Was there anything so horribly wrong with OF that they needed to recreate it?
I actually had an Intel EFI architect tell me - to my face - that they invented EFI because there wasn't anything that already existed to reuse. Later, in the same talk, he said he'd seen EFI implementations that wrap OpenFirmware.
The conclusion I drew from this was that the thing wrong with OpenFirmware was that Intel hadn't written it; either that someone needed to justify their existence, or that they have some deeper cultural NIH reason why they had to not use OF. So, either malice or incompetence, and I don't really care which. It's a complete clusterfuck.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Not getting it.
Date: 2011-06-08 08:57 pm (UTC)I actually had an Intel EFI architect tell me - to my face - that they invented EFI because there wasn't anything that already existed to reuse. Later, in the same talk, he said he'd seen EFI implementations that wrap OpenFirmware.
The conclusion I drew from this was that the thing wrong with OpenFirmware was that Intel hadn't written it; either that someone needed to justify their existence, or that they have some deeper cultural NIH reason why they had to not use OF. So, either malice or incompetence, and I don't really care which. It's a complete clusterfuck.