Linked by Howard Fosdick on Mon 18th Jun 2012 05:29 UTC
Permalink for comment 522723
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-12-05
"The Windows repository is Windows Update. Looking at the Ubuntu repository, Windows Update pales by comparison."
This was exactly my point--congrats for probably being the only one to get it. It's ironic how few people actually read and comprehend a post when it goes against their bias--like, oh, honest jabs at Microsoft for example...
"I lol'd.
Well, technically Microsoft isn't offering much software, but neither is Canonical. I mean how much software Canonical has actually written? Some package manager for GUI? That's an achievement."
The fact is, the programs are obtained by Canonical and compiled for and supported by them for the Ubuntu distro. Sure, primarily it's technically "third party" but face it... even Microsoft can't make everything. It's certainly not unheard for them to outright BUY a company or product to obtain exclusive rights, access and ownership of it. So no one else can use it.
With free/open sourse software, all distros--including Ubuntu--are legally allowed to go grab the source code for such various programs, compile it for their distro, and package it for fast and simple installation and use. And there is no suing if someone takes the code and decides to integrate it in their product in some way.
Edited 2012-06-18 20:42 UTC