How is that not relevant? It obviously is.

If Ubuntu let phone companies subsidize their upcoming tablet devices and in turn required that the devices are locked, would you bitch at them? Would it result in same amount of rage on Slashdot? Because I think it would go something like this "This is a good thing. Ubuntu is paying majority of the price of these devices so it is in their right. And it's good to see Ubuntu gain market share!"

Because in x86 land it isn't the normal. In ARM it is. Apple, Google and pretty much every other manufacturer does exactly the same. Slashdot is just bitching at this story because, gee, it's Micro$$$oft.

So basically you don't care about any of his points even while they are perfectly valid, just because he dared to post anything positive about Microsoft?

There is no BIOS on these devices.

And that is what Microsoft is doing, and it's the same every other ARM vendor does, including Apple and Google.

There is no BIOS on these devices. UEFI replaces it.

Microsoft's stance isn't any other from other ARM manufacturers and operating systems. Pretty much every ARM device is locked down, including iOS and most Android devices. It is the norm in ARM land. How is Microsoft suddenly more evil than others, WHEN EVERYONE DOES IT, INCLUDING GOOGLE AND APPLE?

IE., lock down boot sector! That is exactly how Alureon bypasses it, and that is what were discussing here!

If user can disable it, then computer program can too. Nevertheless, it isn't even a problem because Linux and Android has majority of market share on ARM-based devices, so just choose them!

Yes it does. Take for example Aluereon family of malware that rewrites your boot sector and hides there.

No antivirus can do anything about it, and even if you re-install your OS, the malware gets re-installed too!

So how would you combat against Alureon and similar malware without protecting the core of your system where it attacks?

There are many viruses in the wild that rewrite boot sector to hide and reinstall themselves even after OS re-install. How would you combat these if you can't lock down your boot sector?

No, the blocking down of install of others OS's is what is misdirection. There are many boot sector viruses in the wild and Microsoft has had tough time removing them. This is why bootloader needs to be protected. How many users will this affect on ARM-based devices. I would say pretty much no one, or 0.0001%. Most users don't even have ARM-based devices, and if they have, it is much more likely to be one that comes with Linux or Android.

Do you have any proof that they have abused that position with hardware manufacturers? Simply by going to another market is not leveraging monopoly.

It is nevertheless a valid comment. Microsoft doesn't have monopoly on ARM-based devices. On top of that, even Android manufacturers lock down their devices with similar technologies because it makes the devices secure. Why is Microsoft allowed to do the same, especially since it doesn't cause any monopoly issues?

Popular isn't necessarily how much people like something. For example not that many actually likes the "popular" girl or guy in school, there's just other contributing factors, like themselves getting something out of it. Just like with Objective-C and iOS.