I think people are forgetting that ARM is an important platform also. It will become more important as time goes on. If there is a big push to tablet or netbook computers towards ARM, then this is a huge problem. ARM will not allow the ability to disable or re-provision keys like the x86 counterparts. Rather than wasting time supporting it we should be finding an alternative that does not mean one central authority (namely Verisign - a USA company) controls all of our systems, no matter what the platform. We would all rather not have ARM based desktops, servers, or tablets having the same "root", "unlock bootloader" and "jailbreaking" mentality applied that the current generation of mobile phones have.
Red hat should put putting its weight behind coreboot, and investing in having systems that COME with Fedora pre-installed. Stop wasting time in the replacing the Windows market, this is something that is fairly non-existent. Even my friends, I tell them about linux, and they are very skillful with computers but have no intention to use anything that is not pre-installed on their system.
Many of os would rather go back to the 90s than bow down to Microsoft signing requests. If we cannot install Linux on our systems then we have something to fight about and something to guide us. This is similar to the WINE philosophy, if WINE for Linux did not exist then many people would be forced to make more native applications for Linux rather than assuming "oh well it works in WINE therefore we do not need to bother".
This is going down the route of SSL again, a flawed system where by which companies are allowed to make money out of pointless certificate signings, and then do not even protect their certificates well enough.
HI
Is there a possibility to build with open hw an complete desktop system, that using coreboot?
If the community can provide an fairly strong platform that can be cheaply produced as SOC, and SBC - no one can stand against us...
Zoltan
2012/6/3 x414e54 x414e54@linux.com:
I think people are forgetting that ARM is an important platform also. It will become more important as time goes on. If there is a big push to tablet or netbook computers towards ARM, then this is a huge problem. ARM will not allow the ability to disable or re-provision keys like the x86 counterparts. Rather than wasting time supporting it we should be finding an alternative that does not mean one central authority (namely Verisign - a USA company) controls all of our systems, no matter what the platform. We would all rather not have ARM based desktops, servers, or tablets having the same "root", "unlock bootloader" and "jailbreaking" mentality applied that the current generation of mobile phones have.
Red hat should put putting its weight behind coreboot, and investing in having systems that COME with Fedora pre-installed. Stop wasting time in the replacing the Windows market, this is something that is fairly non-existent. Even my friends, I tell them about linux, and they are very skillful with computers but have no intention to use anything that is not pre-installed on their system.
Many of os would rather go back to the 90s than bow down to Microsoft signing requests. If we cannot install Linux on our systems then we have something to fight about and something to guide us. This is similar to the WINE philosophy, if WINE for Linux did not exist then many people would be forced to make more native applications for Linux rather than assuming "oh well it works in WINE therefore we do not need to bother".
This is going down the route of SSL again, a flawed system where by which companies are allowed to make money out of pointless certificate signings, and then do not even protect their certificates well enough.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 06/03/2012 12:03 PM, x414e54 wrote:
Even my friends, I tell them about linux, and they are very skillful with computers but have no intention to use anything that is not pre-installed on their system.
Yes. I tell friends that it's free and they're interested, but afraid to try it because they "need" Windows programs. I tell them that there are Linux equivalents that can read/edit/write files that the Windows programs understand and they're more interested. They ask about anti-virus and I explain that the malware that's currently out there in the wild bounces when it hits Linux and they're impressed. But they don't change, they don't try it, they don't even burn and try a LiveCD to see what it's like. They just can't imagine freeing themselves of Windows.
I do have two friends who use Linux, as a secondary OS, but they're geeks, and they're doing it so that they can support it. Several years ago, my sister (NOT a geek!) tried a LiveCD of Ubuntu. After only five minutes, she called out, "Joe, I *WANT* this!" We set her up with a dual boot system, and within a week, she'd stopped booting into Windows. The moral of this (if there is one) is don't tell them about Linux, give them a chance to try it for themselves.
On 06/03/2012 12:20 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 06/03/2012 12:03 PM, x414e54 wrote:
Even my friends, I tell them about linux, and they are very skillful with computers but have no intention to use anything that is not pre-installed on their system.
Yes. I tell friends that it's free and they're interested, but afraid to try it because they "need" Windows programs. I tell them that there are Linux equivalents that can read/edit/write files that the Windows programs understand and they're more interested. They ask about anti-virus and I explain that the malware that's currently out there in the wild bounces when it hits Linux and they're impressed. But they don't change, they don't try it, they don't even burn and try a LiveCD to see what it's like. They just can't imagine freeing themselves of Windows.
That's just it - 95% of computer users use windows. I seriously doubt they give a hoot if open source users end up being left out in the cold. 3rd party developers of SW (and freeware), be it for *nix* or for windows, will have to also shell bucks to MS to sign their blobs?? Someone's gain is a great loss to many.
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 20:03 +0100, x414e54 wrote:
Stop wasting time in the replacing the Windows market
I tend to agree. It's quite rare that something different can actually be a replacement, only an alternative. Sometimes an alternative is better, sometimes not. There are usually drawbacks in using an alternative, often they're serious enough to override any perceived advantages. Probably three-quarters of the battle is convincing someone that an alternative would be better (if it is), the rest then actually doing it.
