On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 15:59 +0100, Hugo Roy wrote: > Le vendredi 18 janvier 2013 à 09:16 -0500, simo a écrit : > > On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 09:57 +0100, Michael G wrote: > > > Better still would be c) good, affordable laptop without UEFI and no > > > > What's wrong with UEFI ? > > Thank you Simo for pointing it out. What's usually wrong with UEFI (the > replacement for BIOS) is the "Secure Boot" feature. Matthias published > an analysis on fsfe.org: > http://fsfe.org/campaigns/generalpurposecomputing/secure-boot-analysis.en.html
SecureBoot can be disabled in most UEFI systems, it would have been better to explictly say no 'Secure Boot', UEFI is much, much more than just Secure Boot. (and someone may complain about proprietary binary drivers in UEFI, but then the BIOS is usually proprietary too, so I see no difference there.) Simo. -- Simo Sorce Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <[email protected]> Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
