Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Signature PC Requirements Now Blocks Linux Installation: Reports
Reader sombragris writes: According to a well-documented forum thread, the Signature PC program by Microsoft now requires to lock down PCs. This user found out that his Lenovo Yoga 900 ISK2 UltraBook has the SSD in a proprietary RAID mode which Linux does not understand and the BIOS is also locked down so it could not be turned off. When he complained that he was unable to install Linux, the answer he got was: "This system has a Signature Edition of Windows 10 Home installed. It is locked per our agreement with Microsoft."
Even worse, as the original poster said, "[t]he Yoga 900 ISK2 at Best Buy is not labeled as a Signature Edition PC, but apparently it is one, and Lenovo's agreement with Microsoft includes making sure Linux can't be installed." As some commenter said: "If you buy a computer with this level of lockdown you should be told."
There is also a report on ZDNet which looks very understanding towards Lenovo, but the fact remains: the SSD is locked down in a proprietary RAID mode that cannot be turned off.
Even worse, as the original poster said, "[t]he Yoga 900 ISK2 at Best Buy is not labeled as a Signature Edition PC, but apparently it is one, and Lenovo's agreement with Microsoft includes making sure Linux can't be installed." As some commenter said: "If you buy a computer with this level of lockdown you should be told."
There is also a report on ZDNet which looks very understanding towards Lenovo, but the fact remains: the SSD is locked down in a proprietary RAID mode that cannot be turned off.
I was doing that 6-7 years ago, but I haven't worried about "driver support" for anything in Linux in about that long. Almost everything works these days - intentional sabotage by competitors being the obvious exception.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Such clauses need to be tried in court as well - a lot of EULAs aren't worth the paper they are written on.
Was the EULA provided before purchase?
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Do you say this about your iPhone or your smart TV or your blueray player or your automobile?
Damn right I do.
There are also plenty of locked down models in the same market that do not let you modify firmware or certain settings.
And it's HIGH time this became very illegal.
The lesson here is that a sufficiently large corporation is indistinguishable from government. --ultranova
But it should be possible to turn off that crap in BIOS/UEFI.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I think there is a difference in terminology.
A "workaround" implies that a manufacturer has intently put up roadblocks to installing whatever OS you please.
But until now...hardware, is hardware is hardware.
There's no difference (till now with the Windows thing) in buying a computer from Dell, or Apple, or Asus...etc....and you putting whatever OS you want on it.
It is JUST hardware, set to run whatever code you wish on it....at least that has been the model till now.
Apple sells you the hardware, it happens to come with their OS pre-installed, but really, once you give them your $$, they don't give a fuck what you do with it....
Apple pretty much uses for the most part, off the shelf components to do their computers...there is no "making it easy".....that doesn't enter into the equation really.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The biggest problem here is that it wasn't even disclosed to the buyer as being a "signature series". I am against lock down, but lack of disclosure is an even bigger problem.
OEMs ought to be disclosing whether or not their hardware has proprietary Windows drivers, however they don't do it. It goes beyond "let the buyer beware," a lot of times the info isn't there.
It's not just intentional sabatoge that can cause a lack of support. Newly release chipsets or other hardware often doesn't have initial Linux support. Sometimes it takes time for that to get incorporated into the kernel and make it's way up the pipeline. Moreover, each distro tends to incorporate new kernel changes at different paces, and it makes it hard to predict how soon support will arrive for new hardware.
I'm not sure if this is the case here. The story makes it sound like it was deliberate, which wouldn't be too surprising I guess, but it's hard to say.
In early December 2015 I built myself a Desktop using the latest Skylake Chipset (released 5th Aug 2015) and all I had to do was select "Other OS" and I installed Fedora 23 KDE spin without any problems. I did find an issue a short time later with my monitor which has two HDMI slots and DSUB slot. Basically, everything worked, however I also connected my PS4 to the spare HDMI port so I could switch between my PC and PS4 and this worked perfectly. Unfortunately switching back to the PC port dropped signal which required me to reset the PC.
The fix was for me to get the latest BIOS (the same day I found the problem) and this fixed the issue of toggling between PC and PS4 or my PS3 if I moved the HDMI cable across. I have been using this configuration ever since.
I can understand if graphics drivers are not available for a new graphics card but I would not be surprised if Microsoft is starting to pull tactics like what is mentioned in the article. Originally Microsoft wanted secure boot (to protect the users of course, cough! cough!) or UEFI. The problem with this is many major Linux distribution got UEFI certified as well which I would assume defeated the original purpose of having secure boot.
No, the issue is Microsoft is being Microsoft and nothing has changed.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Good God.. I've been sayin it. I've been sayin it for ten damn years. Ain't I been sayin it? Miguel.. Yeah, I've been sayin it.
Who releases a computer that won't run AHCI? From accounts of people who have looked into the BIOS .. AHCI is there but *intentionally* restricted from being enabled by customers. The people who did this knew exactly what this meant when they did it and what consequences of doing it would be yet they went ahead with it anyway.
But this is slashdot. It all is a vast conspiracy and MS and Windows have not changed in 20 years
http://saveie6.com/
GNU-Linux Evaluation
[Excellent] Stable platform for long-running server applications
[Excellent] Software development tool chains
[Excellent] FOSS software availability and variety
[Excellent] Support communities for FOSS software
[Excellent] Stable, smallish-footprint OS kernel + core services + APIs on which to build mobile device OS services and GUI
[Fail] Simple, Uniform, Highly Functional, Good UX GUI for desktop/laptop computing and entertainment hub
[Fail] Best-of-breed desktop productivity applications for everyday business and home computer users
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?