Frances switchted to Linux on 2.5 million PCs

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s viable because all of the important components are open source. That’s the entire genius of open source, if you’re capable enough then you’re immune to future changes. You can fork a project and take over development. It only costs developers and that’s well within the budget of a modern western country.

    Any country who is going to undertake the effort to move away from Windows will have the resources to support distros which align with their country’s interest or create their own. Even North Korea has their own distro of Linux, I’m sure the EU countries can find the talent required to ensure their software meets their needs.

    As an individual, you’re right. You’re largely at the whims of the people who volunteer their time to the kernel, the software ecosystem and the individual distributions. If you have infinite money then those problems become a line item in your budget.

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 hours ago

      But if the definition of viable is merely “open source”… there are many other such operating systems out there.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        It’s not just that it is open source. It also has the largest software ecosystem of other open source software.

        Yeah, they could use TempleOS, but then they’d need to write their own Office replacement. Or they can use Linux and use/fork LibreOffice.

        There’s no need to reinvent the wheel, Linux has been the nerd community’s go to OS for replacing Windows for decades.