In my opinion, GNU/Linux should never be marketed. GNU/Linux should always remain a free system in every regards. If a distribution wants to sell their own copies to raise money for research and development as well as pay their staff if needed, then so be it, but otherwise marketed with off the shelf PCs and Servers, no.

The day GNU/Linux sells out, then GNU/Linux will no longer be free.

I tend to agree but it seems that a lot of the major voices in Linux, Linux included, want to "win the desktop" which, to me at least, seem to go against this.

@ReaperX7
some fine-tuning
I would agree if you would change your statement to...
The day GNU/Linux sells out, then GNU/Linux will no longer be what is was meant to be
...(unless our society changes radically ).

All GNU tools are GPL licensed, as is the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux can not be made non-free, regardless how much it is marketed and regardless if it comes pre-installed on hardware.

Only as long as there is somebody/something that defends the license (of the single programs/applications?) with real $

How does that change with Linux being preinstalled on consumer hardware? Maybe someone can clarify to me how preinstalling Linux on consumer hardware or even servers makes it less free?
Maybe I should feel guilty, some time ago I worked for an OEM where we shipped every system that wasn't ordered with Windows with Ubuntu preinstalled, have I made Linux less free?

Oh no sorry, I just meant that in the end there has to be a real company/organization (e.g. fsf.org) funded with real money to defend the rights of GPL SW. Otherwise any "bad" company could just #1 copy the code #2 license it and #3 sue the GPL-software that originally wrote it for using their licensed code.
Summarized: it's a gray world and GPL needs a strong real-world-presence to push/force its ideals/principles/licence-agreements.

Hi...

I'm sorry but I disagree there. Why push and force? Let the GPL stand (and attract software writers) on it's own merits. Convince me why I should release my (hypothetical) product under the GPL, if I want to make money from it.

Regards...

The GPL is nothing if there's no real company behind it defending it resp. enforcing the license agreements.

As I posted earlier currently 78% of businesses use Open Source and the number is growing. There is also a huge test case in courts, both State and Federal, right now surrounding XimpleWare, Ameriprise and Versata. This is an incredibly important battle if for no other reason than to destroy the FUD often promulgated by lawyers that GPL is a virus that infects anything it touches. It is highly likely that the GPL will come out of this fight stronger and more widely accepted than it even is currently.

Here's a starter - http://opensource.com/law/14/12/gplv...0000000c9pyAAA

It's too complicated - don't understand anything.
Isn't there the main question if those companies behaved correctly or not according to the licenses/agreements? Don't think that it's about the GPLv2 itself...

The thing is, SteamOS has already had a pretty big impact on getting Linux onto PCs as the main desktop OS. In PC gaming circles, I see many people now actually building Linux gaming machines - buying new hardware for running Linux. Because there is now an impressive catalog of Linux games on Steam (not just SteamOS). This has opened the door to many gamers just downloading Linux and playing the games they have already purchased. In many cases, the extra resources and faster boot-up times of a Linux OS are a bonus.

I myself saw that a few of my favourite games that I owned already in Windows (on Steam) now had native Linux versions. I immediately dual-booted Xubuntu, threw a 250GB SSD drive just for Linux and have not booted into Windows for 2 months. 80% of my games collection runs in Linux either natively or via Wine. This is massive because this is only the early days of the push for mainstream gaming in Linux and with the gaming industry being bigger than Hollywood, it's not a bad place to gain market share. I suppose this is working in an Android-like fashion, but on desktop hardware.

Perhaps what is interesting (and really emphasising my point) is that if you look on YouTube, there is a rapidly growing section of Linux gamers reviewing AAA titles - the most interesting point being that all of them that I have seen are Linux not SteamOS.

Could you please list the games you're referring to?

There are currently 2077 games listed for Linux on Steam, so I'm not going to look through all of them right now, but here is a list of big games (not necessarily AAA, but some are and all are certainly big sellers):

Dying Light
Bioshock Infinite
The Witcher 2
Borderlands 2
Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel
Wasteland 2
Metro Last Light
Metro 2033 Redux
Shadow Warrior
Portal 2
Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth
Tropico 5
Dungeon Defenders
Dead Island
7 Days to Die
The Talos Principle
Outlast
Chivalry: Medieval Warfare
Crusader Kings II
Killing Floor
XCOM: Enemy Unknown
Baldur's Gate II
Europa Universalis IV

Hopefully that gives some idea of the kind of games available right now for Linux gamers (or even Windows gamers who have some of them and can play them on Linux at no extra cost).

You can check the list here: http://store.steampowered.com/search/?term=&sort_by=_ASC&os=linux&page=1#sort_by=_ASC&sort_order=ASC&os=linux&page=1

It is also worth adding that you can install the Windows Steam client using Wine and quite a lot of games just work without any fiddling.

I share TobiSGD's puzzlement and applaud his company's policy. Recenty saw a new laptop for sale at a RadioShack here in Nicaragua with Ubuntu pre-installed instead of Windows. A couple weeks later i encountered a new independent shop selling computers with no OS or software pre-installed. In both cases i rejoiced to think that Microsoft's grip on the market may be weakening.