Way ahead of you, Mr. Garrett..I recommend drinking
This is probably a "dumb question" -- but I am not clear on the point:
Since this "samsung-laptop" driver is not usable, what happens when someone tries to install (or boot) Linux on an affected Samsung laptop, without using that driver?
(or for that matter, on unaffected ones)?
Is there a more generic driver as fall-back?
Does the boot just hang?
That gives me a significantly better idea what we're talking about.
On the other hand, I don't see why those should need vendor/model specific drivers, in the first place...
I personally wouldn't care about multi-media keys, but things like suspend/hibernate and backlight control do make a real difference.
Backlight is a problem because maybe some wires aren't where they are "Normally" or maybe a jumper is backwards, things like that. This laptop specifically (Dell XPS 13z Ultrabook) doesn't have the normal backlight control, its vendor specific instead of just being "Intel backlight." I had to go further than most to get Linux running on here, I had to run a custom kernel and even then its not exactly how I want things to be. For example thanks to what is either a buggy bios or a buggy disk controller, this laptop refuses to boot with the new GPT partition layout. Granted its not a big deal to do the old style MS-DOS style layout, but its still a problem.
If my servers start rebooting randomly to install hacked kernels, I think I'll notice. Whereas if I can't build a new kernel myself to work around bugs or support new hardware because it's not signed by Microsoft, I'm going to be rather annoyed.If you manage a whole bunch of servers in data centre, it would again be nice to know that only kernels you authorise can run on the systems.
The only real value in 'Secure Boot' is enforcing vendor lockin on the people who buy the hardware. For everyone else its a real pain for minimal benefit.