←back to thread

535 points raddad | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
kevin_b_er ◴[] No.11389769[source]
Sounds like a regression on Canonical's issue #1. The resolution case was "A majority of the PCs for sale should include only free software.". This article does indeed appear to showcase active work toward a regression on bug #1

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

replies(3): >>11390421 #>>11390478 #>>11390621 #
1. bcg1 ◴[] No.11390621[source]
In general I certainly agree, but there are also advantages for free software of this.

For example, this will probably help expose and fix lots of bugs in Microsoft's implementation of Linux interfaces, which will be a benefit to free software developers and vendors.

Also, general users will get more exposure to free software programs, and may be more open to buying a legit Ubuntu or other Linux computer in the future. For example, I was able to switch my wife over to using Linux Mint without any issue, which was undoubtedly made easier by the fact that she was already using LibreOffice, Thunderbird, and Firefox on her Windows PC.

It seems like people are able to pretty easily run free software programs on Mac OS X, and all things being equal I think that has been a great benefit to free software, and a lot of web developers et al seem to be willing to make their program free software friendly and release them under free software licenses. I would love to see a similar trend with Windows, even if I personally think that proprietary operating systems are extremely harmful and need to go the way of the horse and buggy.