<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Well, these are sad news.<br>
I'm surprised that the amount of blobs is so high in modern
hardware.<br>
Without desiring to criticize or judge the project: What's the goal
for the future, when even you admit that there's no great difference
in technical aspects to vendor firmware?<br>
The sole purpose of free hardware may be honorable, but my personal
believe is that efficiency is more important to people.<br>
<br>
Am 30.01.2017 um 23:09 schrieb Timothy Pearson:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 01/30/2017 02:12 PM, Philipp Stanner
wrote:<br>
> I'm primary interested in it because of faster booting speed
and in<br>
> general getting rid off the stone-age functions vendor bios
contains<br>
> which are completely unnecessary to boot a modern
x86-computer.<br>
<br>
> I don't mind if coreboot contains cpu microcode etc.<br>
<br>
> As far as I know the only total free computer is the X60.<br>
<br>
> But isn't this whole privacy issue more a topic for
libreboot?<br>
<br>
No, not really -- people have many reasons for wanting to use
coreboot<br>
over a vendor firmware, and these reasons influence our
recommendations.<br>
<br>
Furthermore, I was specifically referring to the ME|PSP and<br>
FSP|binaryPI, not microcode. On many modern systems coreboot is a<br>
simple shim around vendor firmware, and in such cases you may or
not<br>
gain anything by using coreboot versus the vendor firmware,
depending of<br>
course on how the vendor implemented their firmware. This
includes boot<br>
time; on platforms with large amounts of RAM where most of the
time is<br>
spent in memory initialization, you will effectively be running
the same<br>
MRC binary as the vendor firmware, so you won't really see a
decrease in<br>
boot time.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<span style="white-space: pre;">></span><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>