asdlfkjasdlfjkh

> we can take a look at wider benefit to society at whole.

my point is that no, we didn't.

yeah. gnome become this mess exactly by the time most laptops OEM were jumping in on the netbook fad... and some of them started to ship laptops boasting linux in the marketing campaign, because, well, they needed something that ran well on low powered 2003 devices with little batteries. most used ubuntu, which was ubuntu the company's goal at the time btw.

then gnome was coopted and took a nosedive and OEM went back to using microsoft for everything. and ubuntu had to write their own shell to survive because gnome tought it would be smart to ship a broken 2.x version with no settings app

the harmless discussions were boring filler for the interesting ones. but we lost them all.

The discussion GPL vs the corps. The corps wanted to use linux for free and make money. they won when linus gave up and added "tainted" message. now everyone just skin the reference implementation and ship a vulnerable modem or iot and we like that.

Google and samsung ships billions of android devices *with no source code for most of the system* and we think that is fine and that android is open source and that linux is healthy when all it does is host a bunch of binary blobs for every piece of the hardware.

then we had discussions on hosted GPL vs the corps. Where the corps won again when we all gave up and came up with the agpl compromise. aws business model is "bigger Cpanel, with more OSS software we get for free". They sold RH business model to everyone who thought RHEL was too expensive, by charging even more. genius.

Troll.

Qt is open source.

The company giving code for free withold some of the new code to pay their bills, just like the original patent system was intended to be. And then later they probably contribute that code for free too!

if YOU code that feature before they do you are free to open source it just fine.

gnome is not closer to macOS. sadly gnome is coopted into making bad decisions under the guise of copying macOS.

As soon as the "designers" got more funding than the coding contributors, the whole gnome org went down the drain. They often trhow away complete systems and replace them with something that are unusable "to drive coding contributors". They are completely disconnected from the community. Ubuntu tries to work around all that (by making their own shell, settings apps, etc) so it is not too obvious, but if you use debian, you probably spend several months without basic desktop funcionality every time they pushed something. Gnome is the inspiration for the systemD politics.

So, no gnome is not closer to macOS. but gnome is broken by using copying macOS as an excuse by the designer teams.