Slashdot Mirror
UEFI Formed to Replace BIOS
anonymous cow-herd writes "Businesswire reports that several leading technology companies including Intel, AMD, Microsoft, IBM, Dell and HP and others have formed the Unified EFI Forum. The non-profit corporation will assume responsibility for the development and promotion of the EFI specification, a pre-boot interface originally developed by Intel that is intended to replace the aging PC BIOS."
I don't see Apple in there at all. They're going x86, I'd think it'd be in their best interests to be involved in the low level stuff so they can bolt on their Apple-specific goop a bit easier.
Have to admit that #2 is the prime reason I want new bootware. Dammit, the whole software IDE raid thing has me pissed. Why do I need drivers (except for software management) for RAID that pretends to be ATAPI? Either implement it as a real ATAPI translation layer, so I don't need drivers, or don't call it "IDE" raid. jeebus.
If USB could figure out driverless storage, I'm sure the rest of the industry can. How many different ways of defining storage can there be?
Networking too. I'm sick of device drivers. Sick I tell you! And not just because I run Linux. I've got an IBM T41 laptop, and trying to figure out which of 18 Windows ethernet/wifi configurations the thing came configured with is pissing me off.
What's wrong with the PC BIOS anyway? Give or take a few gremlins when new technologies are first introduced, the basic tech seems to have adapted remarkably well for a very long time. Since flashable BIOS technology is now routine, even the early adopter problems don't seem like that great an issue. What's the replacement supposed to offer as an advantage over tried-and-tested, apart from a few buzzwords?
On a more sinister note, there's no mention in TFA of DRM and the idea of "trusted" computing, but I can't help wondering whether this isn't one of the main aims behind the scenes, given who's supporting this new organisation.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Do you really think they'll take linux into consideration? Of the companies listed, some are dead set against linux, and others, such as IBM and HP - have a vested interest in it. Really, ultimately DRM is unavoidable as it benefits big business. This scares me....Any chance we can get Novell or Red Hat into the UEFI?
I've always wanted something similar to the old SGI Indy boot PROM monitor, but on PCs. While similar technology is widespread on Sun and Apple machines, amonst others, it is far superior to the simple option-toggling capabilities of most PC BIOSes. The shell was quite handy, and the built-in diagnostic tests were even better.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
... or why not have the fine folks who support OpenFirmware join the EFI group and work with them to make a standard that meets everyone's needs? I sure hope they don't have a "Not Invented Here" mentality that will stop them from working to create a real industry standard with a real industry group.
Leaders of OF should send EFI a letter. The worst they can say is "you're not welcome." But then everything will be right out in the open, won't it?
TW
Is there really any doubt whether Apple will use EFI in their machines?
Yes. You'll note that they're not listed as a member. Not invited? Not interested? Working on something else? Will they just license the developed tech from Intel? Who knows. But it's interesting that Dell is there but Apple is not.
--
$tar -xvf
well, OF exists for 1994 - so intel should have joined the OF effort (IEEE standard, even)
they didn't.. and defined a standard 10 times larger than OF, doing approximately the same
if we (the OF people) join them, the best that could happen is a combined standard 11 times larger than OF - not wise.
True, Dell tends to meander along behind whatever the crowd has already done, but IBM and HP both have vested interests in Linux. Somehow, I can't see them allowing MS bully-rights on this one.
Time to stock up on BIOS based systems. Once they get this change pushed through all new systems will be forced to ship with EFI. And the bets are running toward them incorporating some kind of DRM which will prevent alternative OSes from running on these new systems.
20 years from now there will be a huge market for "free" computers that don't have EFI/DRM built into the system. Of course by then it will be illegal to connect a non EFI/DRM system to the Internet. But a persitant group of hackers will devise numerous methods to mask "free" computers from the corporate Internet police (CIP) which routinely scan all systems connected to the Internet looking for non-compliant systems. And in further efforts to eliminate the hacker menace the new EFI standards will be designed to scan a computers hard drives looking for signs of any activity deemed illegal by the CIP. This of course leads to several people having their doors knocked down and flash bangs thrown through the windows as the CIP confiscates their systems when they find more than a few dozen mp3 files on the users computer systems which don't have proper DRM tags.
