Microsoft has a long and sordid history of cheerfully doing anything they can to fuck everyone over just to make a few more percentage points of profit.
Linux is a free kernel that literally revolutionized the computing landscape.
It might be a scared cow, but at least deservedly so. There is imho a difference between accidental incompetence (debatable, even) and active malice. Microsoft has done a lot of the latter so gets bashed more, nor surprise there.
"You keep using that word..." or term in this case.
There are only 2 words in this term, and neither one even slightly applies.
A sacred cow is called a sacred cow because there is no reason for it to be sacred.
Linux is perfectly subject to criticism, and so not at all sacred.
Linux has earned a stunning amount of respect and gratitude by actually providing stunning utility and quality. IE, it's not just a random object like a cow that everyone decided to worship for no reason.
Spoken as a freebsd user who has plenty of critiques of the entire linux ecosystem.
> Linux has earned a stunning amount of respect and gratitude by actually providing stunning utility and quality. IE, it's not just a random object like a cow that everyone decided to worship for no reason.
I agree.
> A sacred cow is called a sacred cow because there is no reason for it to be sacred.
Here we diverge. Linux earns sacred cow status when people interpret legitimate criticism of it as an attack that must be debunked or dismissed. And there's plenty of that happening in this forum; you may not be treating it as a sacred cow, but plenty of people are.
And to expound on why it even matters, it does a disservice to Linux to treat it this way: if you can't engage with its flaws, you'll never help fix them, and instead attack people who try.
I think both parties share some blame here.
Not really confusing. Linux is a sacred cow.
There would be a lot of people gloating if this happened to MS.
Microsoft has a long and sordid history of cheerfully doing anything they can to fuck everyone over just to make a few more percentage points of profit.
Linux is a free kernel that literally revolutionized the computing landscape.
Yes, this is the sacred cow status being referred to.
It might be a scared cow, but at least deservedly so. There is imho a difference between accidental incompetence (debatable, even) and active malice. Microsoft has done a lot of the latter so gets bashed more, nor surprise there.
"You keep using that word..." or term in this case.
There are only 2 words in this term, and neither one even slightly applies.
A sacred cow is called a sacred cow because there is no reason for it to be sacred.
Linux is perfectly subject to criticism, and so not at all sacred.
Linux has earned a stunning amount of respect and gratitude by actually providing stunning utility and quality. IE, it's not just a random object like a cow that everyone decided to worship for no reason.
Spoken as a freebsd user who has plenty of critiques of the entire linux ecosystem.
> Linux has earned a stunning amount of respect and gratitude by actually providing stunning utility and quality. IE, it's not just a random object like a cow that everyone decided to worship for no reason.
I agree.
> A sacred cow is called a sacred cow because there is no reason for it to be sacred.
Here we diverge. Linux earns sacred cow status when people interpret legitimate criticism of it as an attack that must be debunked or dismissed. And there's plenty of that happening in this forum; you may not be treating it as a sacred cow, but plenty of people are.
And to expound on why it even matters, it does a disservice to Linux to treat it this way: if you can't engage with its flaws, you'll never help fix them, and instead attack people who try.