[ale] OT: micro mini nano PC

[agcarver+ale at acarver.net (Alex Carver)]

Perhaps but the hardware companies want to sell hardware so if they make
it too difficult their sales will drop.  Linux isn't so niche anymore
and it could affect their profits.  And if one doesn't sell it someone
else will.

On 2016-01-30 13:56, Steve Litt wrote:
> 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.