| reply to rexbinary
Re: Linux Foundation UEFI Secure Boot Key Delays Explained said by rexbinary:
So Tux, what are you going to do when you build your next rig with a 'cute' UFEI? Stick with the defaults? 
Like many things being foisted on users like me who are not interested....
Short term: I am hoarding non UEFI boards for just that purpose to avoid it for as long as possible. Which can take CPU upgrades and hold 16-32GB RAM.
And will look for non GUI based boards till they no longer exist. Then do what I need once.
Disable secure/restricted boot
Turn off num lock
change boot order
This is basically a UEFI tax now, similar to another tax... I really see no point in all this looks cuite. Mostly aimed at the ADD crowd of today who need glitz ... doesn't make understanding what CAS is and that changing that setting may not be a good idea unless you have a clue... but the cute GUI and even the current basic BIOS allows you to change it.. but the cute GUI just entices them to change things they probably don't need to mess with. And as I stated melt their motherboards.. which I hope they do.
Long term:
Thats why I am not looking forward to purchasing laptops
Tolerate a bunch GUI crap thats not needed to change a few settings once and get out it forever.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | And yet my UEFI systems have a user interface that is indistinguisable from the "character mode menu" of my older BIOS machines.
What I take from this is that, as usual, your target is badly chosen. The problem is not that UEFI permits vendors to come up with worthless glitz; it is that some vendors come up with worthless glitz. |
|
 MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | said by dave:And yet my UEFI systems have a user interface that is indistinguisable from the "character mode menu" of my older BIOS machines. Same here. My work laptop is UEFI, but it you wouldn't immediately know by looking at it. I don't really see what the big deal is. I've used the MOBO configuration screens only two or three times. How often does one reconfigure their MOBO? |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| said by Maxo:said by dave:And yet my UEFI systems have a user interface that is indistinguisable from the "character mode menu" of my older BIOS machines. Same here. My work laptop is UEFI, but it you wouldn't immediately know by looking at it. I don't really see what the big deal is. I've used the MOBO configuration screens only two or three times. How often does one reconfigure their MOBO? I don't see why anyone should be defensive about using the new interface. If I want to spend all day in it, taking screenshots or troubleshooting a broken motherboard, which is mostly what I've been doing with it since I got it, new BIOS chip seems to have fixed it, tyvm, What's it to ya?
If any boorish, insulting, ranting curmudgeon, posting in emacs or lynx or some such, can show me how EUFI is a hindrance to FOSS or its users or how his Etch-A-Sketch is a superior screenie tool, I'm all ears. As yet, I don't see a problem. |
|
| said by berserken:
motherboard, which is mostly what I've been doing with it since I got it, new BIOS chip seems to have fixed it, tyvm, What's it to ya?
Can I DISABLE all those cute annoying wasteful ADD graphics? ? ?
1) Its wasted ROM space
2) Its wasted development time that could be used to address real issue in the BIOS itself not some useless GUI for the BIOS for "tweaker/melters."
You can have all that so long as I can disable ALL of it and get my bog standard character based screens. Can I do that? ? ?
Didn't think so...
Not on any I've seen and all the MB OEM's tout this as some fantastic thing... BIG WHOOOP!
Thats what its to me!  
said by berserken:
If any boorish, insulting, ranting curmudgeon, posting in
I proudly am, THANK YOU!
said by berserken:
emacs or lynx or some such,
Don't use emacs, its interface is even more stupid than vi (flame away!), vi or nano only as its quick and easy on ssh sessions.
said by berserken:
can show me how EUFI is a hindrance to FOSS or its users ....As yet, I don't see a problem.
Ok....heres one.....
[mythbusters voice] Theres your problem! [/mythbuster voice]
»www.kubuntuforums.net/showthread···-hurdles
Heres a whole forum for problems...
»www.kubuntuforums.net/forumdispl···sistance
There was a thread there that started that was probably 10 pages deep about UEFI and its wonderfulness... all to get cute ooogey GUI and a taking screen shots that a simple digital camera or Droid can do.
Again, allow me to turn it all off to simple basic character interface AND NOT HAVE ISSUES BOOTING.
said by berserken:
or how his Etch-A-Sketch is a superior screenie tool, I'm all ears.
They make a serial connected Etch a Sketch! 
Cool! ! Have to get one of those...
Not all change is good oogley googely graphics on everything is not a good thing...
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | What is this, some save-a-transistor appeal?
