Summary: Microsoft’s unwanted changes to the basis of Windows are likely to backfire in a major way
THE NEEDS of users aside, too little attention is being paid to what Microsoft does to de facto standards. Christine Hall takes a look at the booting scandal we recently wrote about, stating that there might be an agenda (which would upset OEMs):
Secure boot is the sort of security solution Microsoft loves. Back in the days when Windows was even less secure than it is now, one of their security solutions was to have software vetted and signed. Although this might have helped enterprise customers a bit, it did little to make the home user more secure, as any software would still install normally after clicking through an “are you sure” warning. If this scheme did anything, it hurt small vendors who couldn’t afford to go through the process of having their software approved by Redmond.
Secure boot is the same sort of scheme, except this time there’s no “are you sure” screen to click through. If a user is trying to install an operating system (or even run one from a live CD) on a machine with secure boot enabled, that operating system will have to have unlock keys to enable hardware devices. These keys are provided to the creator of the operating system at the whim of the hardware makers.
I can’t begin to explain the number of things wrong with this system. To begin with, for this feature to fulfill its intended purpose, the keys must be kept secret. Nobody but the hardware maker and, perhaps, the OS distributor, can have access to them – meaning they probably must be kept in binary form with no source code being made available.
Dr. Dobbs is meanwhile expressing scepticism about Vista 8 for the following reason:
Redmond once again pushes developers to forgo existing technologies and adopt a new UI and APIs — despite the lack of compelling benefits.
Techrights no longer covers Windows as much as it used to. Windows seems like it is already on its way out (gradual exit) because form factors change and Microsoft cannot keep up. But just worth noticing is this alienation of developers. Remember what Microsoft’s CEO was sweating about. All those developers who embraced KIN, SideKick, Windows Mobile, WP7, XAML/Silverlight and so on got seriously screwed. The next post will cover the death of the Zune. █
Summary: UEFI is Microsoft’s latest excuse for leaving GNU/Linux out in the cold
MICROSOFT loves blocking or suppressing GNU/Linux installations, typically using a process it keeps describing as a feature. Microsoft has been sabotaging the MBR using the excuses that it is hardto support it (funny how one or two GRUB developers can handle it just fine). There is antitrust evidence about it going decades back and there there is the war on fastbootingsystems and battles against Linux using VM restrictions (fighting Linux with a Windows EULA). We have covered many such examples, even those that extend to ACPI.
Computer scientists warn that proposed changes in firmware specifications may make it impossible to run “unauthorised” operating systems such as Linux and FreeBSD on PCs.
Proposed changes to the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) firmware specifications would mean PCs would only boot from a digitally signed image derived from a keychain rooted in keys built into the PC. Microsoft is pushing to make this mandatory in a move that could not be overridden by users and would effectively exclude alternative operating systems, according to Professor Ross Anderson of Cambridge University and other observers.
“Microsoft could lock out Linux with Tivoization” was Homer’s (Slated.org) explanation. He pointed out that “The upshot is that in order to run Linux on machines with UEFI secure boot enabled, the new bootloader, kernel and all other binaries must be signed by a key that is accepted and distributed by the OEM. In practice this means Linux will only run on machines that are either preinstalled with Linux by the OEM, or on machines where UEFI secure boot is not enabled. Given Microsoft’s demands, the latter seems unlikely, and the former would essentially spell an end to Linux (or any other OS) users having any sort of autonomy WRT which distro they use, on the extremely rare occasion Microsoft’s subjugated “partners” even bothered to preinstall Linux at all. On most machines, Linux would simply be locked out entirely.
“If this does pan out the way I’m sure Microsoft would like it to, our only hope is for antitrust regulators step in and force OEMs to allow consumers to opt-out of UEFI secure boot, to enable them to install whatever they want on their own damned property.
“This is by far the biggest threat to consumers’ freedom and choice we’ve yet seen on PCs. It literally turns the keys to the entire PC industry over to Microsoft.
“I wonder how much Linus “likes Tivoization” now?”
Is Microsoft finally resigned to the fact that Windows can never again be the dominant operating system on our planet? Or is the behemoth planning to make one final attempt to control what you use?
Sean Michael Kerner has good coverage, whereas Sam Dean apologises somewhat or gives the benefit of the doubt to Microsoft by writing: “It’s highly doubtful this will end up being a concern when the final version of Windows 8 comes to fruition. Microsoft has become increasingly aware that IT administrators are interested in heterogenous environments where many people want to use multiple operating systems. We’ve also noted that Windows 8 is taking some of its cues from Linux. It’s not in Microsoft’s best interest to box out alternative operating systems.”
Well, gentle headlines exist as well and they come from the expected sources. Microsoft boosters try to belittle the problem, whereas Linux advocates do not. Based on antitrust material we know that Microsoft often does this knowingly and deliberately, citing internal communication.
According to other articles, this debacle “was discovered by Linux developer Matthew Garrett, who’s been doing a lot of work with EFI booting in general for his day job. Recent UEFI specifications have allowed for “secure boot” that requires an OS to have a signed key in system firmware to work.”
