QuestionMark
@QuestionMark@lemmy.ml
- Comment on Google's plan to restrict sideloading on Android has a potential escape hatch for users 6 days ago:
Since Google’s goal is to improve security
This is an obvious lie.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 2 weeks ago:
Please let this be a nightmare…
- Comment on Microsoft Word documents will be saved to the cloud automatically on Windows going forward 2 weeks ago:
I’ll just use LibreOffice, but… a lot of people just don’t care. Which does also impact us.
- Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux 3 weeks ago:
I have written four comments here regarding this (five when I send this one). How many have you written? I won’t argue over this any further. It’s not worth the time, for both of us.
- Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux 3 weeks ago:
Are our definitions of “free” not the same? The way I think of “free” implies that, if the cost of a CPU/RAM/operating system is added to the overall cost of a device, that CPU/RAM/operating system is not free. You are paying for it.
Just because Linux is open source doesn’t magically mean macOS isn’t free
You’re right, because you didn’t read my comment carefully. I wrote, clearly, that Linux is funded. That’s where the money for its development comes from.
Linux’s license means Google can’t close Android’s source and make manufacturers pay for it, it has other ways to profit from Android.
Windows is paid.
Every major operating system has some way to obtain money for its development. The most logical thing for Apple is to add macOS’s cost to the price of Mac devices. Given this definition of not-free, the probability of macOS not being free is higher.
- Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux 3 weeks ago:
Linux has an entirely different story.
You can also donate to them.
But what about Android? Android is definitely not paid.
Android is based on the Linux kernel, which uses the GPL license.
Therefore, Google cannot close Android’s source code, and force manufacturers to pay for it.
When you buy an Android phone, however, there are some closed-sourced components installed on them: Google Play Services, YouTube, …, which Google can profit from.
So Google does profit from Android. It’s free, but Google definitely generates enough to develop Android.
Apple’s situation is different from Google’s. It is the sole maker of devices that run macOS, and macOS is close-sourced. It can add a price to each macOS device sold for macOS development. It would be illogical for Apple not to do this, and use the profit brought by the sale of other devices. Therefore, there’s a high probability you’re also paying for macOS when buying a Mac device.
- Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux 3 weeks ago:
The arguments were provided by others, I simply stated what I observed. You are right that Apple doesn’t make you pay for macOS separately, but in my opinion, it’s like saying that Apple processors are free because you don’t pay for them when you buy a Macbook. You also don’t pay for Windows separately when you buy a Windows laptop, you know, but the manufacturer is paying for Windows which is added to the overall cost of the laptop.
- Comment on 7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux 3 weeks ago:
Floo: Do you think I’m acting in bad faith because I acknowledge a fact, and you won’t? Ah, yes. Projection. It’s amusing that you’re accusing me of what you’re doing. It’s extremely amusing that you’re accusing others of accusing you of doing what they’re doing, while in fact you’re accusing others of doing what you’re doing. Did the recursion make your brain explode? Sorry, I forgot to take your intelligence into account.