MAINSTREAMING LINUX

Why are so many people opposed to it and want to keep it a sekrit klub?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FQM5fU7V-MM
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

have you ever seen a Linux advertisement in public view?

Yes, for Dell computers.

>watch pilot episode of new TV drama called Mr. Robot.
>characters have discussion about GNOME vs KDE

happening.jpg

Microsoft shills are the ones doing that. They also hype every new distro and other free operating systems to attempt to fragment the free software community as much as possible.

They want you to use things like *BSD so linux numbers look smaller when sites like statcounter publish statistics. Plus the licensing of the software they shill for is almost always something that's not GPL'd, meaning it typically uses software licenses that help and protect corporations and do nothing to protect the user or preserve freedom.

They unify around their software so it's really obvious: .NET, TypeScript, Visual Studio, VS Code, etc, etc, but when new competing software comes out they go into other communities and fragment them, but leave the MS communities alone. When sublime was popular they went into the sublime communities and told them to use Atom and Brackets, but they always end up saying some MS product is even better, just kind of nonchalant.

Now how man have you seen for Windows?

No one with an education who programs for a living would ever support MS:

Bill Gates was a ruthless, cutthroat businessman who made his vast wealth by using every dirty trick in the book (and inventing a few new dirty tricks along the way) and then using Microsoft's success to effectively hold the computer industry hostage for 20 years.

He viewed any successful non-Microsoft software as a threat, even if that software was for Windows. And if that software was cross-platform he viewed it as an existential threat, since it lessened people's dependence on Microsoft.

Internet Explorer? Microsoft didn't make it. They completely missed the boat on the World Wide Web, and with the popularity of the Netscape Navigator web browser (which was available on almost every computer, from $20k SGI workstations to Macs to Windows PCs), Bill Gates & co saw a threat to Microsoft's dominance, so they rushed to get their own web browser by buying one from a company called Spyglass Software. Now, since Netscape Navigator cost money, everyone assumed Microsoft would charge for Internet Explorer, and Microsoft's contract with Spyglass Software promised to give Spyglass a cut of whatever money they made from Internet Explorer sales. So what did Microsoft do? They released Internet Explorer for free, which was something none of their competitors could do since Microsoft had such deep pockets. Spyglass Software was ruined, and so was Netscape eventually. Once Internet Explorer was available, Microsoft threatened not to sell Windows to any PC manufacturer that bundled Netscape Navigator, which would later get them in trouble with the Department of Justice and the EU.

I'm not against mainstreaming Linux.
But all the OS's that take Linux to the mainstream lock it down and turn it into a botnet (which is understandable, they have to make money somehow).

So I don't care if those botnets run Linux, Windows or OSX. I won't use them, and am opposed to them. I'll keep using a Linux OS that's free (as in speech).

>>characters have discussion about GNOME vs KDE

youtube.com/watch?v=FQM5fU7V-MM

DirectX? Began life as an OpenGL knock-off that would (Microsoft hoped) lock-in developers to Windows. Hell, Microsoft was so afraid of OpenGL (since it was cross platform and the industry standard at the time) that they offered to partner with SGI (creator of OpenGL) on a new, cross platform graphics library called FireGL. Except that Microsoft had no intention of actually releasing FireGL. They hoped working on FireGL would distract SGI from advancing OpenGL long enough to let DirectX (then called Direct3D) catch up to it, and when their plan worked Microsoft just up and abandoned FireGL.

When 3D accelerators were new (which are now called GPUs), there was a much larger number of companies developing desktop GPUs than the nVidia/AMD/Intel tri-opoly we have today, and many of them were too small to afford to create their own full OpenGL implementations. Since most PC GPUs at the time only implemented a small subset of OpenGL in hardware, Microsoft wrote a full software OpenGL implementation and then offered it to GPU companies, so those companies could just replace the parts that their GPU implemented in hardware and still have a full OpenGL driver. Once they had all spent a good deal of time doing this, Microsoft actually refused to license any of their OpenGL code for release, effectively guaranteeing that smaller GPU companies would only have support for DirectX.

Video For Windows? VFW (now called Windows Media or whatever) only came into being because Microsoft literally stole the source code to QuickTime For Windows. Both Microsoft and Intel were having a hard time getting video to play smoothly on PCs, when Apple surprised them both by releasing QuickTime For Windows, a port of their QuickTime video framework for Macintosh. QuickTime For Windows could to smooth video playback on ordinary PCs with no special hardware, and Microsoft and Intel were caught completely off guard by it. Apple had contracted out to a 3rd party company to do the Windows port of QuickTime, so what did MS do? They went to the same company and gave them a ton of money to develop Video For Windows, but an insanely short schedule, knowing full well that the company would essentially have to re-use a lot of the QuickTime For Windows source code to get the project done on time.

