
Thread beginning with comment 495782
To view parent comment, click here.
RE[2]: Just to show
by ronaldst on Fri 4th Nov 2011 01:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Just to show"
Member since:


I don't have any links to give you but I'll tell you what I believe is wrong with UEFI. There was a video presention presented by the Plan9 guy Ron Minnich about CoreBoot which goes in further details.

UEFI itself is a small OS. It has it's own drivers. Which is duplicate functionality since Windows/MacOS/Linux must also provide the same drivers and functions. There are videos on Youtube where people boot up their PCs to the desktop and simply remove the BIOS chip while everything runs. And nothing crashes.

Security and costs. More code, more complex, more bugs, more space needed. UEFI does more than the current BIOS.

There are no technical reasons why a simple hardware init + payload straight to the OS couldn't be a replacement for today's BIOS.

The only reason we still have this excess layer is none other than protecting other people's IP and profits.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure someone will comment and tell me that I am wrong but those are my reasons about UEFI.

I'm not going to comment on the secureboot stuff because someone with a functioning brain knows there's no issue here. It's the usual fodder for the internet drama queens.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Just to show
by BushLin on Fri 4th Nov 2011 02:03 in reply to "RE[2]: Just to show"
BushLin Member since:

As predicted someone is writing to tell that they think you're wrong, although only on the small matter about removing BIOS chips.
I once had a bad flash and the system wouldn't boot, however I had a similar board nearby so I could boot to DOS on that, switch the *ROMS over and then force flash the BIOS image which failed previously.
Oh yeah, the point... While I'm not going to argue the merits of UEFI, what you said about removing the BIOS chip doesn't appear to prove anything as it doesn't seem any different to what was possible before.

Reply Parent Score: 1