I was thinking about the recent story about the DB looking for windows 3.1 administrator.

A classic issue I’ve soon working in heavy industry is that hardware last longer than windows version. So 10 years ago, you bought a component for the product you design or a full machine for your factory which only comes with a windows XP driver.

10 year latter, Windows XP is obsolete, upgrading to a more recent windows might be an option but would cost a shit load of money.

I have therefore the impression that Linux would offer more control to the professional user in term of product lifecycle and patch deployment. However, there is always that stupid HW which doesn’t have a Linux driver.

  • speaker_hat@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Look at your keyboard and you’ll get your answer (hint: Microsoft symbol)

    Microsoft integrated itself into every aspect of the industry (and beyond) to be a monopoly, as part of making technology.

    Linux in the other hand, is just a technology, which doesn’t really cares about market share, profits and being a monopoly.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

    I also look at it as Coca Cola vs. Natural freshly squeezed juice