Linux is #1 run by corporate interests like Red Hat (who controls the entire Linux ecosystem, see systemd etc.) in the exact same way as Microsoft. Linux being open source doesn’t mean it isn’t a corporate project by cumulative billion value companies. It’s not free software. It is what’s called “embrace extend extinguish”.
In short, you can only defend Linux over Windows once Linux stops accepting patches from Microsoft.
If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Linux, you can fork it and remove them. If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Windows, you have to use something else.
It’s not just Microsoft tho. Redhat, oracle, facebook, Google, intel, AMD, they all contribute to linux. Removing their contribution would effectively make the kernel unusable
Everyone is getting free stuff; that’s the point. If you want companies to not use free stuff to make money then either linux is worse, or companies need to po away.
So what’s the problem with that? We get contribution for free to make newer hardware working, they improve already existing stuff, they solve bugs and everyone take advantage from that.
Hardware manufactures (Intel, AMD, etc) SHOULD be contributing to Linux. How could they EEE if they aren’t directly competing? The better compatibility they have with Linux, the more server CPUs they can sell. That’s their motivation, and it’s aligned with the OSS community.
Red hat may be a contributor to the kernel but development is open source. See the difference between American mega corp with closed source software vs red hat contributing to the Linux kernel?
My network firewall blocks thousands of Microsoft tracking attempts per hour in my home network. My linux machine has zero packets blocked. How is this the same?
I guess you claim it’s the same because you don’t understand the difference, or we are talking about something else being the same, like both have desktop environments…
One is hostile against the user privacy and the other is not. They are very different. Systemd is a boot system and it’s great. It doesn’t call home.
Linux is just Microsoft for oblivious nerds
Interesting concept, what do you mean by this?
Linux is #1 run by corporate interests like Red Hat (who controls the entire Linux ecosystem, see systemd etc.) in the exact same way as Microsoft. Linux being open source doesn’t mean it isn’t a corporate project by cumulative billion value companies. It’s not free software. It is what’s called “embrace extend extinguish”.
In short, you can only defend Linux over Windows once Linux stops accepting patches from Microsoft.
If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Linux, you can fork it and remove them. If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Windows, you have to use something else.
It’s not just Microsoft tho. Redhat, oracle, facebook, Google, intel, AMD, they all contribute to linux. Removing their contribution would effectively make the kernel unusable
Isn’t taking corporate money and extracting it into a public good a positive?
You have it backwards. The corporations are extracting free public contributions.
Everyone is getting free stuff; that’s the point. If you want companies to not use free stuff to make money then either linux is worse, or companies need to po away.
So what’s the problem with that? We get contribution for free to make newer hardware working, they improve already existing stuff, they solve bugs and everyone take advantage from that.
Hardware manufactures (Intel, AMD, etc) SHOULD be contributing to Linux. How could they EEE if they aren’t directly competing? The better compatibility they have with Linux, the more server CPUs they can sell. That’s their motivation, and it’s aligned with the OSS community.
What’s it like having your head that far up your own asshole?
Warm and cozy? What do you expect? Why else would I be here? God you people are dumb.
How do you deal with the smell?
My ass smells like roses. The real problem is all the thorns.
I do not get your argument still. Could you elaborate further?
Sure, if microsoft or redhat was embedding malware or proprietary software via patches, sure. But their contributions are also FOSS!
Average TempleOS user
At least he took his own initiative
Red hat may be a contributor to the kernel but development is open source. See the difference between American mega corp with closed source software vs red hat contributing to the Linux kernel?
My network firewall blocks thousands of Microsoft tracking attempts per hour in my home network. My linux machine has zero packets blocked. How is this the same?
I guess you claim it’s the same because you don’t understand the difference, or we are talking about something else being the same, like both have desktop environments…
One is hostile against the user privacy and the other is not. They are very different. Systemd is a boot system and it’s great. It doesn’t call home.
Gate’s closed, huh? Alright, I’ll come back later and make sure I ask you for permission.
I don’t recall saying to come back.
And how would anyone benefit if Linux stopped accepting patches from Microsoft?