Many more people will have their systems confiscated and accounts frozen when their computers report back that they used certain terms in IM sessions and email such as "she was the bomb last night!"
Of course the system will omit everything but the term "bomb".
Without a doubt it is a Not Invented Here Syndrome, in addition to a "we don't own the patent" disorder.
OpenFirmware is clearly a better alternative but it reeks of IBM and that scares most of the companies mentioned..
-if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
...to find out why BIOS is antiquated crap. Apple didn't invent Open Firmware, but they make very good use of it.
Four examples:
-Hold down a key at startup to boot from CD/DVD.
-Hold down a different key at startup to boot from a network volume (if available).
-Hold down another different key at startup to give you a menu of all bootable volumes, and boot from the one you want-- external, internal, it doesn't matter.
-Hold down yet another different key at startup to have the machine act as an external hard drive.
The features above make troubleshooting a wayward, non-booting Mac a breeze, and they come in very handy at other times as well. If you encounter a non-booting Windows PC, you almost always need another computer nearby to effectively troubleshoot and fix it.
Ever since Apple announced the move to Intel, I've been a little worried about losing those features-- but I'm hopeful that they will find a way to keep them alive on Intel-based Macs.
~Philly
It was Apple that popularised it. I can imagine that Apple will be one of the first to EFI as well, since the others have major legacy problems to contend with.
My guess is that Apple will use EFI in their x86 based offerings as both Quanta and Asustek (see the press releases) have recently announced that they will use the AMI EFI implementation (Aptio) in their products. If my memory serves me correct, both these companies have manufactured, or are currently manufacturing Apple hardware.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Funny, cause Intel, AMD, HP, and DELL are all four linux supporters. Seems to me that Microsoft is the only one that is anti-linux.
If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
I agree, the main drive here is DRM. And for a long time I've been anti-DRM (seeing how poor I am and all) But I've recently had a new outlook. I think DRM is important. It's important for people to have certain safeguards. That's only fair. BUT (and its a big BUT) DRM is also ripe for abuse. For the consumer, potential abuses such as region and device differntiation that requires paying for the same contant multiple times, or not being able to protect against data loss w/ backups. For the artist, in that the recording companies will control the DRM technology and set the entry bar too high driving independent artist out of the market. Not to mention OSS being left out in the cold too.
I think what the anti-DRMs need to do is change their focus. Compromise with the big companies over DRM ensuring us common folk good Fair-Use laws. Then everyone will be happy.
:T:R:A:N:S:
If you actually read my comment you'd see that I'm saying I don't mind DRM hardware and DRM software because I will not use any application that uses DRM. That also applies for when I go Mac - maybe my Mac will have DRM built in to protect iTMS purchases. So what. I don't buy music online. Or any other media thats subject to DRM.
Nor will I use any app that DRM's its files..
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
I'm sorry but do you people take the time to read up before you complain? This is a wonderful opportunity for the open source movement. EFI makes booting multiple operating systems like a thousand times easier. Instead of having a single boot record on the hard disk boot information is stored in a data table and given as an option to the user who selections the OS they want.
A thousand times? Is it really *that* hard right now? It seems like EFI is basically just moving GRUB from the MBR into a bit of flash rom, then adding DRM to make sure I'm not trying to boot an OS the EFI chip doesn't approve of.
This means that Linux can be installed without breaking the existing installations or screwing with the boot loader at all. The DRM is a problem but there is not too much information about if there is going to be a lot of DRM in this new bios replacement.
I can do all of this with existing technology. And without DRM. You imply that people having doubts in regards to this technology have those feelings out of ignorance, yet you yourself say that "...there is not too much information...there is going to be a lot of DRM..."
So, basically, we should be exicited that a number of tech companies want to replace a working technolgy with a version, which while it may work marginally better, will also prevent us from using and controlling the use of our machines as we see fit? Now *that's* ignorance.
IMNSHO, OpenFirmware is way too open.
r y/pa-dw-slof.html
PC industry is filled with crippled hardware. Only if people knew the quality of what they buy...
