[sf-lug] Microsoft trying to shut out dual-booting machines with UEFI...

[Brian Morris]

Computer store on Howard St sells no OS boxes with a credit. Zareason pricy




On Sunday, September 25, 2011, Christian Einfeldt <einfeldt at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
> there are several vendors that sell machines without Microsoft software on
them, most notably, Zareason, which is right over in Berkeley.  They are a
family owned business who derive all (ALL!) of their income from selling
Linux machines.  Let's help get the word out for them!
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Alex Kleider <a_kleider at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The question then becomes: Will there be any non sticker-ed boxes to buy?
>
> a_kleider at yahoo.com
> ________________________________
> From: Wladyslaw Zbikowski <embeddedlinuxguy at gmail.com>
> To: Jeff Bragg <jackofnotrades at gmail.com>
> Cc: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 10:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] Microsoft trying to shut out dual-booting machines
with UEFI...
>
> My impression is that this has nothing to do with Windows 8 per se; it
> has to do with what hardware vendors are required to do to get an
> official "Windows 8" sticker from Microsoft. In other words, the same
> kind of trick Microsoft pulled in the 90s when they told OEMs to
> install (or at least pay for) Windows on every box they made, in order
> to sell any Windows boxes:
>
> Microsoft has induced many OEMs to execute anticompetitive "per
> processor" contracts for MS-DOS and Windows, even though many would
> prefer to preserve their freedom to offer PCs with non-Microsoft
> operating systems.
>
> http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f0000/0046.htm
>
> The difference here is, vendors can still sell non-Microsoft boxes;
> they just can't put a "Windows 8" sticker on them. So just don't buy a
> box with a "Windows 8" sticker.
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Jeff Bragg <jackofnotrades at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Good question, to which I have no good answer.  My suspicion is it will
>> depend on the virtualization software (whether it's implementing
emulation
>> the the expected firmware).  I can't imagine it would serve MS' interests
to
>> squash virtualization of Windows as a side-effect of being spiteful to
>> competing OSes.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, David Rosenstrauch <darose at darose.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/22/2011 03:57 PM, Jeff Bragg wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Incentive for me to continue to steer clear of MS Windows entirely (or
>>>> only
>>>> virtualized).
>>>
>>> Which actually brings up another point:  wouldn't this change make it
>>> impossible (or very difficult) to run Windows 8 as a VM?
>>>
>>> DR
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sf-lug mailing list
>>> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>>> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>>> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sf-lug mailing list
>> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>>
>
> ______________________
>
> --
> Christian Einfeldt,
> Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20110925/35d355ea/attachment.html>