Discussione:Trusted computing: differenze tra le versioni
Contenuto cancellato Contenuto aggiunto
Riga 143:
L'articolo parla sempre di possibilità, di fututo. Manca lo stato attuale.
[[Utente:Leonardoproseri|leonardo]]
:: il problema e' che poi questo paragrafo andrebbe constantemente aggiornato .. gia' quello inglese per esempio non parla del PVP-OPM o delle richieste dell'esercito USA . comunque se vuoi puoi tradurlo e poi mantenerlo aggiornato usando i vari link gia presenti nella pagina .
::"The purpose of creating this table two years ago was to keep track of the nascent paradign shift in trusted computing. IBM (now Lenovo) led the way with their laptops, and early entrants to this list were view (by me at least) and leaders in security at the edge.
::Today, every meaningful vendor has Trusted Platforms in their roadmap and Microsoft has an OS that requires TPM version 1.2 ready for enterprise users before the end of this year. There are no more real surprises -- the paradigm has shifted.
::Going forward, I will only update this table to correct broken links. Adding new platforms is, for the most part, meaningless. '''It would be easier (and shorter) to maintain a list of vendors/platforms without TPM (and some of my correspondents -- of the EFF, anti-DRM ilk -- would probably prefer that).''' " [[Utente:Dbiagioli|Dbiagioli]] 17:39, 20 ago 2006 (CEST)
|