
A Developing UEFI Secureboot Situation - bkerensa
http://benjaminkerensa.com/2012/06/20/uefi-secureboot-situation
======
mtgx
Good for Canonical. I'd hate to see a future where an OS has to be pre-
approved by Microsoft for running on a machine that comes with Windows.

~~~
Spearchucker
Agreed. Imagine needing OS pre-approval from Google on a machine that comes
with ChromeOS... or wait, by Apple on a machine that comes with OSX.

That's tongue-in-cheek.

And yes, I know Microsoft has the desktop market cornered. However that market
is no longer what it was, and there is little (other than the economics of
adoption) stopping any OS vendor from doing the same.

~~~
mtgx
At least there are some encouraging trends with some manufacturers who are
starting to be more interested in deploying laptops with Linux/Ubuntu:

[http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Dell-to-bring-
Ubuntu-...](http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Dell-to-bring-Ubuntu-
laptops-to-850-retail-stores-in-India-1620657.html)

As Microsoft start selling hardware and compete with their own partners
without even telling them, this trend will probably accelerate:

[http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/19/us-microsoft-
windo...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/19/us-microsoft-windows-
tablets-asia-idUSBRE85I1NL20120619)

------
thristian
mjg59, the Fedora employee whose posts about UEFI have earned a lot of HN
karma, has posted about why Fedora considered and rejected the system Ubuntu
is putting in place:

<http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/13713.html>

~~~
MyHooves
And the response from Mark Shuttleworth is in the post. Fedora is trying to
justify why they were quick to pay for a signed bootloader but its not all
adding up like everyone wants.

