Microsoft Looking At Office For Linux In 2014

On OEM machines with Windows 8 pre-installed. there can be some issues. The big thing here really boils down to how OEM vendors implement it, not MS. It's these vendors who are more to blame for UEFI headaches more than anyone else. That said, if your distro installer has support for SecureBoot already on it, you're golden. The thing to keep in mind though is this is not an MS thing. MS didn't turn off the lights in a meeting, light their face spookily with a flashlight and give a cackle while they plotted the downfall of Linux. It's a matter of how the specification is implemented by the various vendors of systems.

Edit: have a look here: http://superuser.com/questions/499923/preinstalled-windows-8-and-linux-uefi-dual-boot-on-a-laptop

 

You always say you stand corrected no matter what dave, but I'll try to explain why you're wrong here.

First, UEFI Secure Boot enabled machines are a small fraction of the latest machines sold at the moment. So, hardly any people had any problem dual booting Windows 8 with something else.

Second, UEFI Secure Boot is supported by OEMs from the EFI Forum. Secure Boot isn't a feature of Windows 8. Support to Secure Boot is the feature of Windows 8. See: http://www.uefi.org/home/

Third, the Linux Foundation now has the very same method of getting its kernel and distributions past the Secure Boot that Windows 8 has. See: http://blog.hansenpartnership.com/linux-foundation-secure-boot-system-released/

Now, you may ask, why the Linux Foundation didn't get such access to "support for Secure Boot" from the start - like Microsoft?

To which I answer, because they didn't want to spend the money and efforts that Microsoft spent - in their own words. Starting its own certification authority is what Microsoft did, and it solves the problem. The Linux Foundation could do the same, but...

"The developer added that the Linux Foundation had also considered starting its own certification authority but had abandoned this plan because it would have required a huge effort and incurred high costs." See: http://www.h-online.com/open/news/i...ft-s-Secure-Boot-signing-service-1754209.html

So what the Linux Foundation did? It used a Microsoft service, a Microsoft authentication service with subsidized prices (lower prices paid by Microsoft).

So, in reality, Microsoft helped the Linux Foundation here.

Hard to believe, I know.

 

Yeah, & me. I also can't see many Linux users actually buying Office either. For many OO/LibO can do virtually everything that they want.

 

You do realise I don't believe you don't you?

 

ROTFL ... I often wonder if they haven't been seduced by the dark side of the force though.

 

You don't need to believe me.

I put references to my statements, so you can check them at their sources.

You can even ask the Linux Foundation itself: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/contact

Or the UEFI Forum: http://www.uefi.org/contact_us

 

I believe there are some who would pay for it. I have run into Word documents that don't format properly in OO or LibO, so there are probably a % of users who must have Office, and making it available on linux might be a good thing.

 

Well that's very kind of you SPP WH, I do hope that you're right about this as it means that one day I may be able to dual boot with Win 8. That is if I ever buy 8, which is unlikely.

 

For me, OO is fine as I only really use Writer & Impress & usually just save them in Office file formats. But I can see why some would prefer Office.

 

For sure some must have Office. I am a heavy duty Excel user and I will accept no substitute on that one....

 

That's pretty technical though I believe. OO Writer only occasionally mangles the odd timetable for me.

 

Last I heard, Palpatine had his hands full with Google and Facebook.

 

Based on what evidence. Can you buy a non-Windows 8 PC any-more ?
So you think that Windows 8 (which requires secure boot) is not selling well on new machines ?

Just to add, it is a requirement of Windows 8 certification that Secure boot can be user disabled.

Cheers, Nick

 

Yes you can. And most PCs with Windows 8 come with free downgrade rights to Windows 7 and Windows Vista as well.

Windows 8 doesn't require UEFI Secure Boot.

Support to UEFI Secure Boot is an optional feature of Windows 8 that requires firmware that supports UEFI v2.3.1 Errata B and has the Microsoft Windows Certification Authority in the UEFI signature database.

Windows 8 System Requirements: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/system-requirements

 

I am talking about NEW systems (as you were) with Windows 8 installed.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh848062(v=vs.85).aspx

Can you stop spreading misinformation Wild Hunter? You seem to be doing this frequently, lol.

Cheers, Nick.

 

Well, I didn't know that UEFI Secure Boot was mandatory for Windows 8 certification of client machines. Please, excuse my ignorance on the subject.

Anyways, are all or most new machines being sold "certified for Windows 8"? Last time I checked they definitely weren't. Things may have changed in these months after the Windows 8 release...

I'm just reading some of the other requirements for Windows 8 certification now. Very interesting:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/jj128256.aspx

 

If Secure can be always be disabled (for the foreseeable future), is there ever going to be a show-stopping issue booting Linux ?


Back to Office for Linux.
Lack of any details. Lack of market share. Is it worth the redevelopment effort, when IMHO they have yet to make a full Win8 new-touch UI interface (rather than an enhanced desktop interface).

Cheers, Nick

 

Some things I observed here:

Why is UEFI relevant to this discussion?
It's a nonissue anyway, just disable the secure boot and move on.

It is possible to buy non-Win8 machines - either without an OS or something else, like freedos, linux, etc.

Whether there's going to be office on linux, well I'd like that.

Mrk