Another reason Windows 8 will never touch my PC.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/microsoft-to-stop-linux-older-windows-from-running-on-windows-8-pcs/9589

Bad. Bad. Bad.

And for those who don't get it, thinking, Oh well, I never planned on running Win XP, Linux, Mac, Win 7, etc. , if you read the article, this means they HAVE ABSOLUTE CONTROL OVER YOUR COMPUTER.

They can not only keep you from running any OS they don't like on YOUR computer, they can keep you from running ANYTHING they don't like!

They, and only They, have the keys to YOUR computer!

Cue the Imperial Death March.

Also another reason not to buy their OSes.

OMG absolute control huh? That is hair on fire nuts. :pilotfly:

It would be interesting to count how many people even care.

Out

OMG!!! I already installed it!!!!!

I am DOOMED. :cry:

:megalol::megalol:

Microsoft - "what? No one cares? EXCELLENT!"

I'll be using W7 for a long time.

You and me both man.

They, and only They, have the keys to YOUR computer!

 

Cue the Imperial Death March.

desperately trying to substantiate that strong feeling of yours towards MS? sorry to bring this to you but fail again: "users could disable secure boot." problem solved :thumbup:

it seems that you are under impression that hating MS makes you look more professional, or cool, or sets you away from the crowd. but in reality it only demonstrates your lack of professionalism. there are bunch of issues with MS'sOS and other products (i know there are , and few of them i see in day to day work). As IT specialist it is not your task to moan about them in every thread you can, but rather be able to find a workaround so your organization achieves the goals. have you thought that your lack of success with MS products has possibly to do with Insufficient knowledge?

PS: win8 i'm not going to use at this point because it costs money vs win7 that i already have.

Ok, let me try to explain this a little better.

What do you not understand about These people want to have utter and absolute control of your computer whether you like that or not?

Now, read the article a little more carefully, and all the comments as well, and you'll see that what you said above is not exactly true, and actually rather murky at best. At one point, it is thought that in order to do this, if it is even possible, you would have to rip open your case and get to a dipswitch on the motherboard ( ever try to reach the motherboard in a laptop? I have. An absolute Nightmare ). Then, even if you manage to do this, some people have pointed out other problems that still make this near impossible, even if the hardware OEMs allow this. Which most people, quite rightly, are betting they won't.

Then their are all the NDA's, etc., etc., and the fact, that in the end, the EU is probably going to sue the living shit out of M$ for even attempting this. And seriously, how could ANYONE support a company that is desperately trying to make us all into controlled zombies? Don't you take OFFENSE at this? Does anyone question ANYTHING anymore? I'm guess I'm one of the few left who still wants free thought and control of his own life, without BIG BROTHER trying to manipulate my puppet strings.

Waiting for Windows 9 and sanity, if M$ survives this ( and if you'll ever be able to buy Windows in the EU again ). As for being "not part of the crowd", yeah, just like I won't hurl myself over a cliff just because millions of other people are doing it. At least only the sane will be left.

What do you not understand about These people want to have utter and absolute control of your computer whether you like that or not?

Do you think our eyes are hard of hearing?

After reading some peoples posts, I begin to wonder. I guess they just don't ( or refuse ) to get it.

Well, if living in a country ruled by a company akin to the Yakuza or Mafia is there thing, good for them. Me, I'm off to find out where all the other sane people went.

Well, if living in a country ruled by a company akin to the Yakuza or Mafia is there thing, good for them. Me, I'm off to find out where all the other sane people went.

Now you are just plain being silly. :doh:

Don't forget to write!

If you don't like it, build your own damn computer, and install whatever you like on it. Not hard at all to do, contrary to popular belief.

All in all: Much ado about EXTREMELY little.

I think most of us here build our own computers - nothing straight from the store shelf will run DCS. ;)

The problem here is customer awareness. Most people do not have any idea about these things, they buy laptops from the shelf of a store already with Windows (the cost of which is included in the price tag), at some point they might learn that Linux might be more suited for their needs (my mom for example finds Ubuntu easier to handle than Win 7). Now, this new Microsoft idea will prevent users who bought say a laptop with Win 8 already on it from installing any other OS. It's hard to buy a mobile PC without an OEM M$ system (which I as I said is included in the price), now you probably won't even have the ability to have any other OS, if you do not like Win 8.

I think it's good to be aware of Microsoft's attempts at monopolising the market again, in an unfair way I might add.

Don't you think it's about time software developers stopped telling us how to use the stuff we paid for though licenses and other crap? DRM is a problem and if someone does not see that they become part of that problem. All in all, software is intellectual property no more than a book is. How come, when I buy a book or a movie, I can do whatever the hell I like with it (sell it, lend it, give it away), but if I buy software, suddenly there is a license telling me what I can, and what I cannot do with the stuff I paid for. It should be mine, but it really isn't.

So now I want to buy I netbook and surprise! The one I want comes only with Windows 8 and I have no possibility of installing another OS on it. This is not extremely little, this is similar to communism!