Mr. Corbet summarises Garrett’s article as follows:
Matthew Garrett has posted an article about the UEFI “secure boot” feature and its potential impact on Linux.
Katherine Noyes, a great GNU/Linux advocate, challenges this move by Microsoft and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols says that “Microsoft tries to block Linux off Windows 8 PCs” (he does not give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt).
If this wasn’t so sad, it would be funny. After Microsoft recently declared victory over Linux, it turns out that Microsoft appears is still trying to arrange it so that Linux won’t even boot on the next generation of PCs that come with Windows 8. Yeah, Linux isn’t on your enemy list anymore right Microsoft? Sure.
Matthew Garrett, a Red Hat engineer, gets the credit for spotting Microsoft’s latest anti-Linux move. In a blog posting, Garrett explains that Windows 8 logo guidelines require that systems have Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) secure boot enabled. This, in turn, would block Linux, or any other operating system, from booting on it.
There’s nothing in UEFI that’s wrong. Indeed there’s a lot of good in UEFI. It’s a 21st century replacement for your PC’s basic input/output system (BIOS). Its job is to initialize your hardware and then hand over control over to the operating system.
Microsoft cheered Windows users earlier this month when it demonstrated the upcoming Windows 8 operating system booting in eight seconds. Part of the technology behind the fast boots, however, could enable Microsoft and its PC vendor partners to block users from loading Linux on a Windows 8 PC, according to a Matthew Garrett, a mobile Linux developer at Red Hat, writing in a Sept. 20 blog post.
We also covered this issue in tonight’s episode of TechBytes (to be published shortly). “Microsoft must clarify the Windows 8 boot spec and how it impacts Linux” says this last article we that we wanted to mention:
This is not a small issue. If Microsoft does attempt to make it impossible for the average consumer to install and run Linux aside of Windows 8, it will lose whatever inroads that it has made with developers in the past few years. Even more, it’s restrictive and could open the company to even more anti-trust scrutiny.
Perhaps there is no issue. It could be that Microsoft has foreseen this issue and has a workaround (at worst). But we don’t know, because Microsoft won’t tell us. They will, but the company will have suffered from its reticence to not pipe up with the truth.
The bottom line is, Microsoft is already under a lot of pressure and it’s unlikely to get away with this trick ‘by surprise’. Same ol’ Microsoft is up to no good. █
“I’ve been thinking long and hard about this, and the only conclusion I can come to is that this is ethically indistinguishable from bribery. Even if no quid-pro-quo is formally required, the gift creates a social obligation of reciprocity. This is best explained in Cialdini’s book Influence (a summary is here). The blogger will feel some obligation to return the favor to Microsoft.”
Summary: Dubious ‘gifts’ from Microsoft (to the only users Microsoft sees as valued) are being converted into cash through eBay
IT MIGHT be years before Vista 8 is available for use, so we try not to mention it. Just mentioning it would help Microsoft, but it is already failing, so we thought we should make a quick post without linking to any promotional material.
“Microsoft calls it a “gift”, but we just call it a bribe and we are not alone.”As we expected all along, Microsoft was bound to bribe some bloggers or influential people for positive coverage (see this previous time). Microsoft does this every time and some days ago it gave 5,000 free Samsung-built tablets. According to reports, some of these ended up on eBay because recipients were not impressed and preferred turning Microsoft’s tablet bribe into cash. Microsoft calls it a “gift”, but we just call it a bribe and we are not alone.
Summary: Microsoft copies more of KDE4, even several years after KDE 4.0 was released
IN ORDER to push aside discussions about the declining sales of Windows, Microsoft likes to bring up Windows 8, which we sometimes refer to as “Vista 8″ because it’s merely a succession of Vista, just a better-looking version of it. Technically, it is more retarded than predecessors (like a phone). It’s also a catchup job based on this Microsoft booster who admit that Vista 8 “will combine file download dialogue boxes into a single box, you’ll be able to stop and pause downloads, and rather than trying to estimate how long a download has left to run, the new operating system will instead feature a graph that shows the data transfer speed, transfer rate trend, and how much data is left to transfer.”
So basically, Microsoft copies KDE 4 about 4 years late. Back in 2005 or 2004 I found in the KDE sites (maybe KDE-Look) a suggestion for this in the form of a mockup, so the idea goes a long way before KDE4 development, even before KDE 4.0 was out.
Vista 8 will be little different above the surface (still mimicking GNU/Linux) and mostly the same under the hood, i.e. a slow piece of junk, especially for file transfers (I/O in Windows is notoriously poor). Some time in the future there will be a poor man’s (or woman’s) GNU/Linux and it will be called “Windows 8″. Can anybody explain what Windows can do that GNU/Linux cannot? We are talking about operating system features here, not applications. Real innovation happens in GNU/Linux; neither Apple nor Microsoft, which mass-market and take credit for other people’s work. █
Oiaohm brought to our attention some important news (via IRC). He says regarding Windows 8: “I am expecting the screaming from the time of Windows 95 on DOS programmers.”
