[michaelt]

"Ubuntu Core" is a similar product [1]

As I understand it, the main customers for this sort of thing are companies making Tivo-style products - where they want to use Linux in their product, but they want to lock it down so it can't be modified by the device owner.

This can be pretty profitable; once your customers have rolled out a fleet of hardware locked down to only run kernels you've signed.

[1] https://ubuntu.com/core

[noitpmeder]

This sounds like a net negative for the end user

[MomsAVoxell]

Not if the end user is an operator of safety critical equipment, such as rail or pro audio or any of a number of industries where stability and reproducibility is essential to the product.

[Hasz]

Ever seen a default ubuntu splash screen/wallpaper on a train, coffee machine, airport terminal kiosk, bus, or other big piece of slow moving, appliance-y thing?

That is why Ubuntu Core (and similar) exist. More secure, better update strategy, lower net cost. I don't agree with the licensing or pricing model, but there are perfectly good technical reasons to use it.

[direwolf20]

That's because it is a net negative to the end user and to society at large.

[warkdarrior]

If the end users do not want the net negative, maybe they should pay for the security features instead of expecting everything for free.

[direwolf20]

I don't understand. The user will not have a choice.