Sujet : Re: cpu-x
De : ronb02NOSPAM (at) *nospam* gmail.com (RonB)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 17. May 2024, 04:54:37
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v26gtd$20265$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
On 2024-05-15, Andrzej Matuch <
andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2024 14:01:54 +0000, RonB wrote:
>
On 2024-05-13, Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 12:25:50 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 23:36:40 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
On 12 May 2024 00:34:11 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
It is technically possible to keep ownership of the software and
make a profit with it, but it is rather difficult the moment you
slap the GPL on the code.
Tell that to the companies making a big business of Linux.
>
Name them, and explain how it is the _software_ that is making them
money,
and not the _support_ for that software.
Red Hat (on wikipedia):
"They produce open-source code so that more programmers can make
adaptations and improvements. Red Hat sells subscriptions for the
support,
training, and integration services that help customers in using
their open-source software products."
Though frankly, what is the difference if you sell your software or if
you bundle software and provide support for that bundle?
>
The latter is a subscription, much like what the zealots are
complaining about Windows software doing. Sure, the software will stilla
be yours, but you won't get the support you need to figure out how to
use it.
For Linux, corporations can usually find third party support on a per
case basis. When CentOS was a clone of Red Hat instead of whatever it is
now, corporations would use it instead of Red Hat and pay for support
when needed. (I'm guessing the same thing happens now with Rocky Linux
and the other Red Hat clones.) You don't have that third party option
with Microsoft when paying for yearly licensing. And that will
especially be the case if they start renting out their software instead
of selling it when Windows 12 comes out.
>
I am not a fan of Microsoft's pay-per-month model for Office, and bought
Office 2021 simply to avoid it. I understand the benefits of paying
monthly and continually getting updates, but I would rather just pay up
front. If that is indeed the way they will go with Winodws, potentially
offering yearly OS subscriptions for people who buy a new computer, I will
gladly move onto Fedora. The mere fact that Fedora would respect my desire
to use S3 sleep rather than S0 (I can change it using a third-party
application), and that I am not forced to update, would be a reason to use
it over any new version of Windows.
I've got Fedora 39 (Cinnamon spin) on one computer. It's not a whole
different than Linux Mint when you get used to it. Except it's cutting edge
vs stable. But I guess I don't have the cutting edge version now, I think
Fedora has gone to version 40.
I guess I should look into how to update it.
-- [Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality." "It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine