Torvalds asks: "Is Intel basically saying 'we are committed to selling you shit forever and ever...

>Torvalds asks: "Is Intel basically saying 'we are committed to selling you shit forever and ever, and never fixing anything'?"
businessinsider.com/linus-torvalds-linux-inventor-is-furious-at-intel-2018-1
Fucking kek.

Other urls found in this thread:

coreboot.org/TianoCore
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

EFI is awesome, but ACPI is absolute garbage.
Also he has every right to be angry at Intel.

Linus and Stallman are /ourguys/

efi is ABSOLUTE GARBAGE YOU CUNT

EFI fixed a lot of problems, and being able to boot EFI files is a godsend for multiboot systems. I guess a lot of you folks don't remember the days where GRUB would routinely 'forget' where an OS was and render it unbootable. EFI solved that issue entirely.

"businessinsider" making up things as usual. That quote is just a response to a illogical patch from Intel which just tested if it's x86 or not (which was a rather asshole move against AMD by Intel, btw, and I do love AMD's response).

And Linus is asking a very fair question, why wouldn't they have some kind of check for affected CPUs and a way to disable it so it wouldn't be applied to future Intel CPUs unless they aren't going to fix it in future CPUs?

His rage is, like it always is, against bad code and bad code practice, not Intel in particular. And it's a good thing.

syslinux doesn't have this problem :^)
efi btfo

>grub sucks so we should install a hardware botnet on the fucking motherboard

get fucked, cunt

>taking quotes out of context
ah yes, tasty

EFI specification does not specify any botnet

...EFI is a spec for the general design of low-level firmware. It has literally nothing to do with hardware. You sure you know what EFI is?

lilo worked just fine, if you changed hard drives from IDE ports and cable positions it was your fault. Also you can use hashes for your drives with grub just fine without EFI.

>firmware has nothing to do with hardware
you sure you know what anything is?

>UEFI is much more complex than the BIOS that it replaced. It consists of millions of lines of code and is an entire operating system, with network device drivers, graphics, USB, TCP, https, etc, etc, etc. All of these features represents increased "surface area" for attacks, as well as unnecessary complexity in the boot process.

holy fuck the botnet shills are out in medium force tonight!

linus is my hero. yells at intel, nvidia, and stuff

u dumb nigga

>I guess a lot of you folks don't remember the days where GRUB would routinely 'forget' where an OS was and render it unbootable.
that was solved by identifying volumes by their UUID, which doesn't change, and is not related to EFI at all, i use UUIDs on my BIOS system (and GPT, for that matter, since grub can boot from a GPT disk on a BIOS machine)

>>UEFI is much more complex than the BIOS that it replaced. It consists of millions of lines of code and is an entire operating system, with network device drivers, graphics, USB, TCP, https, etc, etc, etc. All of these features represents increased "surface area" for attacks, as well as unnecessary complexity in the boot process.
KILL IT WITH FIRE

I guess intel ME isn't botnet either, r-right? :^)

IME is 100% a botnet. EFI is not.

>While Intel's edk2 tree that is the base of UEFI firmware is open source, the firmware that vendors install on their machines is proprietary and closed source. Updates for bugs fixes or security vulnerabilities are at the vendor's convienence; user specific enhancements are likely not possible; and the code is not auditable.

That's no different than all the proprietary BIOS code that existed. And if you find that problematic, install Libreboot.

I don't know how but it took people this long to figure this shit out, Intel was always about selling shit to you at max price.

Reminder that there is an open source UEFI implementation available as a Coreboot payload.
coreboot.org/TianoCore

>UEFI is much more complex than the BIOS that it replaced.
I agree that UEFI is bloat but it's a step in the right direction, only if todays CompSci weren't full of dudebros and actual autists we could of have had better implementation in no time

are you even paying attention to this thread?

>I agree that UEFI is bloat

>but it's a step in the right direction

>a step in the right direction
There's no reason why the OS shouldn't be handling networking, USB, TCP, https, etc. Adding that complexity to the base software shipped with the hardware is just asking for problems.

>Tries to piss everyone off
>Oh noes, y u no support muh loonix?

How much is AMD paying him?

>better implementation
see:

want to bribe him with the money you got selling intel stock, Brian?

Linus is best tech Youtuber.

>Though some people use Linux as an alternative to Windows or macOS, its best uses are in the cloud: The majority of servers and supercomputers run a Linux variant.
This journalist gets points for accuracy.

Host mac. Guest linux. Best