[untitled]
7 comments
UEFI is an overly complex standard leaving ambiguities for implementations. The gains from moving to UEFI almost don't seem worth the added complexity.
Not a UEFI problem perhaps, but I also had a dual-boot misery experience early last year. I kept on trying to make a Ubuntu and Windows 8 dual-boot set-up on the same hard drive, and it would be fine until Windows Update would destroy my ability to boot into Ubuntu. It was my work computer and I lacked the tools (I also tried Super GRUB Disk, Boot Repair and a few others) to figure out why or how this was happening in a timely manner so just gave up in the end and virtualised Windows instead...
It definitely seems like dual-booting (with the exception of Boot Camp) has become no more user-friendly in the last decade. It's as much of a pain as it's ever been.
It definitely seems like dual-booting (with the exception of Boot Camp) has become no more user-friendly in the last decade. It's as much of a pain as it's ever been.
The problems she had were entirely due to her inexperience, not to any UEFI design flaw. And despite not understanding her tools, she was able to set up dual booting anyway. I'm counting this as a UEFI success story.
"I have no idea how modern systems boot, because I haven't kept up on the changes happening in the last 10 years. BIOS 4evah!" -> UEFI is somehow bad. k
I don't know why people have trouble with this when places like the Arch Wiki exist: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Unified_Extensible_Firm...