Comment on [deleted]
krigo666@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I have predicted a few years ago that the “PC”, ie x86 IBM PC compatible computers, will rift into diferent devices, some running locked Windows, some running other OS like Linux-based ones, BSD, etc that value freedom amd openness. The issue is that it is Microsoft who designed and controls Secure Boot. And they will close more and more.
After 30+ years of Microshaft shenanigans, I just don’t trust them and never will.
different devices, some running locked Windows
That unforgettable moment, when you stand before that machine where you should be able to self-manage that value-card for some prepaid money for some special purpose, and that machine shows you nothing but a good old bluescreen, and it is a bluescreen from a 15 year old Windows…
Microsoft is 50 years old.
Yeah, I said 30+ as in 37 or so I’ve been using their products since I got my first PC, a dual fdd Olivetti PC1.
And often acts like a bunch of 3-year-olds.
NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
I just recently looked into Secure Boot and from my understanding it’s not a Microsoft lock-in. Many Linux distributions are signed with keys that are loaded by default, and advanced users can even add custom signatures to their computer so Secure Boot would accept them. The original fear around Secure Boot was legitimate, but by now we know the worst outcome of it didn’t come to pass.
That said, I did disable it on my new PC because I think the chance of it causing issues is greater than the chance it will actually protect me from bootloader malware, and I’m willing to accept that risk and responsibility.
krigo666@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Lenovo “secured-core” PCs won’t boot Linux out-of-the-box