News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops?. Parent comment

Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by shawnz on Friday January 10, 2020 @11:26PM (#22018124)
Doesn't UEFI also support aarch64? Why can't vendors use that?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by gsnedders on Saturday January 11, 2020 @01:46AM (#22018570)
Windows 10 requires UEFI support, so any ARM device that supports Windows 10 uses UEFI.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by solarkraft on Saturday January 11, 2020 @04:15AM (#22019025)
Hey, that's wonderful. What I had read before pointed to every device having some weird undocumented mess.

But: Is the bootloader even unlockable to install alternative software?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by gsnedders on Saturday January 11, 2020 @06:12AM (#22019319)
> But: Is the bootloader even unlockable to install alternative software?

IIRC, MS require the device to support Secure Boot, but whether or not you can disable it or whether you can add other signing keys is undefined (and I have no idea what vendors do). (Originally the requirement was it must be always enabled and only the OEM could add keys, but that has since changed.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by timthorn on Saturday January 11, 2020 @03:19PM (#22022028)
There's a port of Ubuntu available. It isn't yet complete but it does boot on Windows on Arm devices.

https://github.com/aarch64-laptops/linux

[ Parent | on HN ]