The change only prevents Linux being installed because Linux doesn't support modern hardware. It's easier to fix that than it is to get a vendor to push a firmware update.
> But then you insist that it's not Lenovo trying to lock out other operating systems. How do you know that? Did they give you the scoop?
Because they're not locking out other operating systems? Linux boots fine.
> Even if the device would get worse battery life (which we don't know that it would, and nobody who booted up Linux on the ISK model or Live on the ISK2 reported their laptop "melting"), it should be up to the user.
Why should it be up to the user? Should the user be able to program every memory timing option, even if by doing so they introduce occasional crashes? Should they be able to set every thermal threshold, even if by doing so they're reducing their hardware life expectancy? All hardware vendors restrict the options available to users.
> You say that if your guess is right, it's a cheap hack to work around crappy power management in Windows. Do we know Linux has crappy power management like Windows does?
It's a hack to work around the fact that Intel won't tell anyone else how to make power management work properly on Intel platforms, including Microsoft. Linux certainly does the wrong thing here.
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}
no subject
Date: 2016-09-21 07:02 pm (UTC)The change only prevents Linux being installed because Linux doesn't support modern hardware. It's easier to fix that than it is to get a vendor to push a firmware update.
> But then you insist that it's not Lenovo trying to lock out other operating systems. How do you know that? Did they give you the scoop?
Because they're not locking out other operating systems? Linux boots fine.
> Even if the device would get worse battery life (which we don't know that it would, and nobody who booted up Linux on the ISK model or Live on the ISK2 reported their laptop "melting"), it should be up to the user.
Why should it be up to the user? Should the user be able to program every memory timing option, even if by doing so they introduce occasional crashes? Should they be able to set every thermal threshold, even if by doing so they're reducing their hardware life expectancy? All hardware vendors restrict the options available to users.
> You say that if your guess is right, it's a cheap hack to work around crappy power management in Windows. Do we know Linux has crappy power management like Windows does?
It's a hack to work around the fact that Intel won't tell anyone else how to make power management work properly on Intel platforms, including Microsoft. Linux certainly does the wrong thing here.