Uncategorized

OEMs: request from coreboot community

I agree. I’d like to see more OEMs shipping Linux-centric models, not just Windows or Chrome or Android PCs, leaving Linux users to deal with installing their preferred OS, which is getting harder and harder with pre-OS security (Secure Boot, etc.) preventing customization. Windows PCs have ACPI tied to Windows OS, a Linux PC does not need those ACPI tables, and perhaps may even want some Linux-centric ACPI tables.

Last time I looked, most “Linux OEMs” — scoped to laptops, not servers — still shipped BIOS-based systems. I asked one large Linux vendor why they were still doing this, and they said that Secure Boot was great for sales for them, Linux users avoid it and prefer BIOS. This may be good for ease-of-configurability, but it is bad for security. If you’re going to keep using BIOS, at least consider using SeaBIOS.

OEMs, please take one decent laptop and desktop of your Windows line, and make a Linux-friend model. Dell used to do this. These years, with Secure Boot, it is much more needed.

Standard

One thought on “OEMs: request from coreboot community

  1. Agreed, to a good but certain extent though. Before Ron Minnich, or Patrick Georgi or any of the Coreboot & Google fanatics come barging in and fire off another round of anti-UEFI ranting, I’d like to remind the reader and especially them of the fact that the actual issue is not with the specific type of system//motherboard firmware. More to the point, it’s irrelevant whether the firmware is of PC/AT BIOS style, Coreboot style, UEFI spec or OpenFirmware standard type, but whether the HW platform (CPU, chipset, RAM controller) is well documented and freely and openly accessible. With that in mind, I do understand their beef with Intel (and by extension, AMD), since modern x86-64 CPUs come preloaded with that binary blob (Intel’s ME or AMD’s AGESA) with no free and open access to the source code and no means of removing the damn thing without rendering the CPU unusable.

    The fundamentally more correct solution to this issue would be either Intel and/or AMD deciding to perform a U-turn and fit the CPU management engine with a FOSS binary or get rid of the CPU management engine altogether, or, the complete abandonment of x86 in favor of either or both RISC-V and OpenPOWER, Both microarchs are first-class citizens in the Coreboot camp, and both of them also have UEFI style firmware implementations hosted at GitHub.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s