# Windows 8 OEM specs may block Linux booting



## Garbage (Sep 21, 2011)

> *Windows 8 OEM specs may block Linux booting*
> New secure boot process leaves unsigned Linux out in the cold
> 
> September 20, 2011, 9:45 PM —
> ...



Source - Windows 8 OEM specs may block Linux booting | ITworld


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 21, 2011)

Don't tell people will have to "jailbreak" (?) the so called "secure (?) booting" to install a damn distro in their machines... :/

Nothing to worry about though, would be cracked in a matter of days regardless of anything.

Good article covering "secure boot"
UEFI and "secure boot" [LWN.net]


----------



## abhijangda (Sep 21, 2011)

once again a poor step by Microsoft.


----------



## Sarath (Sep 21, 2011)

Aren't they likely to be slapped with Anti-competitive penalty for this again?


----------



## Vyom (Sep 21, 2011)

Really, if this news is not a hoax, I would pity Microsoft! 

You know what I like about Google? They let users choose between their and other's product.
Rather they make their product so good, that people automatically gets attracted to it.

Eg: When I install Chrome, it asks me to keep Google as their default search, rather than setting it by default!

It would really be a pity on M$ if this were to be true!


----------



## doomgiver (Sep 21, 2011)

vineet369 said:


> Really, if this news is not a hoax, I would pity Microsoft!
> 
> You know what I like about Google? They let users choose between their and other's product.
> Rather they make their product so good, that people automatically gets attracted to it.
> ...


IE latches on to your pc like a rabid leech and forces you to burn the afflicted pc to get rid of it.

anyway, lfc is right, it WILL be broken within days.
lets all learn low-level programming, so that we can help too


----------



## meetdilip (Sep 21, 2011)

Don't worry, people will find some way out. 

I wonder if it is true, didn't see in any of the major news portals.



Sarath said:


> Aren't they likely to be slapped with Anti-competitive penalty for this again?



Thinking the same.


----------



## vaithy (Sep 21, 2011)

Well what I am thinking is, M$ is trying killing its Golden Goose..Enterprises which are relying on windows Xp and redhat linux may not upgraded, it 'll be a hard sell on the server side..
Hardware vendors may not agree to block additional revenues on non windows OS..chinese hardware vendors may sell millions without the features of UEFI, undercutting the likes of Dell,HP and acer etc.,
It is very ironic that the future of software freedom is depending on the likes of Iron curtain Nation's whim and fancies..


----------



## Extreme Gamer (Sep 21, 2011)

I am sounding like a pervert, but:



Spoiler



Microshaft just proved their name.



Translation:

They just admitted that they cant compete with Linux 

If you want to know the relevance of the bit in the spoiler tags, PM me. This thread is an inappropriate place both in topic and language(meanings) to explain.
Sorry mods, I do not have finer and less offensive terms for the bit in spoiler tags.


----------



## Ishu Gupta (Sep 21, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:


> If you want to know the relevance of the bit in the spoiler tags, PM me.


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 21, 2011)

Let us first get the clear picture. There is NO Official statement yet from Microsoft about any Hardware Lock for other platforms.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 21, 2011)

Tech&ME said:


> Let us first get the clear picture. There is NO Official statement yet from Microsoft about any Hardware Lock for other platforms.



*video.ch9.ms/build/2011/slides/HW-457T_van_der_Hoeven.pptx


----------



## infra_red_dude (Sep 22, 2011)

I don't see why this could be a big issue. Most Linux users build their own systems, which means all they will lack is a Windows 8 sticker and will not be mandated to have the secure boot enabled.

Also, most of the enterprise machines have 1 OS per system. I'm yet to see a dual-boot machine used for development in any company, unless of course it is a test bed system in some lab.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 22, 2011)

infra_red_dude said:


> I don't see why this could be a big issue. Most Linux users build their own systems, which means all they will lack is a Windows 8 sticker and will not be mandated to have the secure boot enabled.


Laptops. A voided warranty would hurt here...

Secondly, Ubuntu among few others do target the masses, and certainly will be affected badly.

I still don't see this going through but whatever...


----------



## abhijangda (Sep 22, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:


> I am sounding like a pervert, but:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



absolutely right dude!!
They just cant compete with OSS.


