would allow "breaking" of their system. The option that you mention was being discussed as a possible option for mfgs, but again M$ was fighting that at the time. Also note that I had stated that "if M$ gets their way" which I personally don't think would be possible, but then we never usually see what goes on behind closed doors.

We have seen that in the past M$ used pressure tactics to prevent mfgs from supporting "other OSes". Although M$ of today is much weaker there has been recent developments that could be interpreted that they maybe up to some of their old tricks with a slightly different twist to them. That's all I was trying to say.

#6

My comments were based on articles written when this first hit. At that
time M$ was pushing for no option available to disable this function and
their explanation was that it would allow "breaking" of their system.

Please post a verifiable source for this comment. Nothing I have read supports this claim... although I read a lot of comments talking about 'possibilities', etc...

This just doesn't fly though, if you think about it... as I said, any vendor who manufactured such motherboards would be shooting themselves in the head.

The option that you mention was being discussed as a possible option for
mfgs, but again M$ was fighting that at the time.

again, I have read *nothing* that supports this claim that MS wanted to prevent the ability for the user to disable the option in the BIOS.

#7

Come on people, please do a little research before spreading FUD...

This is an OPTION in the BIOS, one that can be TURNED OFF.

Any systems manufacturer that disallowed the ability to turn it off would be committing commercial suicide imnsho...

Who cares about us lowly 1% of the market place? So they piss off 1% by not having that option to disable it. Loosing their share of that 1% of the market is not suicide.

#8

>
>> Please read the linked article. [below]
>>
>> If Microsoft gets away with this, then no computer that has a Windows 8
>> logo on it will not be able to boot from free OSs like Linux. This will be
>> part of the BIOS. You might not be able to run free software like
>> LibreOffice, if it goes to the extreme end.
>>
> I should think that is illegal under competition law.
>
> To me, if MS get away with forcing OEMs to make it so their systems cannot
>> run Linux, then it is another anti-trust violation for MS. Billy boy is
>> going back to court about unfair practices from the 90's, so if people do
>> not step up now to convince OEMs that we will not buy their products if they
>> implement the free OS and software blocker at the BOOT LEVEL, then we cannot
>> buy any new computers for Linux.
>>
> We can buy new computers, just not those that come with Windows. Might even
> be an advantage since there will be a niche market in supplying hardware
> that is not restricted in that way. I might start a new business :slight_smile:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-
Above link is broken, but the problem is that, how many OEM's will deem
it profitable to manufacture 2 different versions of their systems. That
also eliminates dual booting M$ and OpenSource OSes on the same PC. This
will also impact the MoBos manufacturers as they already make 2 versions
of their product to support Intel and AMD now it'll have to be 4
versions. I don't think that'll happen. It's more likely, if M$ gets
their way, one will have to some how hack the boards which will more
than likely nullify any warranties which will then send OpenSource back
to just hobbyists and such and non acceptance by others.

I would expect some government would sue under anti-trust laws at least
in Europe. Also, not discussed so far is upgrading with the new
motherboards to Windows 9 at a later date.

#9

Scott

My comments were based on articles written when this first hit. At that
time M$ was pushing for no option available to disable this function and
their explanation was that it would allow "breaking" of their system.
The option that you mention was being discussed as a possible option for
mfgs, but again M$ was fighting that at the time. Also note that I had
stated that "if M$ gets their way" which I personally don't think would
be possible, but then we never usually see what goes on behind closed doors.

We have seen that in the past M$ used pressure tactics to prevent mfgs
from supporting "other OSes". Although M$ of today is much weaker there
has been recent developments that could be interpreted that they maybe
up to some of their old tricks with a slightly different twist to them.
That's all I was trying to say.

You would not be accusing MS of trying to lock everyone out of the OS.
Actually they may force their own death because people using other
devices and the cloud could be much less dependent on MS products than
now. I would hope that some European at least and preferably the US
government threatens serious lawsuits with the possibility of real jail
time.

#10

Have any of you run across this?
http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf
I ran across this about a year and a half ago. It is an excellent documentation put together for the European Union. I started to boycott Microsoft products about 6 years ago. Ronald Reagan said the Soviet Union was the evil empire. I've heard it said that Microsoft is the evil empire of the corporate world.

