Cost me a few hours and ended up just disabling secure boot in the end. Wish I didn’t need MS for some programs.
Just curious, what programs? I’m obsessed with only using FOSS, maybe I can give you some alternatives.
It’s been a mix throughout the years. The initial problem software years ago was Adobe Illustrator and InDesign, but since then it’s been various engineering/programming related software that only supports Windows. I’m primarily on Linux at this point on my laptop.
Best solution is to format the C:\ drive and never touch any Microsoft product again. That is what I did 10 years ago.
The newly freed 40+GB are a nice bonus.
You also got rid of a lot of malware as a bonus. And your PC boots a lot faster now as well.
I stopped trying to dual boot entirely with all the problems it caused me. I’m surprised the community universally seems to recommend dual booting as an easy to setup option for beginners.
Easiest way to dual boot is 2 disks, with Linux and grub installed on 2nd disk, and BIOS set to boot to 2nd disk. That way Winblows thinks it is alone in the 1st disk of the system.
Even so had an issue a couple years back that Winblows messed up its own loader, by not placing the boot files in the reserved hidden partition but then configuring the boot as if it did… facepalm Took me a morning of trial and error figuring how Winblows boot to fix it…
Winblows is a cancer, but unfortunately it still is necessary for some gaming.
Waiting for the MS apologists to say this is a Crowdstrike problem or some other fucking dumbass shit.
Microsoft by and large are just computational cancer at this point. Bloat, crud, fud, and junk.
The Crowdstrike problem was in fact a Crowdstrike problem. It affected Linux too, but of course there are vastly fewer users of Crowdstrike on Linux: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theregister.com/AMP/2024/07/21/crowdstrike_linux_crashes_restoration_tools/
This is pretty obviously a Microsoft problem.
Well… yes and no.
The fact that Crowdstrike very obviously and intentionally fuzzed the line between ring 0 drivers and app metadata simply could not have been done without MS’s tacit (at the very least) approval. The initial version where Cloudstrike introduced that side loading threat definition update vector should have been flagged as an issue - more specifically, they should have held them to a FAR more rigorous testing and resiliency standard than they were. This is fairly standard practice (and in many cases enforced as regulatory measures) for highly critical systems and components in a lot of industries, and I’ve worked in two of those industries.
Microsoft creates secure boot: “we should be able to run whatever we want on our hardware!”
Microsoft lets users install crowdstrike on their computer: “Microsoft shouldn’t let us run this on our hardware!”
Way to miss the nuance lol
What I’m saying is that if a system claims to rigorously validate code that runs in a particular sensitive domain (here, ring 0), it should actually rigorously validate code. This was a process failure at the end of the day.