----------



## baccilus (Sep 22, 2011)

How can this even be legal. I just can't understand just how this can be allowed. You know what will be the biggest effect of this:
Linux will have fewer newer users. Everyone I have introduced to linux has begun by dual booting. That will end. Moreover as soon as Windows 8 releases we will only see preloaded laptops in the market like it is happening now. A normal guy can hardly buy a well specced laptop that doesn't come preloaded with Windows 7 since the preloaded are the ones which a more available.


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 22, 2011)

^^
Microsoft seems to be moving toward the APPLE way of doing things now. 

We will soon see Microsoft's own brand of Desktop Computer ( like iMac's ).... mPC !!!


----------



## cute.bandar (Sep 22, 2011)

Does this mean we won't be able to use bootable disks like hirens ?


----------



## baccilus (Sep 22, 2011)

I hope Windows 8 is a bigger failure than Vista.


----------



## vaithy (Sep 23, 2011)

Here how it is goes,





> A unrewriteable loader checks the UEFI image, confirms it is unmodified. Starts UEFI.
> UEFI checks the bootloader, confirms it is unmodified. Starts the bootloader.
> Bootloader checks the kernel and system files, confirms they are unmodified. Starts the kernel.
> Kernel boot process confirms an integrity checker is unmodified, which then scans the entire OS to ensure the state of the system and all drivers.
> ...


Leave out installing Linux,
so if I am installing some video cards,than rebooted .. the system may hang or break..because the integrity of the system failed (a la vista ?) 
when the system come with single partition of 500GB hard disk, later I make three partition for my use with third party partition manager, than again rebooted the syste may refuse to boot or reset old system ..
third party antivirus system usually modified the windows firewall sytem, than reboot, and found the system' banal'
very interesting idea..
after windows-7 I am , like others, eagerly waiting for the famous. BSOD wall paper, it seem, m$ s obliging in this release..

(I have already installed windows developers preview, and it is a nice Wall paper OS, and their titles are 'elephant' sized icons.  beneficial to peoples who have vision ailments..looking forward to complete OS)


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

Everyone wants to break apart their competitors. What Microsoft is trying to do is not NEW. Many companies like APPLE has already done so from the beginning itself.

Apple Mac OS is developed on Unix and Linux is also developed based on Unix, yet both are very different and you cannot install Linux apps directly in Mac.

Both use a very different kernel to boot. ( Mac = very restrictive )

So, if MS is trying to do anything similar to what Apple did decades ago, then this is not new.

And I feel Microsoft has its own justification for doing so. ( Fighting Piracy issue could be one of them )


----------



## vaithy (Sep 23, 2011)

Tech&ME said:


> Everyone wants to break apart their competitors. What Microsoft is trying to do is not NEW. Many companies like APPLE has already done so from the beginning itself.
> 
> Apple Mac OS is developed on Unix and Linux is also developed based on Unix, yet both are very different and you cannot install Linux apps directly in Mac.
> 
> ...



this is going to comparing it apples with oranges..apple is the sole manufacturer of Hardware along with the OS installed.. so no question of other OS..so there is no monopoly there..But Ms is OS vendor, and its  hardware is manufactured by its partners (OEM)No fault there.. But M$ is forcing the the OEM to sell only windows installed PC and license it, with a rider that it sell no other OS installed PC. this sort of monopoly has been prohibited in many countries, and M$ itself convicted felony in the USA and escaped by bribing the congressmen,senators ..

If piracy is the sole reason then it should be welcome so FOSS will flourish !


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

vaithy said:


> this is going to comparing it apples with oranges..apple is the sole manufacturer of Hardware along with the OS installed.. so no question of other OS..so there is no monopoly there..But Ms is OS vendor, and its  hardware is manufactured by its partners (OEM)No fault there.. But M$ is forcing the the OEM to sell only windows installed PC and license it, with a rider that it sell no other OS installed PC. this sort of monopoly has been prohibited in many countries, and M$ itself convicted felony in the USA and escaped by bribing the congressmen,senators ..
> 
> If piracy is the sole reason then it should be welcome so FOSS will flourish !



