First the game consoles are locked down, then the phones, then the tablets and not they are ready to lock down the PCs too.
Corporations want to "sell" without giving up control, and the law hasn't stopped them because it's new technology. It's more profitable because they can literally control the market. This isn't allowed with old technology; auto manufacturers don't get to control what brand of gasoline you use, or require that repairs be done with their own parts. The sale of a car marks a clear separation between who has control. It happens with all new technology: Oracle wants to promote Java as ope" and give it away (rather then sell it,) but they also want it under their control. Regulating corporate control isn't anything new, it just takes time.
How long did it take open source (Linux) to make headway? It never would have happened if this was in place.
It's true that Linux could not have made headway if Secure UEFI was present at the start of PC era, but if it had been, we would also have established legislation securing the rights of the consumer by now. The only real question is how long it'll take, in practical terms, to get legal protection from companies controlling hardware post-sale. Since desktops and laptops aren't new, like smart phones or tablets, we'll get fast action to stop any monopoly grab by Microsoft. Corporate control of game consoles/smart phones/tablets will eventually be regulated, with the laws defining the "established market."