With its game-related articles, Phoronix seems to have attracted too much kids than is good for it.
Please, no more flaming, go hijack another topic.
Not really.
Not really.But GNU(since you insist)
Not really.Linux is not about picking the most free of the non-free, it's about picking the free, period.
You're thinking of Hurd.This is in hope of building an ecosystem of completely free software, which at some point is hoped to cause a revolution in the way that the software is developed
Really? Your actions belie your words; but sure, I'll feed you a little longer.This is not the right place to argue about these ideas,
Wait, an argument? Where do you see an argument? This isn't a situation where I believe something to be true and I present reasons to support my point. This is simply a thing that happened. So thoroughly did it happen, we have reams upon reams of archives, mirrored several times over, showing exactly how it happened and how it keeps happening; we could pick apart LKML messages from Linus for the rest of the decade if we really wanted, but I can't imagine it would take more than a few minutes for it to be obvious that the goal is something that works and works well. So single-minded is he in this pursuit, some elements of the security community still have latent umbrage related to his "masturbating monkeys" remark and the fracas that came with it.Not the first time I hear that argument,
Fun lesson about reality: people care about things that work and idealism takes a backseat when the chips are down. People don't use Linux on anything and everything because of the price or the licence. It's because it's pretty good at pretty much everything anyone sets out to do with it.You're mixing means with the goals. The goal is to produce free software, not to be a junkie who refuses to live in the reality.
So failing to kick dirt at anyone you have deemed "not sufficiently free" is disrespecting developers. Genius.If that is even true, it just means that Phoronix audience disrespects the hard work of programmers, who wrote their (audience's) favorite operating system and tools that they take for granted (by encouraging the subversion of the free software). I will leave it up to your conscience and will respect your opinion, but I don't need your permission to express mine.
Getting back to the real topic at hand, there's got to be a better way of verifying the proof/not-proof of this stuff than these ridiculous email screenshots with sticky notes. I don't expect the naysayers will ever be quashed entirely, but reducing the room for doubt would be nice.
With its game-related articles, Phoronix seems to have attracted too much kids than is good for it.
Please, no more flaming, go hijack another topic.
is it possible that maybe Valve can work with kwin and gnome to create a standard API call to disable compositing when gaming?
Some games are free, yes, although not open source. I am not speculating whatsoever, I am assessing the situation objectively by comparing the offering with what the rest of the market has to offer and I find no better alternative. What you describe sounds like a very extreme view which thankfully many don't seem to share. Linux is great, but considering the current position Linux is in, being excessively demanding with no room for compromise, especially one as good as GOG, seems unwise.
By your standard, there will be little to no game support if a game is required to be open source as well as free, and games are what cause many to still dual boot Windows or not bother to boot Linux entirely. More game support, along with Linux flavors tending to be free and open source, could boost Linux into relevant market share on the desktop market. I would rather take an even middle ground as to opposed to being associated with either extreme.