OK. First, a dumb question: what does secure boot buy you that can't achieve by locking the BIOS down to booting from the internal hard drive anyway? Why would I want secure boot? What am I missing here?
Secondly, I wholeheartedly agree with the comments that the EU isn't going to like the anti-compatitive nature of this if it happens in Europe.
Thirdly, I'm wondering what happens if someone buys a computer then goes down the path of not agreeing with the Windows licence conditions when it powers up. Historically, one's been able to install Linux at that point (then go hunting a refund for the cost of the OEM Windows licence, in an ideal world) but with secure boot, one might end up with a brick. The refund requests could get interesting.
Fourthly, I'm guessing there are ways to circumvent secure boot. It would be ironic if Microsoft's actions both gave circumventers an excuse under the DMCA in the USA and an incentive, à la Playstation and XBox.
no subject
Secondly, I wholeheartedly agree with the comments that the EU isn't going to like the anti-compatitive nature of this if it happens in Europe.
Thirdly, I'm wondering what happens if someone buys a computer then goes down the path of not agreeing with the Windows licence conditions when it powers up. Historically, one's been able to install Linux at that point (then go hunting a refund for the cost of the OEM Windows licence, in an ideal world) but with secure boot, one might end up with a brick. The refund requests could get interesting.
Fourthly, I'm guessing there are ways to circumvent secure boot. It would be ironic if Microsoft's actions both gave circumventers an excuse under the DMCA in the USA and an incentive, à la Playstation and XBox.