It is quite showing that OF is adopted only by Sun & Apple: both well know for quality harware with good record. Companies not afraid to respond to customers claims. And frequently responding.
Additionally, from rumors I have heard, EFI is designed madularly, and modules basicly can be any kind of binary blobs. So EFI will improve nothing on side of BIOS - it will remain closed source, and will quite quickly end-up being fix for every hole system might potentially have. Just like BIOS.
After all, all those magic stuff they promise, can be as easily implemented on top of modern BIOS. There is no technical problems as it is. *NO* *TECHNICAL* *PROBLEMS*. Many companies have source code for BIOS. Just sit down and do it. Just like IBM did with Slimline Open Firmware - stripped down version of OF, sufficient to boot Linux on JS20 blades.
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/power/libra
P.S. From what I have heard about BIOS developement, it is low amount of flash which is problem: normally installed on PCs is only 64k. That's the problem - not BIOS itself. EFI I'm sure will mandate something like 1MB minimum of flash - after all the prices are now so much lower. But still as it stands: there is no un-solvable problem with BIOS.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
First off, the reason I used the term "Not Invented Here" was because that was the term the original post used. I'm not bashing Open Firmware.
Second off, 'Trusted Computing' can, and likely, will coexist with I-have-control-of-my-own-box computing. The question is, how will that coexistance work?
1. Is it gonna work by the Linux community needing to buy seperate motherboards with seperate firmware and seperate CPUs.
2. Is it gonna work by the Linux community hacking the firmware in ways that aren't technically legal (think Xbox) so the business community won't have anything to do with it.
3. Or is it gonna work by having firmware where 'Trusted Computing' can be turned off and on (or forced off and on) depending on the OS you choose to run?
If the F/OSS doesn't work with major industry groups, you're going to get #1 or #2 and F/OSS operating systems will be marginalized or worse. If they work with the industry groups you'll at least get a shot at #3.
There is a good second reason though. If F/OSS wants to be part of the computing community then they're going to have to come out of their F/OSS burrows occasionally and join industry groups to create industry standards. Yes, it's hard. Yes, lots of these groups don't work. Yes, some of these companies are evil, or mean, or monopolistic. So what?
There's a term for people who don't join in the decision making process and then complain about it afterwords when the decisions go against them. Actually there are several terms, but the one I want to use today is "childish". It's time for F/OSS to grow up and actually play with the big boys.
TW
Us geeks have more power than you give us credit for. Nobody in my extended family buys anything computer related without asking me first. Its annoying, I end up being tech support for all the aunts and uncles and cousins, but its the way it is.
They come to me and say "Hey, I want to do X with my computer, will *something they configured somewhere* do the job".
I'll say, "No, that's an EFI box, you don't want that", and they'll get something else I recommend.
Even non technical folks can understand a simple comment like "The only thing this 'new and exciting' technology gives you over the old tech is the ability to have someone else tell you what you can and can not do with your computer".
I turned everyone that asked me away from Divx (and the reason I mentioned above was the driving force behind people's decision to go with my recommendation), and I'll do the same with any trusted computing platform. And I'll advocate boycotting any company that tries to force it on us (hell, I still don't buy anything from Circuit City).
I know perhaps not everyone on slashdot believes in the benifits of Freedom software, however if you look at the parent link you will see that firmware which stores the bios is programmable these days. Many people have said in response to this article "good now we can finally have a proper BIOS that does what it should". However there are already several open BIOS alternatives available. LinuxBIOS and OpenBIOS are both mentioned in the discussion here.
The obstacle to a free BIOS is the reluctance of manufacturers to releast the necessary information to allow the BIOS to control the hardware.
Perhaps if they allow their hardware to be freely programmable they will be excluded from the "trusted computing" allowable hardware?
I have a question, if anyone is familiar with this. Do hardware manufacturers take the specs for a BIOS and port it to their hardware when installing it, or do they release their specifications to the BIOS developers?
Perhaps we are needing freedom hardware manufacturers. I wonder, if the F/OSS community was to design specs for free hardware would there be any incentive for someone to manufacture it?
I suppose it depends on how much of a market there is for a totally free/customizable computing system.