3 ms·
First, they'd need to have a willingness to license "encumbered" codecs, drivers, etc, even if it meant charging for a version of their product. Second, it wou
by octorian 8y ago
First, they'd need to have a willingness to license "encumbered" codecs, drivers, etc, even if it meant charging for a version of their product.
Second, it would involve a ton of product testing, and tedious ironing out of rough edges. Every single time an installation or upgrade fails, or runs into a strange error needing obscure forum searches to fix it, that's a problem.
Third, they'd have to seriously cozy up to proprietary software vendors for application support. This one is unfortunately an endless time and money sink, and can't pay off until they have enough users that they don't need to do it anymore. Thankfully F/OSS options provide some limits on this, but not entirely. Many times there are F/OSS options that are usable, but the proprietary ones are better (and worth paying for).
This is just a few thoughts off the top of my head. Its not well researched or thought out, but a starting point for a conversation.
- skgoa 8y agoI think you are spot on. These are such a huge issues that keep most people away from Linux. The perpetual denial of these issues is a ridiculously huge blind spot in the Linux comunity.