He elaborates: “Reason I expect Windows 8 to be extreme is MS has lost control and will attempt another Windows 95 like event to get control back. Before Windows 95, MS was also getting massively cloned and competed with.”
“Before Windows 95, MS was also getting massively cloned and competed with.” –Oiaohm“More proof MS is killing .NET on the client,” called it one person in USENET. “The development platform and tools strategy at Microsoft is getting increasingly complex,” explained Mary Jo Foley. Seeing the pattern yet?
“.NET will not go away on the server, but killing off the XAML team is another indication that .NET is being culled for client stuff,” wrote one person. ”Everything’s moving towards HTML5 / Javascript. If developers don’t like this idea and start leaving in droves, Redmond’s downfall will be swift.”
Here is another take on it. “Now let’s see how mono copes,” concludes Oiaohm. Mono will be the subject of our next post. It’s a bad time to be a C# developer. █
Summary: The farcical version/derivative of Vista known as “Windows 8″ gets ridiculed even in the corporate press
YESTERDAY we quoted Dvorak on Windows 8. As we argued all along, it turns out that Microsoft does not have a new version of Windows. A DRM-laden shop is not an operating system feature and the current build lacks compelling features to actually make many sales (sales to OEMs should not count, as the end buyer makes no actual choice). “So Microsoft has demonstrated Windows 8,” wrote Will in IRC. “Sounds like it’s basically Windows Phone 7 on a PC.” Or worse than that: as Wired Magazine puts it, this is “Just Windows 7 With a New Skin”. To quote:
Microsoft has shown an early look at Windows 8. The upcoming OS is designed to run on any machine, from a tablet to a desktop PC, and while it has some genuinely clever features, it is at heart yet another skinned version of regular old Windows. Here’s a video of it in action. Skip to a minute in if you don’t care to hear about how tired the poor Windows 8 team is after so much work.
Vista, “Vista 8″ and “Vista 7″ as we call them (because Windows 8 is like Mojave and Windows 7 to Vista) sure looks like it is too little, too late in a world of mobility. Microsoft has resorted to hardware bribery — not just OEM kickbacks — in a desperate attempt to slow down the inevitable. GNU/Linux and Android are rising and overcoming Microsoft’s crimes against the industry. █
“In the face of strong competition, Evangelism’s focus may shift immediately to the next version of the same technology, however. Indeed, Phase 1 (Evangelism Starts) for version x+1 may start as soon as this Final Release of version X.”
Summary: Stating the obvious about an operating system that has not a single selling point of substantial value
“If Win 8 only includes the superficial features that are predicted, then it’s a tweak of Win 7, not a new OS, and we shouldn’t have to pay for it,” wrote John Dvorak last week. Microsoft is too busy trying to block Linux at OEM levels (Windows is dying in x86 land) and amid “Windows 8″ hype our reader Ryan, who is a former Microsoft MVP, says that the “same could be said of Windows 7″ as “it’s just superficial tweaks of Vista” (see our pages about 7 and 8, the better marketed versions of Vista). The promise of a ‘new’ operating system merely shows that Microsoft is nervous. █
Summary: The latest round of vapourware tactics from Microsoft helps show that Windows is having a crisis which is a matter of great urgency
FOR THOSE who have not noticed, as Windows numbers go down Microsoft is starting to float Vista 8, selling the illusion that it’s almost here and that it will do everything anyone has ever conceived. By doing this, Microsoft may discourage some businesses’ migration to Vista 7; people whom I know closely are having problems with Vista 7 and some regret leaving XP to move to it (this afternoon I had one person tell me this). On the other hand, Microsoft resorts to talking about products that do not yet exist in the market because, as its internal documents put it[PDF], “In the face of strong competition, Evangelism’s focus may shift immediately to the next version of the same technology, however. Indeed, Phase 1 (Evangelism Starts) for version x+1 may start as soon as this Final Release of version X.”
As usual, Microsoft sells the illusion that people should use the latest of everything and waste more money on it, even when the latest software is fragile, unproven, and prone to bricking. MSBBC writes about SQL flaws which have just targeted Microsoft software:
Early reports suggested that the attackers were hitting sites using Microsoft SQL Server 2003 and 2005 and it is thought that weaknesses in associated web application software are proving vulnerable.
Ongoing analysis of the attack reveals that the attackers managed to inject code to display links to 21 separate domains. The exact numbers of sites hit by the attack is hard to judge but a Google search for the attackers’ domains shows more than three million weblinks are displaying them.
Those who want a secure operating system are better off just leaving Microsoft altogether, not to mention cost savings and other commonly-stated advantages. My boss/collague has just bought a Mac, having used Vista 7 for a while. He is leaving Windows and that whole antiquated mindset. Windows does not seem to impress people all that much. UNIX and Linux become dominant not just in phones but on desktops too. One adoption curve drives the other and people who own an Apple or Google phone sooner or later rethink their desktop operating system (a personal observation). █
“I’d put the Linux phenomenon really as threat No. 1.”
