An HOA (home owners associations) can say what color you can paint your house, What you can plant in your yard, What you can have in your driveway, and some even say what color your blinds can be.
Microsoft controls your computer, they say what info is sent back to Microsoft, and they say when you must upgrade. They can shut down your computer when they want whether you like it or not.
Linux is a clearing in the woods. You have the freedom to build a cabin yourself from logs with your barehands with LFS, buy building materials and power tools to build a completely custom house yourself with something like Arch or Gentoo, get a kit and put it up yourself with Fedora or Debian, put up a prefab with Ubuntu, or just pull up a trailer for a while and move on with a live ISO.
Perhaps Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc are either pre-built homes delivered complete by truck or a stick-built home built to specifications provided by an architect.
In any case, remodeling is a possibility.
where linux
Sounds like GNOME.
I’d say they’re more like the developer, they’ve made the house their way, you can kinda change it, change the paint, move the furniture but you can’t make any major structural changes.
As much as Microsoft sucks their os is generally pretty solid. Not great but good enough for most
(I say this having not had a windows install on a personal machine for over a year now)
You will not find a developer standing at your front door saying “Sorry, Updating the house- you can’t go in right now” - and if you buy a home usually you can remodel but if you are in an HOA you probably have to beg permission to do anything that would be visible from the street.
I haven’t had an update forced on me on my work machine ever
If you’re having the house fumigated, or making some renovations you’d have to be out of the house for a bit
I didn’t understand the “forced upgrade” argument until now. Yea I guess you’re right, at some point you have to do updates (they nag about upgrading to 11 but you can skip that indefinitely). But with how popular Windows is you have options for a lot of problems (including forced updates which to be fair shouldn’t be ignored when it comes to security patches).
If you open up Chris Titus Tech’s Windows Utility (https://christitus.com/windows-tool/) you basically have a comprehensive list of all the ameliorations one could ever want at their disposal. That’s really the main thing Windows still has going for it, it’s a decades-long mainstay which means there are plenty of knowledgable people out there who know how it can be made to heel even if Microsoft decide to force a Microsoft account on you, telemetry, whatever it may be, there will probably always be a way around it.
For example one of my main gripes with Windows 11 is how you can’t make the taskbar show all tray icons anymore by default. They removed window titles in the taskbar so now everything is basically a square down there meaning there’s all this empty space between my open windows and the tray. But of course someone out there has written a program to automatically unhide all tray icons and thrown it on GitHub.
To me personally it doesn’t matter how crappy the design choices are as long as they can be mitigated. If bad corporate decisionmaking is a dealbreaker (which is also a fair assessment) then you have to ditch the corporation entirely and go Linux or what have you. Not trying to be smart or anything but there really is no reason to stay on Windows left anymore. Maybe if you absolutely need Microsoft Office or something but ever since Proton came out the issue with Windows-only games has pretty much evaporated.
Switching to Linux without prior experience will challenge even the most tech-savvy, but it’s an investment worth making many times over.
I don’t get the forced update thing at all, use windows at work and don’t get nagged about updates ever. if it ever has updated on its own it’s done so completely imperceptibly to me
The only argument I see is that they’re dropping support for win 10 soon which kinda sucks but the majority of people will not even notice they’ve been upgraded
So can Canonical. The difference is, they don’t.
So far, and since I have been running Debian for a while now I don’t know about Ubuntu specifically, All the distros I have used either show an update is available, or you check for updates.
You have the choice and control to install the update and can do it later if now is not a good time. Or don’t install it at all, it’s your system.
Obviously, yes. My point is: Do you read and understand all changes in the code for each update? You need to trust the maintainers, cause they could theoretically push out any code with the update.
Some HOAs are better than others.
Unfortunately, all it takes is a change in the HOA board to turn a better HOA into a badder HOA.
Please do tell how they would do that.
You trust their repos.
With every apt update, they could push whatever code they want onto your PC.
Same as with literally any binary-based OS.Not sure why you specify binary-based OS’s. Following Gentoo’s upgrade guide also gets you potentially whatever they want on your systemp
Someone definitely reads the changed code of Gentoo packages. You are saying that every operating system on the planet is untrustworthy, besides gentoo and a few other source-based distros, but let’s target Ubuntu in particular.
That’s not what I’m saying.
I’m saying you need to trust the people making your OS cause no way in hell is anyone else able to audit every update they push.
Whether your OS is trustworthy depends on their history. In that regard, I’d give Ubuntu a solid B-Fair enough
How does that work, exactly? I don’t actually know. Are they compiling their own copies of the upstream code changes?
Yes, they’re taking the source code from upstream, modifying (“patching”) it, compiling it, then uploading their compiled binaries to the Ubuntu repo where your system downloads them during an update.
You can technically download the source code as well, if you activate the source repo. But hardly any end user does. And the source code you get doesn’t compile to the same binary you get from the repo anyway. (This would be called a “reproducible build”. Some distros try to be reproducible. Ubuntu doesn’t, they have other priorities.)
Thank you. That makes sense why some downstream distros designed for specific purposes (e.g. gaming) might include a handful of their own repos for specific software.