The world would be a better place if locked bootloaders were not a thing. I agree that there needs to be laws in place to prevent the sale of these devices.
Locked in the technical sense of being able to verify the operating system isn’t a bad thing. The problem is when the device owner can’t add signing keys of their choice.
Imagine having to purchase a new PC to simply be able to get updates. Or be locked to windows for life and not have an option to install Linux, BSD, whatever else.
There is zero reason to restrict installing a new os or firmware on a phone except planned obsolescence
How do you feel about locked bootloader’s on game consoles?
I figure this is one of those edge cases people might fall on either side of. But consoles are also a really large segment of the tech market, so it’s worth thinking about.
The PS3 used to have an unlocked bootloader with official Linux support. Sony removed it because of piracy. Of course, piracy is still possible, but as always, it’s only an excuse to exert more control over customers.
That’s pretty cool though, I’m glad they at least experimented with it. I wonder if they just chickened out at some point or if they actually found a steep increase in piracy?
I feel like consoles are targeted at a section of the population that doesn’t value freedom over how they use their hardware. Locked bootloaders on consoles are technically not good, but it’s almost like it’s part of what defines a game console. If it really valued the users freedom, it’d just be a PC. The steam deck and similar devices are changing that idea though.
I feel like consoles are targeted at a section of the population that doesn’t value freedom over how they use their hardware.
Well I don’t think I really believe that. Certainly, I don’t think gamers care less about technical freedom than other groups, say for example users of iOS devices, or smart TVs, or routers, or car entertainment systems. Most of those are pretty locked down, but I don’t think a lack of caring on the user’s part has much to do with that.
but it’s almost like it’s part of what defines a game console.
I do think you’re absolutely right about that. A console is supposed to be plug and play. You plug in a controller, and you can play your games. You shouldn’t have to worry about drivers, software updates, system specs, whatever; the games just work.
(Admittedly, this has been shifting lately, with constant software updates and different editions of the same console. But I think the point still essentially holds true.)
But yeah, once you start opening up the platform, making it easy to tinker with, suddenly total compatibility can be harder to guarantee, much like it is with Android.
The world would be a better place if locked bootloaders were not a thing. I agree that there needs to be laws in place to prevent the sale of these devices.
Locked in the technical sense of being able to verify the operating system isn’t a bad thing. The problem is when the device owner can’t add signing keys of their choice.
The latter is what GrapheneOS does.
I don’t have a problem with boot loaders doing cryptographic checks in general, as long as the ultimate decision lies with the device owner.
Imagine a PC with a locked bootloader.
Imagine having to purchase a new PC to simply be able to get updates. Or be locked to windows for life and not have an option to install Linux, BSD, whatever else.
There is zero reason to restrict installing a new os or firmware on a phone except planned obsolescence
Imagine buying a PC but only be able to install anything from one app store made by the manufacturer
How do you feel about locked bootloader’s on game consoles?
I figure this is one of those edge cases people might fall on either side of. But consoles are also a really large segment of the tech market, so it’s worth thinking about.
The PS3 used to have an unlocked bootloader with official Linux support. Sony removed it because of piracy. Of course, piracy is still possible, but as always, it’s only an excuse to exert more control over customers.
That’s pretty cool though, I’m glad they at least experimented with it. I wonder if they just chickened out at some point or if they actually found a steep increase in piracy?
I feel like consoles are targeted at a section of the population that doesn’t value freedom over how they use their hardware. Locked bootloaders on consoles are technically not good, but it’s almost like it’s part of what defines a game console. If it really valued the users freedom, it’d just be a PC. The steam deck and similar devices are changing that idea though.
Well I don’t think I really believe that. Certainly, I don’t think gamers care less about technical freedom than other groups, say for example users of iOS devices, or smart TVs, or routers, or car entertainment systems. Most of those are pretty locked down, but I don’t think a lack of caring on the user’s part has much to do with that.
I do think you’re absolutely right about that. A console is supposed to be plug and play. You plug in a controller, and you can play your games. You shouldn’t have to worry about drivers, software updates, system specs, whatever; the games just work.
(Admittedly, this has been shifting lately, with constant software updates and different editions of the same console. But I think the point still essentially holds true.)
But yeah, once you start opening up the platform, making it easy to tinker with, suddenly total compatibility can be harder to guarantee, much like it is with Android.