| |||||||||||||
Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)Posted Mar 6, 2013 16:43 UTC (Wed) by mmcgrath (subscriber, #44906)In reply to: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H) by niner Parent article: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)
> In other words: it's really, really hard to find some correct number here.
If the highest numbers you could find were 2% of PC video gamers then lets go with 2%. My point still stands. We give the Linux desktop away, there's 98% of people out there that would prefer to pay for an alternative.
(Log in to post comments)
Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H) Posted Mar 6, 2013 20:35 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
no, it's that they pay for the alternative when they purchase their computer and don't see it worth their time to switch from the vendor 'supported' OS to Linux, let alone go through the hassle of trying to get some money back for the OS that was bundled with their hardware.
That's very different from saying that they would rather pay for an alternative.
Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H) Posted Mar 7, 2013 10:29 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
> no, it's that they pay for the alternative when they purchase their computer and don't see it worth their time to switch from the vendor 'supported' OS to Linux, let alone go through the hassle of trying to get some money back for the OS that was bundled with their hardware.
It's still a bit more confusing. _Users_ do not pay for the OS that comes with their computers, OEMs do. And for them, Windows + crapware pre-installed has actually _negative_ price, that is, they get money for that. Free is not cheap enough to compete. Someday someone verify if this common practice is completely legal, and in the best interest of consumers.
Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H) Posted Mar 7, 2013 11:15 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
> Someday someone verify if this common practice is completely legal, and in the best interest of consumers.
I have no doubt that the mentioned practice is completely legal in most jurisdictions around the world (*). But I also have no doubt that it is *not* in the best interest of consumers.
(*) modulo the cases where the crapware is also malware, or is (possibly unintentionally) infected with malware.
|
|||||||||||||