Support us on Patreon to keep GamingOnLinux alive. This ensures we have no timed articles and no paywalls. Just good, fresh content! Alternatively, you can donate through PayPal, Liberapay or Buy us a Coffee. You can also buy games using our partner links for GOG and Humble Store.
Trolls.... (Linux related ones)
Page: «2/4»
  Go to:
damarrin 29 Sep

Arguably, Linux is not successful because there's no exclusive software for it, meaning you can do everything you can on Linux on other platforms so there's no reason to use Linux (from a functional point of view, I'm not talking about freedom, privacy, etc because the general public doesn't care about those).

Arguably, Apple is the most privacy-minded company there is right now. You buy expensive hardware from them and they make their money from that and not from gathering and selling your data. They are also not a monopoly in any market, Google is bigger in smartphones and obvs MS is bigger in OS. Let's not confuse monopoly with having control one's own devices.

Apple and Google are getting bad press right now because of the shit Epic has been stirring up that they shouldn't have control over their own platforms. I see value in the argument that a smartphone is just like a computer and should be treated like one, I also see value in it being a closed platform, where users have limited capabilities in exchange for security and peace of mind. Much like gaming consoles, perhaps. Should Sony and MS and Nintendo allow users to install their own software on them, including competitive stores? And if so, should they offer support and warranty if users do that?

Perhaps there's place for both types of devices in the market. It's just too bad for smartphones you only have the choice of locked-down chaperone Apple and spyware Google.

Cyril 29 Sep

Quoting: slaapliedjeBut back to trolls, yeah I don't think any of them are paid. I actually watched a commentary video about another video... where the original video was a grown adult male that was upset (to the point where he seemed close to bursting out into tears) that the PC was getting ports of some of the games that were previously exclusive to the PS4 (like Horizon: Zero Dawn). Because SOMEHOW having games be available to more people is a terrible thing! Oh no! I mean it isn't like the PC even competes with the consoles, that's one thing I've never understood...

<rant>
These people are simple consumers, brainless, fanboys. It's the same thing about Apple you don't understand either. ^^
It's like they think: Playstation is better than Xbox, the console looks better, the gamepad is better, the games are better!", they don't care about other people can't buy/play that game on their platform of choice.
They want to be, sort of, part of the "better" camp, but better in what? Not freedom for sure...
You know, I think we all know some fanboys, either for video games, cars, computers, clothes, food...
There is always someone saying that what he use/buy is better but in the same time doesn't know shit and refuse to learn, they just consume.
And the idea that they could be slaves, brainwashed... is unbearable for them, I saw that many times...
In fact with many of these big companies It's just like Stockholm syndrome...
</rant>

damarrin 29 Sep

Well, if you spend money on something you are more than likely going to defend it.

And of course, you may do nothing, buy nothing and “consume” nothing, that’s not much of a life, really. People make amazing things and one of the good sides of civilisation is we have a fair amount of free time we can spend on entertainment and don’t have to slave in a mine 16 hours a day. People find what works best for them and go with it. Yes, many a time that doesn’t involve much thought.

Shmerl 29 Sep

Quoting: damarrinThey are also not a monopoly in any market

I quite disagree that Apple should get a free pass. Anti-trust should have blasted them years ago for not allowing alternative stores and banning competing browser engines in their own. Even if they aren't literally a monopoly (that's a very edge case anyway), they have enough market influence to harm progress and competition by messing up Web standards because they can (see above about the browsers ban). Apple are one of the most disgusting anti-competitive lock-in driven companies around. I'd say they even outdid MS from the '90s in this regard.

Even though I don't have any respect for Epic's own anti-competitive practices, I hope they win this case over Apple and the later will get the anti-trust treatment they deserve.

Last edited by Shmerl on 29 September 2020 at 9:44 pm UTC

damarrin 29 Sep

Exercising control over your own platform has nothing to do with monopoly. Plenty of companies do this in the general computing space. Your TV maker does that with your TV, your cable provider does that with your TV box, and so does your router maker/internet provider with your router.

Monopoly is a dominant position in a market. Apple have that nowhere.

Last edited by damarrin on 29 September 2020 at 8:34 pm UTC

damarrin 29 Sep

Also, the thing I’m personally outraged about is MS’s monopoly in the PC OS market, which is an actual monopoly in the legal sense and not some made up one, and that no one in power deems it fit to do anything about, since practically everyone on the planet, including all the lawmakers, wants it to remain so.

slaapliedje 29 Sep

Quoting: damarrinExercising control over your own platform has nothing to do with monopoly. Plenty of companies do this in the general computing space. Your TV maker does that with your TV, your cable provider does that with your TV box, and so does your router maker/internet provider with your router.

Monopoly is a dominant position in a market. Apple have that nowhere.
They do within their own 'mall'. Imagine you are in a small town. There is only one place that has a shopping center. To open your own shop there, it is required that you not only pay your lease for the property/building, but the owner of the shopping center gets a cut of every sale you make as well.
That is Apple in a nutshell. Android at least has some back alley stores that are not muscled away, they just require customers to travel out back to shop with them.
For Android, it is as if the option is there, they just don't get prime real estate, and a reputation for "not google". Apple, you simply have no choice. You want to lice in AppleTown, you have to play by their rules or you get kicked out into the cold.

damarrin 29 Sep

You’ve never seen a shopping centre lease contract, have you? Your rent increases with your sales.

You can jailbreak your Apple device too, if you’re so inclined. And no matter what you do with your Android phone, no matter how many 3rd party stores and apps you install on it, it’ll continue reporting everything you do to Google to fuel their marketing machine.

damarrin 29 Sep

Also, you don’t have to live in Apple town. They’re a minority player in the market, Google is bigger and you can get by without Apple. You’d only be unable to if they were a monopoly, which they aren’t.

And yes, if you want to live there, you have to live by their rules. I fail to see the problem here.

dr_jekyll 29 Sep

Quoting: damarrinApple and Google are getting bad press right now because of the shit Epic has been stirring up that they shouldn't have control over their own platforms. I see value in the argument that a smartphone is just like a computer and should be treated like one, I also see value in it being a closed platform, where users have limited capabilities in exchange for security and peace of mind. Much like gaming consoles, perhaps. Should Sony and MS and Nintendo allow users to install their own software on them, including competitive stores? And if so, should they offer support and warranty if users do that?

At least in the countries I know, there is no warranty in case of modification, so this is just another non-sense argument to support apple's position.

Also the point of security is nonsense.
Because you still could allow users to choose.
If they want the company's "secure" store, they can have it, but if they want something else they shouldn't be denied.

All in all the point of this is much bigger than you think.
As one economic professor pointed out years ago, we are going to see a future of service-economics, if lawmakers don't act.
This means: In the end no one will be able to buy products anymore; that they own, that they can modify and repair and use forever.
Instead you will only be able to pay for services, like subscriptions and then use (former) "products" in the limited way the companies want.

I don't want to live in this future.

While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Patreon, Liberapay or PayPal Donation.

We have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed exclusive articles. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.

Livestreams & Videos
Community Livestreams
Latest Forum Posts