this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
681 points (96.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21180 readers
1339 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     

    I don't think i need to explain how it works, should i ?

    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    Legal question. If Windows on the linux kernal needs to open source, but that does not apply to other software it runs, right? So could they close source their DE and charge for that, or charge for the windows store?

    [–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    That is correct. Microsoft could simply charge for their closed-source desktop environment or their package manager or their software environment in general, but any modifications to the kernel would need to be free and open-source (though they could still charge money for it).

    [–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

    thanks for the answer.