Shared publicly  - 
open-source construction's profile photoSahil Malhan's profile photoRigved Rakshit's profile photoBianca Kwey's profile photo
Its such a typical Microsoft move, but at least there is a way past it, even if it isn't particularly practical.
It's more than impractical. We need to have a method that is acceptable to all distros. Due to licensing and costs for keys, this is problematic for community supported and niche distros.
Hopefully that aspects gets worked out as well.
But yeah, ultimately, it's a d**k move on Microsoft's part, which I've frankly been expecting since they started pushing the "Trusted Computing Initiative"
People are passively accepting the dictatorship of Microsoft and accepting UEFI when they should be fighting it. We should go out on the streets and protest against this, and tell all people about the shackles that UEFI represents. They are destroying our freedom, our right of choice when it concerns about the operating system we want in our own computers. By the way, with UEFI our computers are still ours? We must prevent that UEFI becomes a standard, we must fight as we fight PIPA and SOPA.
Jaws dropped. Honestly, I expected Canonical to fight this ridiculous standart instead of bowing to MS.

By the way, where the hell are Google and Wikipedia when we need them?
Exactly! Sucks that the Linux community is being forced to go this route. Also reading more into this seems that the Ubuntu method defeats the purpose of secure boot... so again, what's the point?

edit: thanks +Daniel Butler!
The good news is that Linux is showing up on MS' radar, means we're big enough to be noticed.  The bad news is that MS thinks it can tell consumers what to do with products that they bought and own, and that all the passive consumers who don't pay attention to this sort of thing go right along with it.  Occupy MS.
+Eric Mueller you can blame apple for that, they showed Microsoft how to do that with the iDevices. Even showed them how to sell it on the customer, it's not a limitation, it's a security function for your safety. Can't install custom firmware or software, only what we say is good because we know better for you. And they used people's fear of technology to sell it publicly and the fear of piracy to sell it to businesses. I mean come on, only pirates, thieves and massive geeks need freedom to make their own choices whn technology is involved, right?
No need to preach to me about Apple, just as bad as MS if not worse.  I didn't know this stuff originated with them, but it doesn't surprise me.  I'm well aware of how Steve Jobs tried to make it impossible to install new components on his early computers, and of their proprietary control of basically everything on iAnything.  This notion that once someone buys something they don't have the right to modify or utilize how they see fit is disgusting.  Apple and MS can try to justify it any way they see fit, but in the end it's just their way of trying to monopolize the market to increase their bottom line.  I'm never buying another computer with an OS that's not open source, not having to worry about crap like this is just one of the benefits of that.
+Eric Mueller +1, I totally agree with you. I'm using Ubuntu (on my iMac!!!), and it's ABSOLUTELY better than Lion... Apple, you lost another buyer!
Unfortunately, every time that one person is no longer an Apple buyer, another 500 new buyers appears... D:
+Francisco Gómez Part of it is because to its fans, Apple can literally do no wrong. Its just not possible.

Some examples I have noticed about this is when Windows 7 came out, it had a public beta for everyone to try out for free (for over a year?) When it was released, so many people complained about big bad ol MS for programs that were broken from XP/Vista to WIndows 7. Apple did the exact same thing for OSX 10.6 to 10.7 but had a smaller window for the public to use for free (was six months). When it came out and, like all OS upgrades, not every program worked with the new OS. What did everyone complain about? Big bad ol... everyone else? People literally blamed everyone else and how there was a free public beta for six months, meaning that everyone should have made sure that when 10.7 was released that their programs would still work. Identical program, completely different results.

Another issue is when Windows has a virus problem and the virus uses Java to infect the system, people blame MS for having horrible security. When OSX has a virus problem with the virus attacking the system through Java people blame Java and not OSX (Flashback trojan comes to mind. And i know a trojan isn't a virus, just using it is an example.) Identical problem again, completely different approach.

Then there was the jailbreaking website ( that you could use to jailbreak your iOS device (iPhone 4 and below) by just going there on the device and sliding the bar to jailbreak. The media and fans couldn't sing enough praise about how wonderful this tool is and how to make it look like everything it wasn't. It was malware, in fact it was the worst malware ever that I know of. While everyone saw it was jailbreaking iOS, what no one wanted to note was Apple had a security hole so huge that it could have easily changed from a jailbreak "payload" to a "brick the device payload". If it can get far enough to jailbreak it can get far enough to brick the device.

But of course, this was Apple. They just can't do wrong.
Add a comment...