Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
On 04/11/2017 08:16 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Tuesday 11 April 2017 13:54:50 Richard Owlett wrote:
'They' never told us, owners of single user laptops, why we
should chose it.
Your quoting lost important context ;<
You quoted only one sentence (as Ric did) of my post of April 8.
But you link to my reply earlier today to Ric's post.
As you argued in another thread, context can be everything,
"Which is referenced here by its own name - Exe GNU-Linux. When
I first saw it I wondered why a Linux distro was named after a
Windows binary. The answer is, it isn't. It is named after the
River Exe in Devon, England."
Because they don't care whether you chose it or not? Debian offers
alternatives, but had to chose a default. Other distros have made
their choice.
Ubuntu has chosen - of course - to go where the money is.
No-one cares what Richard Owlett - or Lisi Reisz - has chosen for his
(her) laptop. And why should anyone?
Lisi
As to your question, the BMOC (Big Monopolists Of Consumerism) have
blinded themselves to the potential size of a market.
I get a chuckle following an Android oriented USENET group. There is
much effort going into how to 'root' an Android object because
purchaser's actually wish to use those objects for their (the
purchasers) purpose. After all, Android was touted as a Linux for such
objects.
The current crop of dinosaurs (MS, Google, Canonical) should remember
"Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.”
[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/doomed-to-repeat-it]
Seen any T. Rex lately? They were once top of food chain.
Reply to: