Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
What linux needs?
iphigenie:
well even with the command prompt most of the tools and software would be GNU or third party :-\
The point was simply that linux is a kernel, linux distros are this kernel packaged with one team's choice of everything everyone ever did in open source (and some closed source)... and this is both the power and the curse of it. A thousand such choices to choose from and most of them not quite finished and polished in the drive to always have the latest of everything.
justice:
I think there are plenty opportunities there that you could argue for this Carol:
* Manufacturers can still have kickbacks by "recommending OS [whatever]", or for every activated / registrated copy.
* OEM versions can only be delivered as part of a computer purchase: ie they'll no longer exist. Linux options are free - or commercial linux distributions (or completely new ones) will have a chance. Similar to different cars for different budgets.
* Linux distro's will have a clear incentive for improving that part of their distro. And other commercial OS vendors will step in. Besides this, the report suggests manufacteres include a "driver disk". This could also include software to ease through the installation.
I encourage you to read the report, a lot of other options that have been considered are written down and their reason for not recommending those options. It's very readable english too.
iphigenie:
Interesting if this became law - would Apple also have to comply?
-Carol Haynes (September 24, 2007, 05:55 AM)
--- End quote ---
of course they would - it is a computer.
Although most manufacturers already offer PCs without the OS. And more and more offer a linux distro option (eg. lenovo with Suse) but at the moment it is the lack of maturity of most distros that makes it difficult for a small assembler to get a quick install with the kind of features you expect (final user friendly step by step "first start" set up procedure, factory restore reset etc. etc.) but also that could support the business model of many small assemblers which change the hardware composition every other week and have to have drivers etc.
Carol Haynes:
Interesting if this became law - would Apple also have to comply?
-Carol Haynes (September 24, 2007, 05:55 AM)
--- End quote ---
of course they would - it is a computer.
-iphigenie (September 24, 2007, 06:13 AM)
--- End quote ---
So presumably Apple would simply stop selling their computers in Europe since they only see computers with MacOS and don't distribute MacOS as an alternative OS anyway.
iphigenie:
So presumably Apple would simply stop selling their computers in Europe since they only see computers with MacOS and don't distribute MacOS as an alternative OS anyway.
-Carol Haynes (September 24, 2007, 07:17 AM)
--- End quote ---
It would be pretty silly for the EU to do a law but say that only "PC" manufacturers are affected - only if your hardware can run windows do you have to offer alternatives, if your hardware runs macos or solaris then it is ok to force people to buy the OS. That leaves a huge window to challenge the law as anticompetitive or unfair.
Besides, why shouldnt i be able to buy Mac hardware but run windows or BSD or linux on it - people do it - or if I have already have an old mac with osX and i want to use that license on my new hardware... It doesnt make a lot of sense (apart from the cases the hardware is very standard) but it should be an option offered.
It would be up to Apple but I can't imagine they would withdraw from the european market, they would just offer the option knowing 99.99% of people would go for the the OS anyway. Of course they could decide to stop selling in Europe but considering how some european countries carried Apple through the bad years it would be pretty silly of them to do that.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version