>there are people who still use BIOS over UEFI and turn off secure boot in the year 2025 on this boardWhat the fuck is your problem?UEFI/GPT has been the standard for a decade. UEFI supports larger drives, boots faster because UEFI runs in 32/64-bit mode rather than 16-bit mode, handles initializing multiple hardware devices during boot better than BIOS/MBR, and supports modern hardware better than BIOS/MBR in general. Unless you have an ancient computer, it is almost certainly UEFI/GPT OTB. I can't think of a reason to use BIOS/MBR if your computer supports UEFI/GPT.
I use uefi, but use the old-school text screen.
If new brings no benefit then there's no point in switching to it. Seethe.
I turn off secure boot because I can't be bothered to set it up with Arch and I don't want updates breaking shit.UEFI boot is nice though, since you can boot the kernel directly without a bootloader.
secure boot is spyware that only helps genuine retards who install random shit
>>107622938Retard alert.
>>107622946>nooooo, the nsa is gonna break into my house and hack my computer11!1>implying the nsa's malware isn't signed by microsoft alreadyYou're not special. You have a much higher risk of secure boot breaking something than someone breaking into your house, opening up your computer, and installing a keylogger as a bootloader.
>>107622970>breaking into your house, opening up your computer, and installing a keylogger as a bootloadersecure boot protects against remote threats. that's the job of bootguard/PSB. retard.
>turn off secure bootKnow this is bait but you're extremely dumb
>>107622470>boots faster because UEFI runs in 32/64-bit mode rather than 16-bit mode,The CPU still boots in 16-bit real mode, the UEFI just takes the place of what might've otherwise been a fancy bootloader, including doing ultra legacy things like enabling the A20 line. It's not faster than traditional BIOS, it's objectively slower, the machines are just faster.
>>107623231there is a front door in every modern consumer electronic that has a processor built by AMD or Intel after 2012 for federal agencies to walk through, complete with a nice welcome mat, coat closet with shoe rack in the foyer, beautiful open floorplan with 4 bed 4.5 bathrooms on 8 acres of land in a great nationally competitive school district, in ground saltwater pool in the backyard and an unfinished bastement
>>107623647Proof?
Is turning off secure boot actually bad? Of course, if you just use Windows, it's irrelevant, but for some Linux distros I had trouble, so I had to turn it off.
>>107623664sure! marketing teams call it intel management engine, or ADM processor security platform
>>107622470>I can't think of a reason to use BIOS/MBR if your computer supports UEFI/GPT.I use it out of spite. Good enough reason for me.
>>107622470Secure boot sucks though, can't even mod your OS.
>>107623647And there isn't with pre-2012? Remember Meltdown/SPECTRE?If you think your shit hasn't been pwned for ages now, you're in for a rude awakening.
>>107622470I never activated secure boot because the MB manual didn't explain it and the uefi menus were confusing.
>>107623696it protects boot files from being tampered and more if you do UKIs. you have to set up your system in a way for it to be meaningful though because in an average distro there are lots of place for malware persistance
>>107623802Don't run malware as root and it's not a problem./thread
>>107623832>Don't run malware as root and it's not a problemthat's not how it works
Tell me One good reason to activate secure boot on a desktop pc
>>107624132To give corporations more control over the software you run. Now be a good goy and do it.
>>107622470User interface has nothing whatsoever to do with UEFI vs Legacy. Shitty graphical bioses were a thing before UEFI.
>>107622470Why would I run intelaviv's embedded malware when GNU Boot just works?
>>107624418And a lot of UEFIs have a text based interface that looks like old BIOS.
>>107622470Anything that came out after my formative years is bad and evil. Change is bad and offends me greatly.
