Slashdot Mirror


Phoenix Sounds Death Knell for BIOS

Anonymous Coward writes "The sky will fall next.... Betanews is carrying a story about Phoenix ditching the trusty old BIOS and moving to 'Trusted Computing'... ya right... Time to stock up on those old motherboards boys!" A follow-up/analysis on this story.

13 of 658 comments (clear)

  1. LinuxBIOS by Howard+Beale · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How will LinuxBIOS fit into this? Will we be able to pop out a Phoenix BIOS and pop a LinuxBIOS into it?

  2. Microsoft? by Kethinov · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought I read a while back that Microsoft was buying Phoenix or something and that in the future a lot of newer BIOSes were going to be made by MS? Am I on crack or is this what's actually going to happen?

    --
    You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
  3. The sky isn't falling. The sky HAS Fallen. by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can hardly imagine whatever "trusted computing" consortium allowing Open Source operating systems to have the specs to their protocols [after all, "security through obscurity" seems to be the favored method of both microsoft and the anti-virus industry].

    Without those specifications, the routers will reject packets from Linux and BSD computers (because they will be seen by the routers as being infected because they cannot give the expected response) and therefore only 'approved' (read: microsoft, and perhaps -perhaps- apple) operating systems will have access to the internet.

    And now, with the access to the hardware cut off by "trusted computing"'s subsitution for the bios; open source operating systems won't even be able to write to the computer hardware itself.

    (my ex-gf pointed out that someone can crack that the way the xbox was cracked, but that is not taking the DMCA into account, which would prevent any 'respectable' projects from being able to use any code generated illegally).

    To top things off, the final piece of the puzzle may be the fact that europe is on the verge of adopting 'software patents', which gives Microsoft the foot in the door to sue anyone who designs a half-way decent GUI into obscurity...and this will be coming soon to a formerly free democratic republic near you.

    In short, Open Source computing is a concept whose day has come and now has gone, and it's time to either get back to chasing 'warez' or give up on computers entirely.

    Unless there's something I'm missing here. But after reading slashdot for the last three or four years, I really doubt that there is.

    1. Re:The sky isn't falling. The sky HAS Fallen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would not be so pesimistic. We are witnessing the birth of a more fundamental split in computing than the old OSS/Proprietry , Unix/Windows dichotomy.

      In a few years we will have 2 well established 'streams' of computing.

      The first will be 'consumer' computers. Largely owned by fairly well off, but technically naive westerners in the US and Europe,this stream of computing will be Microsoft based, include DMCA and trusted computing models. It will be a very one way, consumer broadcast model allowing those who have money and no sense about their privacy to be pampered with choice, watch DVD movies and whatever other Hollywood rubbish they want piped straight from AOL/Time/Warner/Microsoft HQ.

      There will remain a growing second stream of computing. Largely comprised of businesses, programmers, geeks, military, government and health organisations, and for the most part the other 70-80 % of the worlds people who live in poorer conditions. Such users have no use for 'consumer' code. It will either be stripped out (regardless of any legal impedements - be realistic) or will come from manufacturers in China and the East where the freaks in Washington will be powerless to interfere in the economics of demand.

      Users of each class of computing will be very different in lifestyle and psychology. The former consumers only receive and pay money.

      The latter group are producers, or 'participants in the world' as I like to call them.

      Eventually these streams will be entirely incompatible, consumer computing will become more like TV.

      Eventually the former 'consumer' hardware will not even be considerd 'COMPUTERS' , being so crippled and controlled as not to function as general purpose computing devices (as Turing would have it).

      Eventually the former class of devices will die out as society changes from a mindless consumer mentality to an active population (or dies out itself, as a matter of deductive logic eitherway the consumer technolgy dies)

      Computers fit a particular definition - they are general purpose ordination devices - make them any less capable and they are no longer computers and cannot be sold as such.

