4 ms·

Technically, the article is correct. Indeed, GNU/kWindows is a better name for the resulting OS, and Windows is still very non-free and spies at its users, etc

Technically, the article is correct. Indeed, GNU/kWindows is a better name for the resulting OS, and Windows is still very non-free and spies at its users, etc etc. But: we already know all that. I am a heavy Linux user, and I am quite excited to see it available on Windows. Because Windows is nice and shiny and well-polished and works with hardware and works better for my needs than fully free OS with limited hardware support (especially on the GPU side). I want to work, not endlessly configure my Emacs, I am pro-capitalism (though very anti-surveillance) and I don't even have a beard. So, thank you, GNU guys, your software is excellent and free. Even if you make it more difficult to use with some software with other licenses, it is still possible, and I am quite happy to add it in the mix. But I don't want to live in your idealized non-commercial world, and your proselytizing became quite boring for the last 25 years. When I do open source, I use MIT/BSD license, because it helps people unconditionally and doesn't introduce restrictions as those in less free licenses like GPL.

zxcvcxz 11y ago
Why is Linux coming to Windows exciting to you? There are already all sorts of problems and I'm sure they'll get better, but you go on to say: > I want to work, not endlessly configure my Emacs Which implies you want a system that stays out of your way. How will this new compatibility layer stay out of your way when you constantly have to find new work arounds whenever you develop anything? For example I've seen a lot of user complaining about setting up a full android development environment. I'm sure this will get support, then other dev environments one by one, but on Linux they'll just work 99% of the time (at least in my experience), on GNU/kWindows you will be debugging things for days, I can see it now. Windows has been coming out with a lot of new stuff lately but nothing has really caught on. I don't see this huge mess taking off or replacing Linux any time soon. Has typescript replaced javascript?
- recursive 11y ago
  I don't have much experience with Linux which is probably why, but I've found it a lot easier to set up a working Windows environment than Linux. > Has typescript replaced javascript? It has on the project I'm working on, but there's really no way you can tell after it's compiled. Angular2 is written in it too.
  - zxcvcxz 11y ago
    From what I can tell Angular 2 lost more users than it gained. I know it made me switch to React.
cremno 11y ago
>GNU/kWindows is a better name for the resulting OS What's the issue with “Ubuntu” so that it needs to be dropped completely? The article only contains: >It would also be best if you avoid calling it “Ubuntu on Windows”; it isn’t a factually incorrect statement—you are running Ubuntu’s distribution of GNU—but it still avoids mentioning the GNU Project.
- mikegerwitz 11y ago
  That statement is the reason. If Ubuntu were called "Ubuntu GNU/Linux", we'd still have a bit of an awkward situation, because there's no Linux involved; it'd be "Ubuntu GNU/kWindows", going by the stated naming convention. So it's not that "Ubuntu" is the problem, per se; it's the lack of mention of GNU. I suppose that's worth clarification in the article.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cyphar 11y ago
> But I don't want to live in your idealized non-commercial world, and your proselytizing became quite boring for the last 25 years. The FSF has no problem with commercial software. They just hate the existence of proprietary software. There are many free software companies. Commercial free software does exist.
rekado 11y ago
> Even if you make it more difficult to use with some software with other licenses The license only guarantees that no additional restrictions are placed on users. The GPL and copyleft are legal hacks. > But I don't want to live in your idealized non-commercial world, and your proselytizing became quite boring for the last 25 years. It is a misunderstanding to think that a goal for GNU or the GPL are a "non-commercial world".

zxcvcxz 11y ago

Why is Linux coming to Windows exciting to you? There are already all sorts of problems and I'm sure they'll get better, but you go on to say: > I want to work, not endlessly configure my Emacs Which implies you want a system that stays out of your way. How will this new compatibility layer stay out of your way when you constantly have to find new work arounds whenever you develop anything? For example I've seen a lot of user complaining about setting up a full android development environment. I'm sure this will get support, then other dev environments one by one, but on Linux they'll just work 99% of the time (at least in my experience), on GNU/kWindows you will be debugging things for days, I can see it now. Windows has been coming out with a lot of new stuff lately but nothing has really caught on. I don't see this huge mess taking off or replacing Linux any time soon. Has typescript replaced javascript?

recursive 11y ago
I don't have much experience with Linux which is probably why, but I've found it a lot easier to set up a working Windows environment than Linux. > Has typescript replaced javascript? It has on the project I'm working on, but there's really no way you can tell after it's compiled. Angular2 is written in it too.
- zxcvcxz 11y ago
  From what I can tell Angular 2 lost more users than it gained. I know it made me switch to React.

cremno 11y ago

>GNU/kWindows is a better name for the resulting OS What's the issue with “Ubuntu” so that it needs to be dropped completely? The article only contains: >It would also be best if you avoid calling it “Ubuntu on Windows”; it isn’t a factually incorrect statement—you are running Ubuntu’s distribution of GNU—but it still avoids mentioning the GNU Project.

mikegerwitz 11y ago
That statement is the reason. If Ubuntu were called "Ubuntu GNU/Linux", we'd still have a bit of an awkward situation, because there's no Linux involved; it'd be "Ubuntu GNU/kWindows", going by the stated naming convention. So it's not that "Ubuntu" is the problem, per se; it's the lack of mention of GNU. I suppose that's worth clarification in the article.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

cyphar 11y ago

> But I don't want to live in your idealized non-commercial world, and your proselytizing became quite boring for the last 25 years. The FSF has no problem with commercial software. They just hate the existence of proprietary software. There are many free software companies. Commercial free software does exist.

rekado 11y ago

> Even if you make it more difficult to use with some software with other licenses The license only guarantees that no additional restrictions are placed on users. The GPL and copyleft are legal hacks. > But I don't want to live in your idealized non-commercial world, and your proselytizing became quite boring for the last 25 years. It is a misunderstanding to think that a goal for GNU or the GPL are a "non-commercial world".