11–20 of 49 posts
Technically, it's no problem if the intended use-case is not to verify against tampering but against transmission errors. However, it's a fine line that people easily cross by accident.
It helps with global education if we condition people to never accept checksums from unencrypted sources, and to be wary of MD5.
I find the window management to be pretty terrible. I guess this is trying to bridge the beginner distro gap between Windows and Ubuntu, because I couldn't see anyone seriously using it for very long. Then again I felt the same way about GNOME3, so maybe I'm not in the majority there.
I actually find window management not that bad, it's similar to OS X in that matter.
It is pretty impressive how much they've been able to pull together in their desktop environment and custom applications.
After that blog post of theirs where they called everyone who took advantage of the free option they provide "cheaters", why would I want to use or recommend a Linux distro that provides nothing but a shoddy OSX GUI ripoff?
"Free and open" but the only way you can download it without it asking for a credit card number is manually entering $0 in the "custom" field?
"Why We Make You Type “$0” We want users to understand that paying for software is important and not paying for it is an active choice. We didn’t exclude a $0 button to deceive you; we believe our software really is worth something. And it’s not an attempt to get rich quick; currently the only people who have received money for working on elementary OS have been community members through our bounty program.
It’s about asking a fair price to offset the costs of development. It’s about securing the future of elementary OS to ensure we can keep making software that millions of people love and use every day."
I find the window management to be pretty terrible. I guess this is trying to bridge the beginner distro gap between Windows and Ubuntu, because I couldn't see anyone seriously using it for very long. Then again I felt the same way about GNOME3, so maybe I'm not in the majority there.
And I'd argue KDE has a nearly identical UX to Windows in the first place. You can even get Windows-8-lite with Homerun. So if you want a fluid transition KDE is probably the best choice, as long as you don't overwhelm them with options (start menu, task bar, system tray, min / max / close in top right, have at it champ).
After that blog post of theirs where they called everyone who took advantage of the free option they provide "cheaters", why would I want to use or recommend a Linux distro that provides nothing but a shoddy OSX GUI ripoff?
"Free and open" but the only way you can download it without it asking for a credit card number is manually entering $0 in the "custom" field?
There's a clear explanation for that: Quote from their blog post: "Why We Make You Type “$0” We want users to understand that paying for software is important and not paying for it is an active choice. We didn’t exclude a $0 button to deceive you; we believe our software really is worth something. And it’s not an attempt to get rich quick; currently the only people who have received money for working on elementary OS…
The simple fact is: when I first went to their website I assumed it was a paid package.
After that blog post of theirs where they called everyone who took advantage of the free option they provide "cheaters", why would I want to use or recommend a Linux distro that provides nothing but a shoddy OSX GUI ripoff?
You mean this post [1] ? I find their reasoning quite logical. [1] http://blog.elementaryos.org/post/110645528530/payments
After that blog post of theirs where they called everyone who took advantage of the free option they provide "cheaters", why would I want to use or recommend a Linux distro that provides nothing but a shoddy OSX GUI ripoff?
Probably it should be read as "taking advantage of the system". Look run an Open Source project is costly, as much as making any other kind of software. Or you throw money developing it or time (which can be translated to money).
They release the source code of everything, plus is GPL so it's free* software as stated by the FSF (but they have privative software as well, for example drivers, as many other Linux distros do).
You still can download the iso for free. Plus they have a community ready to help you, and developers trying yo fix every bug they can.
You don't want to pay. Fine don't pay. You don't want to pay them. Fine don't pay them.
But try to think this, in every situation if you use free software that don't require to you to pay consider to help the project. If you have the possibility, then do a donation you are making a little big help to the project. Any help is welcomed (bug reporting, documentation, programming, recommending to your friends, and other things)
If you don't care, it's fine. But when good open source project dies, God help us. And this is true for every single open source projects not only for them (Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, FreeBSD, vlc player, Kodi).
(free* as freedom). (free* as free beer).
After that blog post of theirs where they called everyone who took advantage of the free option they provide "cheaters", why would I want to use or recommend a Linux distro that provides nothing but a shoddy OSX GUI ripoff?
By putting cheaters in quotes, you're putting words into their mouths. I didn't find the word cheaters on that page. They are making a solid point about the cost of open source software and about how free software isn't free.
They turned off user comments and edited their post when they started getting pushback from people asking how much of their revenue is going to upstream developers (which is where the vast majority of the work on this operating system is being done).