5 ms·

I think that if you are concerned about freedom, then you need to use an OS that is not controlled a commercial entity. OS X, iOS, Windows, Android, ChromeOS, a

by Esau 10y ago

I think that if you are concerned about freedom, then you need to use an OS that is not controlled a commercial entity. OS X, iOS, Windows, Android, ChromeOS, and Ubuntu all have issues; even though some of them are open source.

franciscop 10y ago
Putting Windows and Ubuntu in the same "commercial" bag is very miguiding...
- chillingeffect 10y ago
  It is, but I upvoted bc I think they're trying to point out that even Ubuntu gets tainted by commercial desire. But you're right in that the degree and flavor of taint varies between the OSes. It's much more productive to point out the features and uses of each of these OSes that modulate freedom. Freedom is partially in the OS and largely in how we use it. Constantly upgrading to the newest thing, for example, I would consider a luxurious consumer habit that serves the elite, but gives smaller relative gains to the individual. I suggest holding on to any OS as long as possible before upgrading. And the fact that even Ubuntu gets tainted with commercial desire is really indicative of much bigger ideas... For example, it points out how power corrupts and needs checks and balances. (don't know if this is even possible with an open source OS). It also makes me wonder if this cyber-organic lifestyle is even physically possible. Is it possible that we've been drawing a massive check against ourselves and this degree of connectivity is unsustainable? Why does it constantly require so much software to keep going? Is there no point of equilibrium in sight?
- Esau 10y ago
  Oh really? I seem to recall Ubuntu sending people's search results to Amazon. Why did they do that? They are a corporation and, thus, more concerned about money than freedom. My comment stands.
  - rpdillon 10y ago
    To be fair, that was a default, but you can change it, or avoid it entirely by not installing the launcher developed by Canonical. Which was always both the strength and Achilles' Heel of Linux compared to other desktop OSes. For people that never install Unity (Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Ubuntu Gnome), it's simply not an issue. This is quite a bit different than, for example, the situation with Windows 10.
    - dandelion_lover 10y ago
      >This is quite a bit different than, for example, the situation with Windows 10. The situation is different; but the direction is the same.
      - franciscop 10y ago
        But the direction are the opposite: 1. Canonical makes no money. 2. They introduce a "bad" feature to try to make money. 3. Users outrage so canonical makes it easy to cancel. 4. Users are still not happy so Canonical turns it off by default. vs 1. Microsoft makes s*loads of money from various sources. 2. They show an annoying popup urging users to upgrade to W10 (to make more money? to reduce support?). 3. They start forcing it by "closing is accepting". 4. They just start forcing it (according to many reports) so the users start creating tools to stop it.
        dandelion_lover 10y ago
        The difference is that the users of Windows have no choice. Microsoft takes advantage of the situation. Canonical has no such advantage, but they surely would like to, according to this precedent.
        hvis 10y ago
        That is too weak a precedent to be making a strong accusation like this. It was one misstep. They have done, and continue to do, a lot of things right.
- davexunit 10y ago
  I don't really think so. Canonical has proven to be a poor leader of the free software community.
  - Delmania 10y ago
    > I don't really think so. Canonical has proven to be a poor leader of the free software community. Why is that? They set out to make Linux more accessible. If you're complaining about the level of control they exert on Ubuntu, there are good reasons for that.
    - davexunit 10y ago
      Ubuntu has been the user friendly introduction to GNU/Linux and free software for many people, it was for me, but in recent years Canonical has made many harmful decisions. They have a purposely unclear trademark policy, have had multiple GPL violations, opted users into sending desktop search data to Amazon, market proprietary SaaS (Landscape, defunct One Cloud, and AFAIK the Snappy server is proprietary), and sell and encourage the use of proprietary software in their Software Center. It's time to move on from Ubuntu.
      - chillingeffect 10y ago
        I've really liked Ubuntu and was looking forward to 16.04, but can you recommend what my next move might be? I'm certainly open to suggestions. My goal is a low-admin workstation for running design apps like Inkscape, eagle and other CNC and electrical engineering software. merci.

by Esau 10y ago

franciscop 10y ago

Putting Windows and Ubuntu in the same "commercial" bag is very miguiding...

chillingeffect 10y ago
It is, but I upvoted bc I think they're trying to point out that even Ubuntu gets tainted by commercial desire. But you're right in that the degree and flavor of taint varies between the OSes. It's much more productive to point out the features and uses of each of these OSes that modulate freedom. Freedom is partially in the OS and largely in how we use it. Constantly upgrading to the newest thing, for example, I would consider a luxurious consumer habit that serves the elite, but gives smaller relative gains to the individual. I suggest holding on to any OS as long as possible before upgrading. And the fact that even Ubuntu gets tainted with commercial desire is really indicative of much bigger ideas... For example, it points out how power corrupts and needs checks and balances. (don't know if this is even possible with an open source OS). It also makes me wonder if this cyber-organic lifestyle is even physically possible. Is it possible that we've been drawing a massive check against ourselves and this degree of connectivity is unsustainable? Why does it constantly require so much software to keep going? Is there no point of equilibrium in sight?
Esau 10y ago
Oh really? I seem to recall Ubuntu sending people's search results to Amazon. Why did they do that? They are a corporation and, thus, more concerned about money than freedom. My comment stands.
- rpdillon 10y ago
  To be fair, that was a default, but you can change it, or avoid it entirely by not installing the launcher developed by Canonical. Which was always both the strength and Achilles' Heel of Linux compared to other desktop OSes. For people that never install Unity (Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Ubuntu Gnome), it's simply not an issue. This is quite a bit different than, for example, the situation with Windows 10.
  - dandelion_lover 10y ago
    >This is quite a bit different than, for example, the situation with Windows 10. The situation is different; but the direction is the same.
    - franciscop 10y ago
      But the direction are the opposite: 1. Canonical makes no money. 2. They introduce a "bad" feature to try to make money. 3. Users outrage so canonical makes it easy to cancel. 4. Users are still not happy so Canonical turns it off by default. vs 1. Microsoft makes s*loads of money from various sources. 2. They show an annoying popup urging users to upgrade to W10 (to make more money? to reduce support?). 3. They start forcing it by "closing is accepting". 4. They just start forcing it (according to many reports) so the users start creating tools to stop it.
      - dandelion_lover 10y ago
        The difference is that the users of Windows have no choice. Microsoft takes advantage of the situation. Canonical has no such advantage, but they surely would like to, according to this precedent.
        hvis 10y ago
        That is too weak a precedent to be making a strong accusation like this. It was one misstep. They have done, and continue to do, a lot of things right.
davexunit 10y ago
I don't really think so. Canonical has proven to be a poor leader of the free software community.
- Delmania 10y ago
  > I don't really think so. Canonical has proven to be a poor leader of the free software community. Why is that? They set out to make Linux more accessible. If you're complaining about the level of control they exert on Ubuntu, there are good reasons for that.
  - davexunit 10y ago
    Ubuntu has been the user friendly introduction to GNU/Linux and free software for many people, it was for me, but in recent years Canonical has made many harmful decisions. They have a purposely unclear trademark policy, have had multiple GPL violations, opted users into sending desktop search data to Amazon, market proprietary SaaS (Landscape, defunct One Cloud, and AFAIK the Snappy server is proprietary), and sell and encourage the use of proprietary software in their Software Center. It's time to move on from Ubuntu.
    - chillingeffect 10y ago
      I've really liked Ubuntu and was looking forward to 16.04, but can you recommend what my next move might be? I'm certainly open to suggestions. My goal is a low-admin workstation for running design apps like Inkscape, eagle and other CNC and electrical engineering software. merci.