YES !!

This were the problem: (read : Mistakes of Microsoft )

1. Microsoft released only the OS as its product. ( from the beginning )

2. Microsoft took a different root, they created OEMs , to run their OS. 

3. Microsoft also released RETAIL version of their OS.

---

What Microsoft should have done from the beginning :

1. Microsoft should have gone the APPLE way of doing things.

2. Microsoft should have released hardware tied OS from the beginning.

Market impact of such move from Microsoft would had been :

1. NO Assembled Computer Parts floating in the market.

2. NO Assembled Computer Vendor shops, etc. which we see today.

3. So, credit Microsoft who actually created such a market in the first place.

So, What MICROSOFT gave us :

1. A flourishing ASSEMBLED Computer Parts Market.

Where DID this Mistake of Microsoft lead the company to ?

1. Today, Microsoft is faceing a lot of problems with regard to its OS being taken for a RIDE by every PC user.

2. Piracy bloomed like it was the ultimate thing to do...

NOW the CORRECTION time for Microsoft.

1. Microsoft is aggresively is trying to correct its past mistakes.

WHO will SUFFER in the END ?

1. The Assembled Computer Market will DIE.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

Protecting the pre-OS environment with UEFI - Building Windows 8 - Site Home - MSDN Blogs

Interesting read. I would still say there's nothing major to worry about yet.

I would hope it is disabled by default in customer grade machines.
*blogs.msdn.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-01-29-43-metablogapi/0624.Figure_2D00_5_2D002D002D00_Samsung_2D00_PC_2D00_secured_2D00_boot_2D00_setting_5F00_thumb_5F00_02016A69.jpg



Tech&ME said:


> ...


Seriously? I'm afraid you are looking at the history of PCs in the reverse manner, and getting it all wrong.


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

^^
He He He.................................................  

Where I am wrong ?? (History of computers !!!! Ha Ha Ha  

I have used all the versions of Linux, Windows, Unix, from the day it all started..... !!!!!


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

No I mean you claimed that Microsoft allowing OEMs to ship their OS and only act as software vendor as a "mistake", when it is certainly not the case as this only brought them amazing level of success, with them owning like 90%+ of the market. 
In fact doing the Apple way would have never bought any success, Apple themselves are the testimony if you look at the PC market only. Moreover you seem to be claiming that Assembled PC market got flourished by MSFT, when the case it's the reverse.


----------



## Garbage (Sep 23, 2011)

I still don't understand why people are becoming so furious over this. Are you missing "*may*" part of the news?


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> No I mean you claimed that Microsoft allowing OEMs to ship their OS and only act as software vendor as a "mistake", when it is certainly not the case as this only brought them amazing level of success, with them owning like 90%+ of the market.
> In fact doing the Apple way would have never bought any success, Apple themselves are the testimony if you look at the PC market only. *Moreover you seem to be claiming that Assembled PC market got flourished by MSFT, when the case it's the reverse.*



OK then, may I know for whom the equipment were actually manufactured before Microsoft made use of the Assembled Computer Parts ??

I mean to ask , who the hell was using the Assembled Computer Parts before Microsoft released its Windows OS ???

IBM ??? then why did it died out !!

Ponder over this, and you will get your answer!!


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

Er the assembled PCs/IBM clones which only got MSFT the market. Think for a moment, if their OS was not compatible with IBM PC and their clones would they have achieved the success they got?
I am pretty sure if Microsoft had gone the Apple way, then users would have had no choice but to look at the alternatives (there were next to none at that time). At worst the market would have been delayed but eventually an "open" platform would have won the game.

I am afraid we're going VERY off topic here let's keep it to Windows 8 secure boot and how it will affect other operating systems.


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Sep 23, 2011)

This will only increase the demand for linux.

Bad move by m$haft.


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

^^

There is NO POINT of compatibility between IBM OS and Microsoft OS. Since, both were the same........... ha ha ha........... if you know the history correctly.

Anyway, lets move back ourselves to the Original Context of this thread....


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Sep 23, 2011)

cute.bandar said:


> Does this mean we won't be able to use bootable disks like hirens ?



Don worry ...if m$ does this...soon there will be some or other cra*k coming to avoid it...


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

I thought I typed "IBM PC" not "IBM OS". Oh wait I did. Heh.



gopi_vbboy said:


> Don worry ...if m$ does this...soon there will be some or other cra*k coming to avoid it...


But any crack (like jailbeaking) will void your warranty.


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Sep 23, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Don't tell people will have to "jailbreak" (?) the so called "secure (?) booting" to install a damn distro in their machines... :/
> 
> Nothing to worry about though, would be cracked in a matter of days regardless of anything.
> 
> ...




Just askin as i know nothing of secure bootin...Cant grub or lilo be patched to allow boot to win8?


----------



## Tech&ME (Sep 23, 2011)

^^
that's exactly the problem, why Microsoft is doing all this.

if only people can think something different then CRACKING !!!


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

gopi_vbboy said:


> Just askin as i know nothing of secure bootin...Cant grub or lilo be patched to allow boot to win8?



They can but practically Red Hat or Canonical will have to negotiate with hundreds or may be thousands of OEMs to get their keys approved, which is not a problem for Microsoft, but for any other competitor, it's something they will struggle big time.
Compounding the problems, GRUB2 is GPL3 licensed which will require any vendor using GPLv3 licensed software to publically release its key, and I am not sure whether a publically released key would be of comfort to any of the OEMs or whether they will really whitelist it. Mind you, there could be ways around this, the former is the most pressing concern anyway. Regardless of whether Canonical or Red Hat get themselves approved, community software like Linux Mint or your custom built distro will be locked out.


----------



## vaithy (Sep 23, 2011)

m$ IN 2011 IS NOT THE SAME m$ IN THE EARLY '80
shrinking volume of PC and Laptaps sales made hardware vendors use novell ways to remain in the game.. The rise of Tablets Pcs is another reason..
When Linux threaten with netbook invasion, immediately M$ responded , and force the hardware vendors to sales 'windows' only netbooks, thereby not only killing Linux in netbooks, even its own windows netbook sales.
"If my enemy lose one eye I am willing to lose my two eyes, " sort of Ballmer's ways showing his hatred kill both linux and Windows in the netbooks.
Acer , MSI who sided with Ballmer & CO is now scrabing for Android leftouts in the Tablets PC market..
Now the Market dynamics changed to mobility where Google and Apple is leading the way.. 
there is a news some where that 23" touch screen android is coming clearly this is the theater of War.
If the OEMs desire to side with M$ , than let them be buried in the deathmount of PC rubbles.


----------



## coderunknown (Sep 23, 2011)

grab a lappy with Linux or no OS @ a lower price + 100% headache free computing. 

"Windows: never works the way you want" should be the tagline of windows 8.

oh, also no Windows preloaded = no bloatware.


----------



## abhijangda (Sep 23, 2011)

^^^ absolutely correct. Microsoft has always used Windows, to expand its other products like IE. And then they faced a lawsuit. Same should happen with them now!!


----------



## Rajesh345 (Sep 23, 2011)

Windows 8 PCs with UEFI Secure Boot Wonâ€™t Lock Out Other Platforms - Softpedia


----------



## marvelousprashant (Sep 23, 2011)

Spoiler



*blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-01-29-43-metablogapi/0624.Figure_2D00_5_2D002D002D00_Samsung_2D00_PC_2D00_secured_2D00_boot_2D00_setting_5F00_thumb_5F00_02016A69.jpg



The concern over whether or not the Windows 8 requirement for ‘Secure Boot’ will prevent users from installing other operating systems has been addressed by Microsoft‘s Steven Sinofsky in a blog post on the Microsoft Developers Network site. 
Read full news here


----------



## coderunknown (Sep 23, 2011)

> Pre-built Windows 8 computers that want a “Windows Certified” sticker have to offer support for “Secure Boot” and enable it by default, *but it remains up to the OEMs as to whether they provide an ‘off’ switch to allow users of other operating systems* – including Microsoft’s own – the ability to install/boot into them.



the bold part says it all. OEM will get discount + other benefits for offering a locked secure boot. 

Source: link provided in above post.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 23, 2011)

Plus imagine the reaction of newbies when told to disable something called "secure boot" to run Linux. I don't expect positive reactions. And most people being stubborn doesn't help either.


