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.

Comments

LinuxBIOS

[Howard Beale]

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

The sky isn't falling. The sky HAS Fallen.

[RLiegh]

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.

Re:The sky isn't falling. The sky HAS Fallen.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Or, buy a Mac...

[Nikkos]

"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.

Submit to Trusted Computing or be DENIED internet!

[Alsee]

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.

-

Re:Trust Me.

[vangilder]

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.