If you go to different car dealers you find many different cars so you have to look into their pros and cons before choosing one. If you go to different computer shops you find Windows computers, Macs and Chromebooks. Macs are very expensive and Chromebooks are very limited, so you buy a Windows machine. People don’t even know what Linux is, and you can’t really blame them. They just want a machine to do everyday stuff with, and not to have to invest too much time or money in finding one.
I get that part. But then we have to do better. We can’t just stand there and be like: “It is what it is.” And with “we” I mean society as a whole: manufacturers, users, educators, governments (tbh, it is astonishingly weird that it is legal to force ship literal spyware with bought hardware), floss community etc.
Don’t mention the hundred different engines out there, along with somethings you can do with one but not the other, so you have to research all of them. Also, you may have to install more stuff to get the engine to do other things you’re used to as well.
Well, my point is: “Do I need to use Windows at your company?”
Answer that with yes and I’m out.
Yes, that’s very privileged, but at least if you have that privilege you should do it in my eyes. You will never get a change if companies do not recognise an increasing problem. “People do not want to work for us because they have to use unethical software.”
And for me, the question is not about personal preference or something. For me, this question is literally: “Do you take part in promoting a monopoly, that spreads spyware, violates user privacy, and, thus, further fuels the ignorance of it.”
I hate that argument so much. It’s like picturing me incapable of choosing a car because I know nothing about them.
“Why did you buy that garbage?” “It was the first vehicle at the first car dealer I found.”
If you go to different car dealers you find many different cars so you have to look into their pros and cons before choosing one. If you go to different computer shops you find Windows computers, Macs and Chromebooks. Macs are very expensive and Chromebooks are very limited, so you buy a Windows machine. People don’t even know what Linux is, and you can’t really blame them. They just want a machine to do everyday stuff with, and not to have to invest too much time or money in finding one.
I get that part. But then we have to do better. We can’t just stand there and be like: “It is what it is.” And with “we” I mean society as a whole: manufacturers, users, educators, governments (tbh, it is astonishingly weird that it is legal to force ship literal spyware with bought hardware), floss community etc.
In this analogy, no car dealer sells a Linux car and you’d have to rip out the engine yourself at home if you wanted one.
That’s the perceived barrier to entry.
Don’t mention the hundred different engines out there, along with somethings you can do with one but not the other, so you have to research all of them. Also, you may have to install more stuff to get the engine to do other things you’re used to as well.
Good luck changing OS on every user’s laptop in a Fortune500 organization to Linux and then managing policies for them.
I worked for F500 and didn’t touch Windows once.
Edit: looked it up and actually I still work for a F500 😅 And still didn’t touch Windows in like 20 years.
Cool, was it the same for all other employees there?
No.
That’s my point.
Well, my point is: “Do I need to use Windows at your company?” Answer that with yes and I’m out.
Yes, that’s very privileged, but at least if you have that privilege you should do it in my eyes. You will never get a change if companies do not recognise an increasing problem. “People do not want to work for us because they have to use unethical software.”
And for me, the question is not about personal preference or something. For me, this question is literally: “Do you take part in promoting a monopoly, that spreads spyware, violates user privacy, and, thus, further fuels the ignorance of it.”