----------



## vaithy (Sep 23, 2011)

Sam said:


> the bold part says it all. OEM will get discount + other benefits for offering a locked secure boot.
> 
> Source: link provided in above post.



Exactly!  M$ contracted the OEM for the particular models and charging them(in their language'discount') for the actual manufacturing items,i.e say 1,00,000 factory products,.. even if the OEM acually preloaded,only 80,000 items, and leave the rest of the items for other os, DOS, etc.,they have to pay to M$ exactly 1,00,000 items, whether the remaining items are windows loaded or linux loaded, the laptop priced same level as windows, so the actual margin of profits are going to  M$ for selling Linux so we are calling this 'Windows Tax'
When I went for my laptop to the local HP reseller, he reietrated the same point, when I requested the Linux loaded laptop, but to pay same charge as windows laptop..
with his tonque twisted like a lapdog  you've  already watched Ballmer's famous laugh," Linux is not free; you have to pay for it..."
I am not hating if Ballmer get billion by selling windows.. but he and his OEM cronies are feeding on the blood of million FOSS developers, who have sweated to million of codes to produce free software try to bring before masses.. that is what unpardonable...



Liverpool_fan said:


> Plus imagine the reaction of newbies when told to disable something called "secure boot" to run Linux. I don't expect positive reactions. And most people being stubborn doesn't help either.


Four years ago I was a fedora uses, when I try to teach linux with it to my friends, they were less enthusiastic , to manually installing all the codecs through terminal etc., then i happened to get PCLINUX then ubuntu CDS (total 10 cds) First they refuse to install it but they try live cds.. then the landscape changed  now they are connverted to PC LINUX and ubuntu (they still need windows so it is dual booting)
If I am again to tell them they should try modify something called UEFI like BIOS, they will certainly not pleased...
For twenty years Linux and FOSS movement thwarted all the attempts by M$ FUD campaign and stood strong..there are some good open source souls still living in the locked cellars of redmond which is called port25, they may give some idea to Ballmer & Co, "instead of destroying linux, let us make some money" . 
the thought of money can change BALLMER's mad schemes,but concentrated on the development of windows-8...Perhaps Ballmer already throwing his towel on the mat, realising windows -8 is going to be his 'windows ME' or VISTA. so he is now actively preparing for Windows-8 services Pack (a la Windows-9).. If any shareholder asking him, he can smoothed them 'what can I do" the linux growd conspired against me !


----------



## socrates (Sep 24, 2011)

Microsoft, Red Hat spar over secure boot-loading tech.  Microsoft, Red Hat spar over secure boot-loading tech - Computerworld


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Sep 24, 2011)

mjg59 | UEFI secure booting (part 2)


----------



## Garbage (Sep 24, 2011)

From mjg59 | Supporting UEFI secure boot on Linux: the details



> *Supporting UEFI secure boot on Linux: the details*
> 
> An obvious question is why Linux doesn't support UEFI secure booting. Let's ignore the issues of key distribution and the GPL and all of those things, and instead just focus on what would be required. There's two components - the signed binary and the authenticated variables.
> 
> ...


----------



## Prime_Coder (Sep 27, 2011)

Will Windows 8 block Linux installs?
*
If it is, then it will be a very bad thing. *

So, finally Microsoft Denies Locking out Linux Stories



> There have been rumors that the secure boot of MS Windows 8 would replace BIOS with UEFI, thereby locking out Linux. This would even lock out the earlier linux-logoWindows versions from new computers. This rumor was disturbing for people who wanted both Windows and Linux on their systems. And since it wouldn’t allow other Windows versions, you couldn’t install other operating systems on the same computer. A real bummer indeed.


----------



## coderunknown (Sep 27, 2011)

yup, a real bummer. and when laptops are out with locked boot-loader, simply blame the manufacturers. sweet


----------



## doomgiver (Sep 27, 2011)

of course, M$ will deny.... you dont plead guilty anyway.


----------



## Krow (Sep 27, 2011)

Windows 8 will take time to grow on me. Anyway, I'll jailbreak the bootloader for linux installs.


----------

