|
|
|
|
|
|
by fallingsquirrel
578 days ago
|
|
|
> That said, linux is in a way like processed foods, and windows is organic. I would have said the opposite. Linux is organic - you get the bare essentials (whatever grew from the ground), and little more. Windows is highly processed - you get the food, but also the chemicals and sugars and additives (AI in your taskbar! Candy Crush and political clickbait in your start menu!) designed to keep you addicted and coming back for more. |
|
|
So windows is pure in the first sense, but linux is pure in the second sense.
You say that with linux you get the bare essentials, whatever grew from the ground, but take a look at the size of a linux distro, linux is actually very distilled, Windows is RAW. You get a binary in there that nobody knows how it got there and there is no source code.
There is source code/recipe/ingredient list/dependency manifest for a vanilla and fudge pastrie, but there is no source code for an apple/windows, you get what it is. For the most part windows didn't have source code in the early stages themselves, it's not like they kept the source code hidden under lock, rather they discarded it or lost it to the ages. It's like compilers, it's just something that grows over a couple of generations from the previous version.