Sowing the seeds for war with yet another ethnonationalist supremacy signal of separation with NIH. Present day leadership of China, Russia, and Israel (and DPRK too.) are merely echoing American and Third Reich "superpower" expansionist aspirations. Human nature hasn't changed and never will, hence history will always rhyme.
hakfoo•3mo ago
It's interesting that they actually did the work, though.
One alternative way to reduce their dependency on foreign platform vendors would be to blow the existing market up. Coreboot and similar exist, and if they got a state-sized injection of resources, they could reasonably drive vendors like Phoenix and AMI out of the market, leaving behind an ecosystem without any particular dominant player.
There is a solid argument for UEFI being a terrible mess, so if they want to leverage a "remove foreign dependencies" as motivation to make something better, more power to them.
burnt-resistor•3mo ago
It started with the IBM PC and manual configuration -> PNP -> PCI -> ACPI -> and then finally, UEFI, subsuming ACPI and EFI. It's what happens when something is designed by committee and has to provide backward compatibility, it becomes Turing complete and produces a document 1131 pages long. It's the worst standard that's been tried, except for every other. If it would've been developed for a green field by a smaller committee who cared about simplicity in a different reality then would've been better, but it's what we have that exists here and how.
The issues of forking are: fragmentation, balkanization, and reinventing a wheel that already exists. Microsoft sure a shit ain't going to support it. It makes OS and hardware support for everyone else more difficult. They're locking themselves in and shutting the door to the rest of the world.
If it's so "terrible", then you're free to write your own and get OS and hardware vendors to support it, otherwise you maybe frivolously complaining about reality.
burnt-resistor•3mo ago
hakfoo•3mo ago
One alternative way to reduce their dependency on foreign platform vendors would be to blow the existing market up. Coreboot and similar exist, and if they got a state-sized injection of resources, they could reasonably drive vendors like Phoenix and AMI out of the market, leaving behind an ecosystem without any particular dominant player.
There is a solid argument for UEFI being a terrible mess, so if they want to leverage a "remove foreign dependencies" as motivation to make something better, more power to them.
burnt-resistor•3mo ago
The issues of forking are: fragmentation, balkanization, and reinventing a wheel that already exists. Microsoft sure a shit ain't going to support it. It makes OS and hardware support for everyone else more difficult. They're locking themselves in and shutting the door to the rest of the world.
If it's so "terrible", then you're free to write your own and get OS and hardware vendors to support it, otherwise you maybe frivolously complaining about reality.