Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Mar 2010 00:07 UTC, submitted by Jim Lynch
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu How surprised would you be, if I walked up to you and told you that every human needs oxygen to survive? I'm assuming that you wouldn't at all be surprised - you might start feeling a little uneasy that a random stranger walked up to you with such a crazy question, but you wouldn't be surprised by the we-need-oxygen fact. Apparently, people are surprised that Ubuntu is not a democracy.
Thread beginning with comment 414623
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Not exactly
by Ripples on Mon 22nd Mar 2010 02:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not exactly"
Ripples
Member since:
2005-07-06

Ubuntu has done a lot to help out end users, and contributed by paying developers to add fixes and features. You may switch to another vendor because you are not loyal, but you probably will not have any problems using the code that Canonical was responsible for contributing to FOSS. Sometimes you need someone to make a decision, not put it up to a vote.

As far as I am concerned, I believe anyone who can compare Microsoft and Apple business practices to a Red Hat, Mandriva and Canonical isn't just naive, but absurd.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Not exactly
by r_a_trip on Mon 22nd Mar 2010 08:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Not exactly"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

As far as I am concerned, I believe anyone who can compare Microsoft and Apple business practices to a Red Hat, Mandriva and Canonical isn't just naive, but absurd.

Primary business practise of all the companies mentioned is making profit. Some are less aggressive then others, but the bottom line will always be prevailing over whatever "community" concerns pop up.

Once you can bring yourself to strip away the warm fuzzies of thinking there exists a large, coherent "community" of FOSS people and see it like it really is, large disparate groups somehow operating to further their own agenda under a certain type of license, it becomes clear the only difference is in business model.

FOSS gives you the source code and a broad license to work with that source. CSS doesn't. For an end user, the difference is that he/she can choose from a larger pool of overlords in the FOSS sphere, because half of the "Four Freedoms" don't do squat for a non-programmer.

Before anyone trots out the classic "but you could learn how to program and FOSS makes that easier", yeah, and I could also learn to become a brain surgeon and I could try to become a God or I could wear pink tutu's and twirl with batons. If I were to be a programmer, I would have been one many years ago. Not all people will become programmers. As a non-programmer, you will always be beholden to a programmer to make software for you.

FOSS licensing is easier to comply with and more flexible in day to day use. FOSS licensing won't bring about Utopia though.

Reply Parent Score: 3