3 ms·

As the FSF clarifies a few sentences later, their criticism centers around the fact that those users are dependent on Microsoft. When support ends for an old v

As the FSF clarifies a few sentences later, their criticism centers around the fact that those users are dependent on Microsoft. When support ends for an old version of a free software distribution, users have the ability to hire someone else to maintain it. They often don't, however, because it's usually cheaper to upgrade to the latest version, and free software operating systems don't have the ratcheting oppressive privacy and security implications that Windows 10 comes with. I do think, though, that it's a valid counter argument to say that users knew (or should have known) the kind of deal they where making with Microsoft when they bought Windows XP. Instead of criticizing Microsoft, they should be pointing out that free software operating systems typically are much more friendly and respectful of the user's rights, even rights beyond being able to modify that operating system. The FSF has always had a problem explaining to the average user why they should care about the ability to modify their own software when they lack the expertise to do so; Windows 10 is providing a practical example.

raverbashing 11y ago
> When support ends for an old version of a free software distribution, users have the ability to hire someone else to maintain it. This is the exception rather than the rule (speaking in general terms) You can pay someone else to isolate and secure your XP installation as well (for the minimum amount of stuff you need in there). Put it in a VM, behind a firewall, secure it, prevent unknown services from running in it, etc.
- jxn 11y ago
  > You can pay someone else to isolate and secure your XP installation as well (for the minimum amount of stuff you need in there). Put it in a VM, behind a firewall, secure it, prevent unknown services from running in it, etc. Of course, you can also pay someone to do the same for a free software OS. You might even have more options for safely isolating it. I suspect the main point is that you have options, e.g. you don't simply have to isolate it (that may not work depending on how you use the software), you could also maintain / fork it. In theory, with enough money, I'm sure you could also pay MS to maintain it for you or (as I've seen done once or twice in the business world) simply buy out the company and have them support it, but it seems like the cash barrier required to getting those things done could be lower than self-supporting the software in many circumstances.
  - raverbashing 11y ago
    > you could also maintain / fork it That's true. However, for the majority of cases, it's not worth it. You theoretically could have an old version of Red Hat running and then self-support there, but I believe the answer is probably something similar to what would be done with Windows XP. Even if what you need to run there is Free Software. Easier and probably more feasible, true. Still, very unlikely. The last option you pointed out is a possibility as well and it happens, however it's usually a way of throwing a lot of money for very little gain

raverbashing 11y ago

> When support ends for an old version of a free software distribution, users have the ability to hire someone else to maintain it. This is the exception rather than the rule (speaking in general terms) You can pay someone else to isolate and secure your XP installation as well (for the minimum amount of stuff you need in there). Put it in a VM, behind a firewall, secure it, prevent unknown services from running in it, etc.

jxn 11y ago
> You can pay someone else to isolate and secure your XP installation as well (for the minimum amount of stuff you need in there). Put it in a VM, behind a firewall, secure it, prevent unknown services from running in it, etc. Of course, you can also pay someone to do the same for a free software OS. You might even have more options for safely isolating it. I suspect the main point is that you have options, e.g. you don't simply have to isolate it (that may not work depending on how you use the software), you could also maintain / fork it. In theory, with enough money, I'm sure you could also pay MS to maintain it for you or (as I've seen done once or twice in the business world) simply buy out the company and have them support it, but it seems like the cash barrier required to getting those things done could be lower than self-supporting the software in many circumstances.
- raverbashing 11y ago
  > you could also maintain / fork it That's true. However, for the majority of cases, it's not worth it. You theoretically could have an old version of Red Hat running and then self-support there, but I believe the answer is probably something similar to what would be done with Windows XP. Even if what you need to run there is Free Software. Easier and probably more feasible, true. Still, very unlikely. The last option you pointed out is a possibility as well and it happens, however it's usually a way of throwing a lot of money for very little gain