What else would you have those transistors do? That would not be "bloat" according to someone?
We've moved beyond the M792-YB. |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| The links you apparently pulled out of your hat are not obvious evidence of some intrinsic problem with uefi. In general, it's evidence of new technology taking time to understand and those who misidentify uefi as their problem; it's evidence of superficiality and empty rhetoric. I hear the various new editions of Windows all have many complainers and decriers of what they don't understand, have not yet learned, many complaints of those who are incapable of listening and/or are too lazy to try.
Man, your serial smoke and mirror poseur tirades have long ago grown quite old. FOSS doesn't need that kind of shit. Nobody does. |
|
| said by berserken:
The links you apparently pulled out of your hat are not obvious evidence of some intrinsic problem with
No they were not pulled out of my hat... Till recently that forum didn't even exist...
There was a very extensive thread on a UEFI install of 12.04 which had all kinds of issues... there now is that subforum.
said by berserken:
Man, your serial smoke and mirror poseur tirades have long ago grown quite old. FOSS doesn't need that kind of shit. Nobody does.
Your entitled to your opinion. I vehemently feel you and others are seriously ignoring the issues that RESTRCITED BOOT and/or SECURE boot poses (CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU INFERERS!???!) to Linux over all.
UEFI is a solution ala waycrap ... Need to improve on the BIOS to work with new hardware, chipsets, etc. great, but UEFI is above and beyond that.. 90% of the crap in UEFI is that crap, oooey gui interfaces, snapshots of screens, embedded players, embedded software??? REALLY!???!
Plain and simple RESTRICTED BOOT and/or SECURE BOOT are meant for one thing as implemented and released. Linux lockout.
If you don't want to to agree with that and bury your head in the sand as ms shovels in the sand and water, go right ahead. I am not! ms is evil, period. This is an anti competivie move, pure and simple, and the hugh and cry needs to be raised.. You don't care for my methods and I don't care for the solutions of most distros or most of the laisez faire attitude over it here. Maybe when this was some dream of an idea it was a good idea.. as IMPLEMENTED AND RELEASED it has ONE AND ONLY ONE GOAL.
Linux LOCKOUT ! ! Period.
MS has shown it already... most here just continue to blow it off.. YOUR LOSS.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black.... |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| You've got no idea what uefi is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface
The interface defined by the EFI specification includes data tables that contain platform information, and boot and runtime services that are available to the OS loader and OS. UEFI firmware provides several technical advantages over a traditional BIOS system:[11]
Ability to boot from large disks (over 2 TiB) with a GUID Partition Table, GPT.[12][13]
CPU-independent architecture[12]
CPU-independent drivers[12]
Flexible pre-OS environment, including network capability
Modular design
[..]
GNU/Linux supports GPT. Linux should be built with option "CONFIG_EFI_PARTITION" enabled.[20] GNU Parted is required to manage disks and partitions, as fdisk does not support GPT. |
|
|
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
1 edit | reply to TuxRaiderPen
said by TuxRaiderPen:90% of the crap in UEFI is that crap, oooey gui interfaces, snapshots of screens, embedded players, embedded software??? REALLY!???! It is not mandatory for any firmware author to include such features.
And contrariwise, the old BIOS doesn't stop the likes of Dell from supplying their laptops with stupid embedded players (it's actually a reserved partition on the disk, with a dedicated button to boot from it) -- the point is that people that want to ship crap will find a way to ship crap; we might as well have standard crap.
Plain and simple RESTRICTED BOOT and/or SECURE BOOT are meant for one thing as implemented and released. Linux lockout.
The presence or absence of GUI capability in firmware is independent of the presence or absence of Secure Boot support. So, while you continue to drift from one to another, we'll continue to not take you seriously. |
|
 EUSKill cancerPremium
join:2002-09-10
canada | reply to TuxRaiderPen
I don't get your rant about UEFI GUI, BIOS is already GUI. |
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | said by EUS:I don't get your rant about UEFI GUI, BIOS is already GUI. It's a plot from Microsoft! |
|
| reply to EUS
said by EUS:I don't get your rant about UEFI GUI, BIOS is already GUI.
The BIOS font is probably Wingdings. |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | reply to EUS
said by EUS:BIOS is already GUI.
Everything still has VGA-compatibility, and VGA is a bitmapped display, so I suppose a sufficiently determined BIOS can draw whatever it wants. As witness the Intel logo on any Intel motherboard.
»embedded.communities.intel.com/c···uefi-gui |
|
