[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ale] OT: micro mini nano PC
- Subject: [ale] OT: micro mini nano PC
- From: cfowler at outpostsentinel.com (Chris Fowler)
- Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:13:14 -0500 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <CABo2fvAZCaGZx-8MuwXWYx+tM4_NV4zouRFw5M1j=jBCTVAyiA@mail.gmail.com> <CABo2fvCPy+XKKvQv+n=5NQG_C+s4+GcYbsi+Ot1p1D83r680-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPfJb3r8v1H=ONVyWZUJvgVPheQLFw3_zhmSojsfxWCj9LJ_ug@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAEo=5Px30Fn1rtePJPzab0mxm7=03sO3bmbhO52Do8nSfWq=-Q@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
> From: "Steve Litt" <slitt at troubleshooters.com>
> To: ale at ale.org
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 4:56:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [ale] OT: micro mini nano PC
> 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.
Most likely reason.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20160131/387772cd/attachment.html>