I like the guy who only uses web-based apps for accounting and then says he can't do it on Linux... Okayyyyy... "of course he's wrong"... no kidding. But of course, who's worse? The guy who says that, or the guy that argues with him for an hour about it? hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

But it does raise some big changes in the last decade. My wifi still works after an update and reboot (not that I need to reboot to get it to work mind you).

"You need Windows and Visual Studio to code for Azure Sphere OS", which is a Linux distro... Well we have "Embrace" and "Extend" so far. I don't think M$ could actually "extinguish" Linux though.

While I wouldn't be paying a $1000+ just to go to a "Linux conference", if it wasn't for corporate support of Linux, it probably would not be as big as it is in markets like the server market, smartphones/tablet market, IoT market, etc. But at the end of the day; Linux wasn't ever something that was developed with profit in mind. It was because of corporate support (being M$'s support) that Windows become as popular as it is in the desktop market. Same story for Apple, but instead of signing deals with OEM's like M$, Apple also made their own hardware - therefore didn't need to make deals with OEM's.

Then why does Red Hat even exist?

Given Linux itself is just the kernel, that's what I was talking about. Red Hat is a business, the same as M$ is a business. The difference between the two is that, Red Hat doesn't tend to use the same tactics as M$ does. More to the point: unlike M$, Red Hat doesn't try to drive everyone else out of business, through underhanded tactics.

1 members found this post helpful.

Of course they do. R€d Hat'$ most famous employee, Mr. Po€tt€ring, has been trying to make the whole Lin$ux ecosystem uniform, he has been trying to make R€d Hat "the standard distribution", with everyone having to adopt $y$t€md, for years.

(Honestly, could you please stop using childish dollar signs at least in this thread? The Linux bashing thread is elsewhere...)

The first problem with what you say is that; there are still distributions that don't use systemd, like, Slackware, PCLinuxOS, etc, just to name a few. I've even seen whole lists of distros that don't use systemd. systemd's developer works for Red Hat last time I checked, who didn't just accept systemd straight away - he still had to convince them to adopt it.

The second thing is that; Red Hat has been a long time involved with Linux and therefore, would have contributed to many pieces of software for Linux, that other distributions have adopted. The point is: unlike a certain other company starting with a "M", the other distributions still have a choice, in Windows, it's up to M$ what choices you have - or more to the point; don't have.

PS: I wasn't using the dollar sign just to bash M$, I was also using it because I can't and won't be bothered to type out M$'s full name.

I will also say that I'm not a hater anymore than I'm a fan of systemd, just so you know.

JALV (just another Lunduke video).