Anyway, this could be the beginning of an end for MS. They got into serious trouble once with the browser thing. But hey, if we all just keep quiet they might get away with it!

Don't you think it's about time software developers stopped telling us how to use the stuff we paid for though licenses and other crap? DRM is a problem and if someone does not see that they become part of that problem. All in all, software is intellectual property no more than a book is. How come, when I buy a book or a movie, I can do whatever the hell I like with it (sell it, lend it, give it away), but if I buy software, suddenly there is a license telling me what I can, and what I cannot do with the stuff I paid for. It should be mine, but it really isn't.

The fun thing with the movie-analogy is that you cannot legally sell it or even publicly show it and still be within copyright law. That, of course, is a whole different ballgame.

And if you ever sit down and read through an EULA of just about any software-product, you will see that damn near all of them are exactly the same: You don't own the product, you have basically bought a right to use it. That's the way it's been with licensed software for decades, and that's most likely never going to change.

So now I want to buy I netbook and surprise! The one I want comes only with Windows 8 and I have no possibility of installing another OS on it. This is not extremely little, this is similar to communism!

Simple solution: Don't buy a netbook with a Microsoft-OS on it. There's always alternatives for those smart enough to look for them. Sadly, most people looking for a netbook or even a computer for everyday use don't care about which OS is on it as long as it works for their needs. Gamers, and especially simmers, are far more critical when it comes to buying things, and fine-read the specs and any review of the product we can come across.

Anyway, this could be the beginning of an end for MS. They got into serious trouble once with the browser thing. But hey, if we all just keep quiet they might get away with it!

It won't be the beginning of the end for MS, since you have untold millions of people that, as mentioned before, don't care what's on the box as long as it works. The same people also haven't bothered to read the EULA past the two first lines before hitting accept, which at that point they've signed off just about any and every right they have to complain about it.

Until there's a viable option for gaming (and I don't consider Linux to be one) built on open standards, or viable systems for businesses that has all the bells&whistles that you have from Microsoft, MS will still be a powerhouse and can dictate what happens when, where and how. Many will probably brindle at the bit when I claim Linux isn't viable for businesses, but there's still few, if any, open-source systems that can rival for example Microsoft Exchange Server and the Windows Server-family for non-specialized systems use.

@Wolfie

Just one question, have you done your research beyond the quoted article? Obviously not. Then you would known that secure boot is an enabled/disabled chipset feature, so you can disable it if you will. But that wouldn't be convenient for your MS crusade, would it?

From one hand it is really annoying that developers dictate us how the things should works despite the opinion of the end-users who actually paying cash. Even worse that sometimes they change the things which become a part of habits or processes. Office 2003 versus Office 2007 – is the perfect example.

From other hand - 99% of users do not even understand the text in first message in this topic. UAC in Windows the good example here – persons who care is able to turn it off, others just live with it.

The lack of concern here is astounding.

Wolfie can you give me an advice what to do about the people who are trying to take control of the planet by military force? I am, somehow, more concerned about that... :D

The lack of concern here is astounding.

I'll be concerned when I hear or read something I didn't hear back when Win95 came along. And even IF what Wolfie posted comes to pass, there's many ways for me to bypass it, for example sticking to building my own computers OR buying one that doesn't come with a Microsoft-OS on it.

Until then I couldn't really give a damn. To think that Microsoft would alienate millions of customers this way is quite frankly idiotic. What Microsoft do on Microsoft-branded hardware is one thing, to think that they will get the major manufacturers of computers and hardware in on such a scheme is something I find ludicrous. Microsoft is powerful and the market-leader in operating-system almost to the point of being a monopolist, but they're not THAT powerful.

Here an article relevant to the discussion. While Microsoft does a lot of stuff I disagree with, and they seem good at making bad decisions lately, this particular situation is probably not as bad as the original post makes it seem.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/linux-foundation-to-offer-signed-solution-for-uefi-secure-boot-conundrum/

The issue to be concerned with where M$ and this matter are concerned is INTENT...anyone remember the spectre of "trusted computing" championed by M$...?

As long as there is a monopoly, there is not much one can do to affect it. Microsoft OS is installed on 95% of world PC's ...

I too will stay with Win 7 for some time. However, if I could run DCS better on Linux, I would switch immediately. The problem is DCS is not one program only. It is DCS, TS, Skype, TIr, Saitek, ... and all kinds of other stuff working simultaneously to make the DCS experience happen.

And by the way, the computer that runs my car, I don't really care which OS it uses.

The issue to be concerned with where M$ and this matter are concerned is INTENT...anyone remember the spectre of "trusted computing" championed by M$...?

I personally couldn't care less about intent, and am more interested in effect.

I intend to get laid today, but that doesn't mean a thing if the missus don't see it the same way.

I intend to get laid today, but that doesn't mean a thing if the missus don't see it the same way.

Well that depends: is the missus the one who you intend "doing"?