News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating systems. Parent comment

Re:Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating s... by Hydraulix989 on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @06:47PM (#12552952)
Yes, I wholly disagree with Garrett's attempts to redirect (or should I say, deflect) blame to Intel instead of Lenovo in this case. I've succinctly outlined my argument in most of my other posts in this thread.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating s... by farcical_tinpot on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @07:09PM (#12553076)
Garrett has a history of stonewalling and misdirection on these matters. It was the same with UEFI, Secure Boot and when he and Red Hat tried to casually shoehorn support for PE binaries into the Linux kernel, hoping no one would notice.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating s... by Hydraulix989 on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @08:45PM (#12553473)
Why is PE binary support a bad thing? Wine gets us mostly there already. Very interesting...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsoft aren't forcing Lenovo to block free operating s... by digi_owl on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @08:46PM (#12553475)
Leading to Torvalds making a comment about Red Hat going down on MS no less...
[ Parent | on HN ]