• rodneylives@lemmy.worldEnglish
    46·
    7 days ago

    LOL at Windows being marked as less corporate than MacOS. They should absolutely be at least tied.

  • mathemachristian [he/him]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    8·
    6 days ago

    GUIX top left

    • dictates to the OS how it has to be
    • requires a lot of reading theory
    • no ties to anduril

    nixOS top right

    • dictates to the OS how it has to be
    • recruits people snatchers

    context 1
    context 2

    Edit: Ah I missed the axes are not labeled like the common political compass. Nvm then. Put NixOS above RHEL and guix above arch.

    • balsoft@lemmy.ml
      4·
      6 days ago

      NixOS is definitely not as corporate as MacOS or ChromeOS. It’s also not as mainstream as RHEL. I’d say RHEL should be one square to the right, NixOS should go where RHEL is now, and Guix should share the square with Gentoo.

      • somethingDotExe@lemmy.world
        3·
        6 days ago

        Red Hat is their biggest sponsors, and uses their releases to bugfix and create their new releases. But just because Red Hat uses it this way, ofc doesn’t mean Fedora isnt independent, it just means they are very influenced by a HUGE donor!

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          2·
          6 days ago

          Are there specific choices made by fedora that would have should have been done differently but were pushed by the large donor?

          Just asking because I’m on fedora but wasn’t aware of that relationship but this description hasn’t yet convinced me that the relationship is toxic for users, but my mind is open enough to believe it with specific examples.

          • somethingDotExe@lemmy.world
            2·
            5 days ago

            The thing is, we don’t really know really. The only thing we know for certain is that Fedoras rollouts is basicly a testtube for Red Hat. I think Red Hat or Fedora was pretty open about this. It might seem “negative” but I just think it adds an extra layer of caution. I don’t think Fedora is interested in becoming buggy in any way, or irrelevant for that matter. Bazzite for instance also run on Fedora, so that would be crazy. But I also think that they just might implement things IBMs red hat tells them too, if they wanna keep getting those huge donations. Donations at an open source market still benefits the doner in this way. It’s a fastlane ticket to features after doners desire. So Fedora users might just get the rollouts before Red Hat users, and get it with the bugs it might have at early stages, before Red Hat implements it. But I am not in any shape or forme in knowledge of the Fedora team and I don’t know how the relationship works. I just don’t buy the fact that IBM gives millions to the Fedora team without using it for their own advantage as well. Who wouldn’t?

  • mimavox@piefed.socialEnglish
    5·
    6 days ago

    Hmm, I don’t see how Corporate can be on a scale though. Either the distro is run by a corporation, or it’s not.

    • The D Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
      4·
      6 days ago

      i think an OS can be made entirely by a corporation, or entirely by one hobbyist with no funding. something like fedora is made by volunteers with corporate funding, whereas something like Arch is made by volunteers with donations, some of which might be coming from corporate representatives

      • mimavox@piefed.socialEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        Hm, yes I suppose you can see it that way. Personally, I’m mostly interested in if it’s a community thing or not, but I suppose corpo donations can be found all over these as well.

    • Jiral@lemmy.org
      6·
      7 days ago

      Not to be confused with openSUSE though, even if there is some overlap. Maybe that one is down another step.