Hacker News Reader

Comment by abrowne | Hacker News Reader

No, only on Intel.

From the "Requirements for certifying Windows 8 systems" PDF available at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/windows/hardware/hh748188 :

    MANDATORY. On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified [...]

    On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode. Only Standard Mode may be enabled.

View on HN

    On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode. Only Standard Mode may be enabled.

Does this mean that , on compliant ARM devices, only Windows 8 may be run? If so, how is this not anti-competitive?

If it is anti-competitive, then what? There's no Microsoft monopoly on ARM they could leverage, they own nothing of that market.

I thought it was that anti-competitive actions were illegal (or just heavily frowned upon?) and monopolies in and of themselves aren't bad, just if they abuse their power in an anti-competitive way.

IIRC, it's basically has to be the combinations of the two. Monopolies aren't illegal in and of themselves. But neither are actions that may be deemed anti-competitive. It's only illegal when a monopoly (or a dominant player - doesn't have to be a monopoly) exploits its position to gain further advantage through anti-competitive actions.

I guess it depends how you define the market. One could argue that they're abusing their dominant position in "consumer operating system" market.

How does that prevent a signed Ubuntu loader from running? Custom mode is to allow running differently-signed or unsigned loaders, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com