[ale] OT: micro mini nano PC

[Steve Litt]

My personal suspicion has always been that Microsoft's motivation for
secure boot was anti-Linux, anti-BSD monopolism. The harder they can
make it to boot Linux, the less people will run Linux.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
January 2016 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28


On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 11:50:26 -0800
Alex Carver <agcarver+ale at acarver.net> wrote:

> Certainly seems that way.  I also suspect that there's an element of
> anti-piracy in the requirement, too.  If the kernel isn't properly
> signed because it's a modified copy to get around all of the
> activation requirements then your computer won't boot either.
> 
> On 2016-01-30 11:37, Jim Kinney wrote:
> > So....
> > 
> > Windows is so unsecureable they have to require hardware devices to
> > guarantee their kernel is real or else the computer won't boot.
> > On Jan 30, 2016 1:01 PM, "Alex Carver" <agcarver+ale at acarver.net>
> > wrote: 
> >> On 2016-01-30 09:31, Steve Litt wrote:  
> >>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 23:20:22 -0500
> >>> Chuck Payne <terrorpup at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>  
> >>>> Intel NUC isn't just for windows, I have seen a tons of them
> >>>> running openSUSE, Fedora, and Ubuntu. As long as you can do a
> >>>> secure boot install, you can run Linux on them.  
> >>>
> >>> That lets me out. I use Void Linux.
> >>>
> >>> SteveT
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Secure boot can be disabled on the NUCs.  It's only required for
> >> installing Windows.  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo