On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:21:14 -0400 (EDT), you wrote: > > >On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 07:54:17PM -0400, Seth Johnson wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > Am 17.06.2012 01:14, schrieb Chris Murphy: >> > >> Please provide an example of a better option, with sufficient detail as to constitute a successful relay of the baton. >> > >> The point of the thread from the outset was to explore alternatives, but so far those alternatives are vaporware. >> > >> > >> > Numerous non-vaporware recommendations follow, snipped directly from the thread: >> >> (snip) >> >> These suggestions boil down to: >> >> 1) Do nothing >> 2) Become a hardware vendor >> 3) Use a Fedora key >> >> None of these solve the problem of getting Fedora onto arbitrary x86 >> hardware bought towards the end of this year. >> >> -- >> Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >I think 50 million dollars toward buying, and properly arranging >the UEFI, of several lots of x86 computers would indeed solve >part of the problem you point out. > >Why not? Intel just launched their Ivy Bridge processors, which has resulted in likely more than 200 different products being released (combined motherboards and systems from vendors like Dell). Then add all the other older Intel processors that will be used in Windows 8 certified hardware. Don't forgot to add in products based on AMD processors. Now factor in the customizations that can be done to many of those products, and you can quickly see that there is no way Red Hat can hope to offer hardware that would make every Linux user happy. Not to mention that you are effectively telling anyone not currently using "Red Hat Hardware" that they can't run Linux, thus eliminating the ability to gain new Linux users. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