Personally, I'd like to see the end of the current motherboard technology, that's burdened with some ancient legacy it needs to keep on supporting. If we can avoid having to do all sorts of hacks to make it boot, and work, that would be a good thing. If we could avoid having to rely on closed-source vendor drivers, that would be a good thing. If we could avoid having to fiddle with a gazillion unexplained BIOS settings to try and make a system work, that would be a good thing. On the converse, being able to get into a BIOS when you need to, without having to work out how to access a BIOS that doesn't accept keyboard over USB during pre-boot, that would be a good thing, too (this isn't just limited to older hardware, either). And it'd be nice to get back to hardware that doesn't need failure-prone forced cooling.
Various motherboard alternatives have been touted about, ones with open-source BIOS, ones with a completely different design than the usual Intel-CPU types. Sometimes they appear to be just concept, or developer boards, sometimes they're for a special purpose. And, perhaps, it's time to encourage wider take-up of such boards, rather than trying to use a board that has been designed for Windows. Let's face it, most of them are only designed for Windows.
That's just it - 95% of computer users use windows.
Depends on your definition of a) "use" and b) "computer"
You might want to compare the size of the Android market and the Windows market (and the Android market itself has lots of lock down problems)
Alan
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 14:58 -0700, JD wrote:
On 06/03/2012 12:20 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 06/03/2012 12:03 PM, x414e54 wrote:
Even my friends, I tell them about linux, and they are very skillful with computers but have no intention to use anything that is not pre-installed on their system.
Yes. I tell friends that it's free and they're interested, but afraid to try it because they "need" Windows programs. I tell them that there are Linux equivalents that can read/edit/write files that the Windows programs understand and they're more interested. They ask about anti-virus and I explain that the malware that's currently out there in the wild bounces when it hits Linux and they're impressed. But they don't change, they don't try it, they don't even burn and try a LiveCD to see what it's like. They just can't imagine freeing themselves of Windows.
That's just it - 95% of computer users use windows. I seriously doubt they give a hoot if open source users end up being left out in the cold. 3rd party developers of SW (and freeware), be it for *nix* or for windows, will have to also shell bucks to MS to sign their blobs?? Someone's gain is a great loss to many.
This may have been covered but if you are among the majority (I would guess) that do not have UEFI machines the question is kind of moot is it not? I am assuming that Fedora 18 will run on these machines without the UEFI boot firmware. Am I correct?
On 06/04/2012 01:44 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
This may have been covered but if you are among the majority (I would guess) that do not have UEFI machines the question is kind of moot is it not? I am assuming that Fedora 18 will run on these machines without the UEFI boot firmware. Am I correct?
Well, how fast will the mobo manufacturers and bios manufacturers integrate UEFI and mass produce them for the market? I am just guessing that manufacturers may balk and complain for a while.
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:48:44 -0700 JD jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/04/2012 01:44 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
This may have been covered but if you are among the majority (I would guess) that do not have UEFI machines the question is kind of moot is it not? I am assuming that Fedora 18 will run on these machines without the UEFI boot firmware. Am I correct?
Yes, on non UEFI machines, Fedora will continue to run as it always has. Even on UEFI machines, with secure boot disabled, it will run as it always has.
Well, how fast will the mobo manufacturers and bios manufacturers integrate UEFI and mass produce them for the market? I am just guessing that manufacturers may balk and complain for a while.
Any of them that wish to have a "Windows 8 Client ready" sticker will do so. I suppose each will weigh the costs of complying with those rules vs the cost of someone not buying their hardware because it doesn't have the sticker.
kevin
On 2012/06/04 14:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:48:44 -0700 JDjd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/04/2012 01:44 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
This may have been covered but if you are among the majority (I would guess) that do not have UEFI machines the question is kind of moot is it not? I am assuming that Fedora 18 will run on these machines without the UEFI boot firmware. Am I correct?
Yes, on non UEFI machines, Fedora will continue to run as it always has. Even on UEFI machines, with secure boot disabled, it will run as it always has.
Well, how fast will the mobo manufacturers and bios manufacturers integrate UEFI and mass produce them for the market? I am just guessing that manufacturers may balk and complain for a while.
Any of them that wish to have a "Windows 8 Client ready" sticker will do so. I suppose each will weigh the costs of complying with those rules vs the cost of someone not buying their hardware because it doesn't have the sticker.
kevin
Winderful Wibble Motherboard with locked down UEFI: R2D2 $127.95 Wunderful Wibble Motherboard with unlockable UEFI: R2D2-U $127.95 Wunderful Wibble Motherboard with UEFI: R2D2-N $99.95
With a simple BIOS transplant the board can move between configurations. The BIOS transplant is made at the time of manufacture. Now, the question remains, will system manufacturers take adequate advantage of this?
{^_^}
Winderful Wibble Motherboard with locked down UEFI: R2D2 $127.95 Wunderful Wibble Motherboard with unlockable UEFI: R2D2-U $127.95 Wunderful Wibble Motherboard with UEFI: R2D2-N $99.95
With a simple BIOS transplant the board can move between configurations. The BIOS transplant is made at the time of manufacture. Now, the question remains, will system manufacturers take adequate advantage of this?
In other markets it looks like this
Locked down board $127.95 "Developer" edition $2000.00
-
Aaron Konstam -
Alan Cox -
JD -
jdow -
Joe Zeff -
Kevin Fenzi -
Tim -
x414e54 -
Zoltan Hoppar