zlacker

>>Zuider+(OP)
Hmmm maybe i should keep windows offline for a few days…..

>>bratwu+B8
I always use opportunities like this to experiment with whatever workflow I have on Linux to see what state it's at. I just game on Windows and do work on Linux so for me the transition is always quite simple: just install what you want on Steam/lutris and compare performance.

Last time I was starting vanishing of Ethan Carter, but even though it was playable, the experience wasn't free of stutters, whereas windows ran flawlessly.

In any case, it is always nice to jump back and check out how far Linux has come.

>>gchamo+x9
A stolen code signing certificate affect Linux in the same capacity as Windows.

I'm of course ignoring the fact that a lot of Linux distros still do not have Secure Boot enabled by default, and therefore do not enforce any kernel driver signing policy.

>>Genbox+Td
Probably because those distros haven't developed a relationship with Microsoft. I'm reasonably certain that in order to distribute Linux on SB, you have to build the kernel as a Windows executable and get MS to sign it.

>>jart+Yp
Most manufactures decided to include Microsoft's signing key into firmware. That is not something Microsoft is in control of. Pre-loaded (factory) keys are much harder for Linux as it seems every distro wants their own signing key, and from an administration perspective, that is not easy to keep track of.

Everyone can load their own signing keys into firmware. However, if you want something that "just works", Microsoft signs a package called Shim[1] that can be loaded on most computers due to the pre-loaded keys.

A relationship with Microsoft is not needed in any way or form to have Secure Boot.

[1] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim

>>Genbox+jy
> Most manufactures decided to include Microsoft's signing key into firmware. That is not something Microsoft is in control of.

AFAIK if a manufacturer wants to sell Windows PC, it has to support secure boot.