Don

#11

I suspect the workarounds will include capturing all the needed keys,
reflashing the bios/uefi chip, and installing what you want. It is a PITA,
but not insurmountable. It will probably spur more open hardware, to the
detriment of those determined to lock down the system.

MS aside, uefi is a good idea. This particular implementation is not.

Please read the linked article. [below]

If Microsoft get...

I should think that is illegal under competition law.

To me, if MS get away with forcing OEMs to make it so their systems cannot

run Linux, then it is ...

We can buy new computers, just not those that come with Windows. Might even
be an advantage since there will be a niche market in supplying hardware
that is not restricted in that way. I might start a new business :slight_smile:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-

foundation-urges-oems-to-say-**no-to-mandatory-windows-8-**
uefi-cage/9770?alertspromo=&**tag=nl.rSINGLE<

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-foundation-urges-oems-to-say-no-to-mandatory-windows-8-uefi-cage/9770?alertspromo=&tag=nl.rSINGLE

<
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-
foundation-urges-oems-to-say-**no-to-mandatory-windows-8-**
uefi-cage/9770?alertspromo=&**tag=nl.rSINGLE<

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/free-software-foundation-urges-oems-to-say-no-to-mandatory-windows-8-uefi-cage/9770?alertspromo=&tag=nl.rSINGLE

>

Free Software Foundation urges OEMs to say no to mandatory Windows 8 UEFI
cage

By Stev...
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@global.**
libreoffice.org <marketing%2Bhelp@global.libreoffice.org>
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
unsubscribe/<

http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/>

Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/**
Netiquette <http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette>
List archive: http://listarchives.**libreoffice.org/global/**marketing/<

http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/>

#12

I've heard it said that Microsoft is the evil
empire of the corporate world.

Only currently. Before them it was IBM.
It seems whenever any company gets very big the obvious tactic becomes
"bend/break any rules required to increase income".

Mark Stanton
One small step for mankind...

#13

What about Apple computers?

Are they not locked down in this way?

#14

Hi :slight_smile:
Please can we try to tone-down this thread? This List should be supporting people that use LO on Windows (amongst other platforms). The various swear-words and stuff seem a little intimidating and may discourage people from daring to ask for help here.

When people ask for help it is often useful to know which platform they are using and we don't want people to be afraid of admitting using Windows since that is our largest target market. Also it's not very kind or polite and i think we need to be both on this list.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#15

Hi :slight_smile:
It's less of an issue with Apple as it's already been subverted and people are quite happily installing dual-boots of other OSes alongside theirs.

Often these things are scarier as a prospect than they turn out to be if/when it becomes reality. Lets hope MS implement it as successfully as they implement any security feature. If they do then it might become even easier to install dual-boots!
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#16

Your 1% is a false assumption, but this ignores the FACT that what you were ranting about was simply not true... MS has NEVER pushed for this to be something that cannot be disabled.

If you disagree, prove it... or stop spreading FUD.

#17

There are lots of evil corporations - Monsanto, pretty much every Pharmaceutical Company out there, most every Government Agency (they are essentially Corporations too), etc etc...

#18

> I've heard it said that Microsoft is the evil
> empire of the corporate world.

Only currently. Before them it was IBM.
It seems whenever any company gets very big the obvious tactic becomes
"bend/break any rules required to increase income".

And part of the reason behind this thread is the incompetence of IBM
when they released the original PC. Apparently it did occur to them
until near release that any computer needs an OS. They did not have time
to develop their own so what was used was primitive OS found by MS. Many
of the problems in Windows are actually direct descendents of design
choices in DOS. Backward compatibility meant that bad original design
choices have lingering effects even now.

Some remember the days of IBM and the seven little dwarves.

#19

Have any of you run across this?
http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf
I ran across this about a year and a half ago. It is an excellent documentation put together for the European Union. I started to boycott Microsoft products about 6 years ago. Ronald Reagan said the Soviet Union was the evil empire. I've heard it said that Microsoft is the evil empire of the corporate world.

Don

One thing missing was the near death of Citrix at the hands of Microsoft.