They've already put UEFI in some computers, and I've heard conflicting reports on UEFI compatibility with Linux.
Apple computers already have UEFI, and Linux runs and installs just fine on Macs. Both of my Macs (Mac Mini and MacBook) run Ubuntu just fine as a live CD. The tech industry - including the free software establishment - are using UEFI to sell Linux users on their own enslavement.
Well it's a mixed bag really. 64 bit UEFI performs far, far better than the ancient, crotchety almost 30 year-old 16 bit BIOS straitjacket. Remember also that it is not just a boot loader, it is a gatekeeper/toll-bridge that must still be leaned on and passed through (by any OS) for vital runtime services.
BIOS was never designed for today’s incredibly wide diversity nor quantity of system hardwares. It’s still stuck with 16-bit interfaces and a severely crippling limited number of directly supported hardware/software IRQ (processor-"hailing")interrupts, a limited number/size of mountable devices (no good for servers at all), limited ACPI-kludged IRQ interrupt routing and a maxed-out variety of precision timers, limited ROM execution space (1 MB) and image size, proprietary extensions, and is completely missing any form of modularity. It has a few other major, weak, poor-security (multi-user environment) issues as well.
The horrid add-on NCR SCSI BIOS solution for extending runtime storage support was another major flaw. Now-old 32 bit systems with multi-user OS kludges (running "over" BIOS storage interfaces) literally had almost zero actual hardware interface-level storage security. (the OS software just prevents a user from seeing all of what's there like everything else is, on the hardware)
It's actually the main limitation/reason why a Windows "virtual machine" actually runs faster "inside of OSX" on a Mac, for instance.
Furthermore UEFI allows for full hardware independence and interface because of it's OS-indepentent driver support through its own standardized driver model, so that manufacturers can supply a standard driver that runs their particular device and it's features on any machine in any environment. It's also supposed to provide a backwards compatible 16 bit "BIOS equivalent" downgraded mode but depending on the installer who knows?
As EvadingGrid points out, here are some distasteful network/processor (Intel features) remote-control 'advantages' to it that are not quite as security minded as one might wish but such is the cost of progress, I guess. There's nothing preventing you from running off the grid, using a better router-firewall (the Stuxnet fix) or using your power bar's off switch.