> It has always worked towards users' interests, This is objectively not true. Debian has not worked for users interests in several cases. One such case I exp

> It has always worked towards users' interests, This is objectively not true. Debian has not worked for users interests in several cases. One such case I experienced years ago, and the reason I switched to Ubuntu, was while at university with a laptop. I had been using Debian on and off alongside Windows for a long time by that point but then a new version of Debian came out. It might have been Debian 7. Previously Debian had shipped with the correct Intel drivers/firmware for this laptops (incredibly well supported and common at the time) WiFi chipset. However in the (then latest) version they refused to ship the driver because "we don't support non-free software". I was left in the situation where I could no longer 1) properly finish setting up the laptop as there was no longer internet access, 2) unable to use the ethernet sockets in the buildings as they were locked down to specific MAC addresses. It took several days for me to be able to get a USB drive, find another PC I could run the Windows -> ISO program from Microsoft, write it to the USB drive, and then finally reinstall Windows. I don't care for how dogmatic and Stallman-like they approached this, and I don't care how people try to defend this, it's simply not the case they have always worked for users interests. By removing a previously shipped driver that fucks over a user even being able to use their machine, they are working to harm the users interests. Ubuntu also doesn't wait a couple of years before shipping new versions of software. This is why Ubuntu won. It just works. It loads """non-free""" drivers. I heard recently that Debian might finally ship with the type of drivers they used to. Too little too late.