And yes, "the industry" (how polite we are to not name names, I suppose) made an affirmative decision to unnecessarily deny the end users reasonable control over their devices.
Wow. Just… wow. That's biggest load of bull I've ever seen. There are no names because this is not something which was decreed by someone but a wisdom gained through much suffering. Different companies reached this point at different time, but by now it's universal knowledge.
It may be the only difference, but its the one that matters because its what determines if the owner of the hardware can choose to take control of it by authorizing a free operating system, and its what determines if all downstream distributors of free software have equal access to the deployed equipment.
Indeed. Now, please, explain why you are trying to push for the solution which makes owner absolutely powerless?
P.S. Before you'll start sputtering nonsense I want to point out that I've typing this on a laptop I don't own (my employer does) and I've first seen this discussion on a phone which I was not mine either (it's owner is a telecom company till I'll pay the rent for two year and it's ownership will be transfereed to me). You said your solution puts owner in control so obviously it should prevent my ability to tinker with these devices somehow… well how exactly it works?
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds