On 06/04/12 23:48, Genes MailLists wrote: > > Just to add another fedora link: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pjones/Features/SecureBoot > > Sounds like they till plan to make use of the UEFI CA $99 signing > service from Microsoft. > > Do you think Arch should follow suit or require instead that Secure > Boot is disabled? > > gene/ > If this is a poll, I vote "Arch should require Secure Boot to be disabled" I choose a distro like Arch because it doesn't have a financial motive and will not give into market pressures such as this. If we want keep hardware vendors from forcing Secure Boot on us, we have to send the message out that we don't want it. Paying a "small" price of M$99 is not the way. However as free software users, we will have to endure some hard time in the coming days when getting new hardware. Just my two cents. Sudaraka.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