When Apple found out (their contract with the other company stated that Apple owned all the QuickTime For Windows source code), they went ballistic and sued Microsoft. Microsoft had been caught red-handed and knew that Apple had them by the balls. So MS settled. Remember when Microsoft "bailed out" Apple in the 90s by buying $150 million in Apple stock? Despite what the tech press reported, that's not what actually happened. The $150 million in non-voting Apple stock that Microsoft bought was part of their settlement (Apple was no longer on the verge of bankruptcy by that point, and didn't need to be bailed out). The settlement also had Microsoft agreeing to port MS Office and Internet Explorer to Macintosh.

No one actually used Internet explorer. I've used chrome my entire life so something like that story shouldn't matter. And Netscape? What is that? I've never seen anyone use it. Microsoft might have been better off going after Google for Chrome because it's better than IE.

Because Windows is mainly shitty due to its popularity: Companies target it, malware targets it, idiot normies target it

AND ALSO

Microsoft participated in the NSA PRISM program and basically worked with the government to help it with Orwellian style mass surveillance. This was just a few years ago people.

Should a group of people in the upper echelons of a private company be working with people in the upper echelons of the government in a top secret program that violates all of our rights? A program that you and I weren't allowed to know about? A program that even members of congress didn't know about and that spied on members of congress?

Pretty fucked up shit when you really think about it.

This board is for people over 18.

Straight up Neutral Evil

We're power users, and we have very different desires to normies. If gnu/linux was mainstream, our views on how we want our software would be drowned out. Let them stick to windows and osx, it works best for them, and gnu/linux works best for us.

I think it only seems that way for a few reasons I've just made up
>Elitists may be more vocal
>People who preach Linux are usually bad at doing so
>Most people have other shit to worry about instead of whether or not they're using an open source OS

underageb&

>Why are so many people opposed to it and want to keep it a sekrit klub?
Because dumbing down and sandboxing Linux will make it less useful for power users.

>author of the show actually believe real life linux users act like Sup Forums
I've never experienced this in real life. In real life, nobody gives a fuck as long you get what you're supposed to do done.

Because they are running 'muh unix' with GNOME and their mouse driven interfaces, binary config, binary logs, init system that has 837482347999 features, dbus activation, polkit, consolekit, udisks, upower, freedesktop, gtk3, and wayland.

Why do americans shart in marts?

Culture of shart

Agreed.

Linux won and freedom lost. I know the story's not over, but at this point that's where we are. Many people have used a Linux-based OS quite a bit, and even GNU/Linux distros like ChromeOS and SteamOS are becoming popular. But the user still has no real freedom.

I guess it's better than it would be if the most popular free OS were BSD licensed instead of GPL, since then the companies could make substantial changes to the kernel and the other OS components making them nonfree too. At least the way it is now, you can still see the source code of the kernel your Android phone runs.

>Why are so many people opposed to it and want to keep it a sekrit klub?


The only people who do this are new converts from the old Windows religion.

They still don't know shit yet, but think they are the shit. They're special because they found "Truth."

It's like new converts from "the old thing" to "the new thing." Always.

Ever see someone get involved in evangelical Christianity or any other charismatic religion? Aren't they assholes?

So it's like that.

Assholes everywhere.

>I guess it's better than it would be if the most popular free OS were BSD licensed instead of GPL

But that doesn't happen. What happens is that you get companies like Apple that take from the public domain and never give back, except for things like Webkit, which is derived from khtml, which is /not/ BSD licensed.

RMS is a sharter, I knew it

if you want to get to the summit of a mountain, you don't ask for an escalator to be installed

accomplish

I already installed Ubuntu for 2 people in my family when Windows shit itself like usual. I said it was the only way they could get me to give a fuck and grudgingly agreed and I haven't heard back from them so I guess it worked out. I gave them a quick walkthrough but they just use Firefox and read stuff about property and religion so it's fine.

I just don't understand how people can shit themselves and not care.

Americunts are not people tbfh

The REAL question is!
Why do amerilards shart in the mart?

because they are so fat they cant tell when their body needs to shit because of all the fat so the shit just starts running out of their asshole. they cant feel it cause the fat insulates their leg and they cant sense the warm turds running down

>you use windows? hah
>but don't use linux please

diabetes kills nerve endings in your lower body if you don't treat it, notice how it's always fatasses