  4. Re:LinuxBIOS by corebreech · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yeah, but it's firmware that does a lot of hairy shit. Getting the CPU to talk to everything on the board and doing it at the maximum possible speed is not for the faint of heart.

    That said, I see now with AMD64 that the CPU is the memory controller, so maybe it won't be so bad.

  5. Re:Or, buy a Mac... by Nikkos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Why? Because Microsoft has declared that thir next operating system will only run on Trusted Computing hardware and it is flat-out IMPOSSIBLE to sell hardware if it can't run Windows."

    This is stupid. If no motherboards adopted trusting computing, it'd be fucking hard to sell Windows.

  6. Submit to Trusted Computing or be DENIED internet! by Alsee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Customers using Cisco's network admission control system can permit network access only to compliant and trusted endpoint devices (for example, PCs, servers, personal digital assistants) and restrict the access of non-compliant devices.

    ISP's can install these new Cisco routers and you will be denied internet access unless you submit to Trusted Computing.

    The routers are advertized as fighting "viruses", but they do not in fact scan for or block viruses. What they do is first check if you are running Trusted Computing. If not they deny you a connection. They can then be configured to verify that you are running specific software such as up to date anti-virus software.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  7. Linux and Mac? by jcr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, does this mean that Mac becomes the preferred hardware platform for linux?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  8. Changing problem by tesloni · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If I properly understand documents which I can found about Trusted Computing I think that no one except certified TC/MS tehnicians can legaly change BIOS software if it is protected by DRM rules.

    That may be an bigger problem if other BIOS vendors do the same thing.

    After all maybe we are all forced to back to old Altair 800 days. Or to stay with current owned hardware and wait on market selfregulation (if no one buy an new HW/SW combination vendors must change rules if they want to survive). Or to buy an hardware which doesn't have TC/DRM/... features.

  9. Re:Trust Me. by vangilder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would argue the opposite. Look at the iPod. It's not obvious how to copy music to multiple song libraries, but it's not overly difficult either. Apple tends to place much more responsibility onto the end user. Even the iTunes Music Store follows this philosophy. The AAC's themselves are restricted to a certain number of authorized computers, but you can burn them to unlimited CDs. I feel that this strategy will continue with their hardware-some restrictions, but with most of the "trust" in trusted computing being placed in the users themselves.

  10. Re:say what? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I second that. Sun's OpenPROM (Sun's version of OpenFirmware) is one of those details that help make Sparcs kick ass systems. The BIOS started as a "poor man's firmware" with all device interaction simplified into a "standard" set of hardware. Thus no new drivers would ever be needed, thus a simple program/set of interrupts worked perfectly. Yet today, we're trying to make PCs into high end workstations. We could do that far more effectivly if the BIOS didn't get in the way.

    I'm curious. Does anyone know a reason why a PC BIOS chip couldn't be swapped with an OpenFirmware chip? I assume there are a few details such as launch location (0x07F0 IIRC) which must be taken into account. Plus, many OSes may have difficulties if the BIOS is not present. However, both those problems are fixable. Does anyone know of other issues?

    More Info:

    OpenFirmware
    Free OpenFirmware Implementation

  11. This Is Great News by istartedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Industry standard company ditching their flagship product; consumer demand for said product remains strong; product still selling.

    I'll use my contacts, call some venture capitalists, and get the ball rolling.

    OK. Not really. But you get the idea. Whenever something like this happens, too many people pessimisticly assume that nothing can be done about it. They remind me of C3PO--"we're all doomed.".

    No. You're not doomed. Crisis. Opportunity. Mmmmm... Crisitunity.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  12. Re:LinuxBIOS by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No. You are not breaking the encryption, you would be removing and replacing it. If you buy something, you have the right to do whatever the hell you want with it. If they (Microsoft and other DRM proponents) say you can't, then basically what that translates into is that you are no longer buying a computer, but you are *renting/leasing* it under *THEIR* terms. I don't rent or lease computers that *they* control. No fucking way!

    --
    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.