• TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    50
    ·
    4 months ago

    Some people just don’t like their OS being used for that purpose and want it to be just a tool that shuts up and does exactly as it’s told and no more. I can see that point of view. Our computers aren’t free billboards. It’s like when car dealers stick their own custom logo on the cars they sell to people.

    • FQQD@lemmy.ohaa.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      The difference is, that you’re using something for free, and you can disable this very easily.

        • D_Air1@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Those people are completely misinformed then. The OS did not come free. You paid for it. You pay for the license every time you buy a computer. If KDE had that then yeah it would by annoying, but they probably wouldn’t be asking then.

          Most places tell you how much you are paying for it. I have to go out of my way to not pay for it since I don’t plan on using windows when I buy a new device.

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          3 months ago

          The Windows is not free. The OEMs pay a license fee and that cost is passed on to people buying those computers.

            • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              3 months ago

              “The price is included” so you did pay for it. That alone makes the comparison invalid and its pointless to even compare a free community developed product to a paid product by profit company on a revenue discussions.

      • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        I get that. I was just saying why it might tick some people off. My idea of a good OS is one that you don’t even notice while using it. It just sits in the background doing its thing and you don’t have to think about whether you’re using KDE, Gnome, or whatever, because it never makes itself known and you just happily use your programs.

        • uint@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          In my opinion no OS manages such a feat of making itself unknown, there are always some problems, and I think you agree with that in practice (it’s more a matter of thresholds). So there is continuous improvement. The question is then whether or not the possible financial boost from the donations will improve the OS in such a way that the net benefit is positive with respect to the negative value of the donation notification (a utilitarian viewpoint, I guess). I would say it will be a net benefit, not least because the negative value of the notification is so small.