I know. The question is not about what’s possible today.
What prevents Microsoft from updating Windows PC standards and eliminate the possibility of turning off secure boot and allowance of enrolling your own keychain in the secure boot process?
These are long games. Being comfortable today doesn’t guarantee same comfort and allowances tomorrow.
Ironically, we’re discussing this under Android’s increasing restrictions.
The same Android which was championed as the bastion of mobile freedom when it first came out.
It goes back to the old arguments about free software vs open source. Maybe by restricting devs in certain ways the users are actually more free. But then maybe the system to lock the users in gets built with wholly proprietary software and there's less adoption overall of the FOSS software. I don't really have a good answer. I recently switched to grapheneOS but it feels like fighting a losing battle, and lots of apps don't like that I'm using a non official android build.
I worked at a big company where GPLv2 software could be used in our systems but not GPLv3. Is it better that that GPLv3 software didn't have more users? The company didn't contribute much back so maybe it's not a big loss.
What prevents Microsoft from updating Windows PC standards and eliminate the possibility of turning off secure boot and allowance of enrolling your own keychain in the secure boot process?
These are long games. Being comfortable today doesn’t guarantee same comfort and allowances tomorrow.
Ironically, we’re discussing this under Android’s increasing restrictions.
The same Android which was championed as the bastion of mobile freedom when it first came out.