Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:58:15AM +0000, Don Littlefield wrote:
Hello,
I want to buy a Samsung tablet and want to load Debian on it. My question is
do I need to get a tablet that is unlocked to do this? Does this have anything
to do with the Linux program operation on the device? I do not want to use it
as a phone, Just to use it as a computer. Thank you for the responding.
"Locked" may mean a number of things. Firstly, a GSM or CDMA device may
be locked to only accept SIM cards with certain IMSIs - in other words,
it will only work with SIM cards for the network that sold the device.
This kind of lock is illegal in certain restrictions, but it can usually
be removed legally (source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_lock). If you're
buying a tablet device, though, this usually doesn't apply (in my
opinion, a "tablet" is similar to a "PDA" in that it's a portable
computer. A "phablet", on the other hand, is an over-sized phone. Many
"tablets", for example, don't provide any facility for making or
receiving calls).
If the tablet you buy is SIM locked, then this doesn't affect you at
all. You may put Debian on the device without hindrance. The radio
firmware of the device should be responsible for enforcing the SIM lock,
but you say you're not going to make calls, so this is moot, anyway.
Secondly, the bootloader of the device might be locked. The bootloader
is specific to the device and, I believe, occupies a position similar to
UEFI on a PC - it initialises devices and locates and begins execution
of the OS kernel. For many devices these days, the bootloader comes
locked in order to protect the security of the OS (and also to protect
the business of the manufacturer by providing a barrier to switching
OS).
If the tablet you buy is bootloader locked, then this WILL affect you as
you will be unable to flash a different OS without unlocking the
bootloader (or, in theory, replacing the bootloader, but that depends on
how generic the tablet is).
donlittlefield@yahoo.com
Don
--
For more information, please reread.
Reply to: