*countable infinities only
lists at colorremedies.com
Sun Jun 17 18:04:35 UTC 2012
On Jun 17, 2012, at 11:25 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 17.06.2012 19:16, schrieb Chris Murphy:
>> What I believe is irrelevant. You're proposing emotional reaction based
>> on a future hardware requirement that has not been proposed,
>> is not in the interest of Microsoft or their OEMs post-Windows
>> 8 requirement efforts requiring the disable feature, all for the singular
>> purpose of destroying a 1% market. And I think your proposal is highly
>> irrational and without merit
The only possible reason Microsoft would include their key is to have future ability to lock down the entire x86 platform for themselves, not at all having a single thing to do with user experience.
> you are aware that on ARM platform is NO DISABLE SECURE BOOT allowed
Yes it has been brought up ad nauseum, and it's irrelevant to the conversation.
> this is not "future requirement"
> this is CURRENT requirement for Win8 on ARM
The discussion isn't about ARM. It's not related to ARM. You might as well bring up DOJ action against Microsoft 14 years ago as though it's relevant too.
I'd rather talk about whether or not Microsoft has nukes, and if they're pointed at Foxconn. Cuz clearly their usage has high efficacy for their market growth, and with almost immediate results. The followup strategy, and distraction bonus, will be buying Nokia.
More information about the devel