Fedora 18 and UEFI onlist

[Roger]

On 08/07/12 15:52, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
> On 07/08/2012 01:13 AM, Roger wrote:
>> My opinion.
>> <snip>
>> so NO microsoft is not in any position to control the x86 market
>> </snip>
>>
>> I have been watching this thread with interest.
>> Conversation to date raises, for me, a number of points.
>>
>> 1. None of this would be necessary if Microsoft produced quality, 
>> secure operating systems in the first instance.
>> Microsoft caused Linux to happen. Linux would not be bane of their 
>> existence, it may never even have existed in it's current form/s were 
>> it not for denial, refusal and incessant greed on their part. They 
>> have only themselves to blame and squirming as with Secureboot seems 
>> just that.
>>
>> 2. Being very concerned about competition. Microsoft has to eliminate 
>> it or at least make attempts to do so.
>>
>> 3. Microsoft seem to be grasping at straws, seemingly fully backed 
>> by  the Administration.
>>
>> 4. Users neither know or care, they buy a computer, it has windows, 
>> end of discussion.
>>
>> 5. <quote> Linux is scary, no one uses it anyway. I can't use any of 
>> my programs on it"</endquote>
>>
>> 6. Microsoft doesn't need to care about the x86 market, as long as 
>> they can clandestinely, over time,  eliminate use of other operating 
>> systems (except for Apple). To me the Verisign discussion so far, 
>> seems only a first step toward the goal of killing off the flies 
>> buzzing round the poo pile that Microsoft plays in.
>>
>> They can't control Open Source so want boot locked down or out, 
>> depending on one's point of view.  In saying this I admit no 
>> knowledge of Secureboot or Verisign.
>> A question I would be asking is what could be their next step.
> I would question not what their next step is...but what their ultimate 
> goal is! I can't possibly believe that they spend the money they don 
> on just taking out "little 'ol Linux"....threre's GOT to be some grand 
> design-master plan that they're not going to divulge until the very 
> end! I think this while it might look scary at first for the Open 
> Source community,...might end up actually being a good thing. The same 
> way when Windows came out and had all it's licenses and product keys, 
> the people who didn't want to go that route opted for Linux and the 
> open source, this could lead to a whole new era, or users who can 
> actually bypass and hack the secure boot mess!....Imagine it...a group 
> of like 13 year olds talking about how they got past the UEFI on a 
> current model ultra book with just a few lines of code!...LoL!...I 
> know...far fetched...but hey....you never know!...
>
>
> EGO II
>
Maybe a goal could be total ownership of the world's operating system. 
Absolute control over what is installed and by whom, much the same as 
Apple.

You mentioned licenses and product keys, Linux somewhat stymied that for 
those wise enough to see and act. To eliminate Linux or at the very 
lease make it incredibly difficult to install goes a long way to fixing 
that problem. Microsoft knows that people are lazy, and like sheep, 
follow well worn trails.

I'm thinking that Cloud may be a reason. To dominate and rent out time 
to use applications which  can never be downloaded or installed but nets 
Billions of Dollars a month for very little work, maybe that's not fantasy.

Untold millions would have to have their credit card details with a 
single entity, Microsoft, so that automatic removal of app rental fees 
from banks across the globe would be simple.
Imagine what that database would be worth and if ownership changed, 
Microsoft were taken over, if their security were hacked.
Imagine that they could simply hike their rental fees at will, no law on 
earth could stop them.

I am hoping that our Linux Devs can come up with ways to mitigate such 
endeavours.

Science fiction of a few years ago is fact now.
Roger