this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
91 points (74.6% liked)

Linux

52796 readers
508 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In light of Mozilla’s recent policy changes, we no longer feel assured that Firefox aligns with our commitment to protect your privacy. This prompted us to revisit the choice of default web browser in Zorin OS 17.3.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 20 points 11 hours ago

A bad move. But again i hate that many distros have a default browser and they don't let you choose.

[–] off@programming.dev 20 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

one of the worst distros ever so I guess this is pretty obvious choice and telling to some.

[–] HotCoffee@lemm.ee 3 points 11 hours ago

Define worst? It does what it says, it's an easy stable distro for windows refugees. Slow updates doesn't make something bad

[–] kepix@lemmy.world 15 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

the everyday linux distro that is famous for asking people for money for their pro version, cause they know most of the userbase is coming from windows and doesnt know that everything is free?

[–] HotCoffee@lemm.ee -2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

They don't force you to buy anything. Almost all distros have a donation button on their site/git.

Nothing wrong with supporting projects you adore.

[–] lumony 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Ubuntu asks for money for their "pro" version.

It's a big reason why I switched to Debian.

[–] HotCoffee@lemm.ee -2 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Once again like Zorin, it isn't required to use the base version. Projects take time and effort, support is optional. Debian also has a donation page gonna distrohop now too?

[–] lumony 6 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

You keep ignoring the "pro" version aspect of this.

Debian doesn't lock features or updates behind paywalls. It's not just about asking for donations.

[–] HotCoffee@lemm.ee -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What does zorin lock behind the pro version? Some themes that you could make yourself if you wanted. And they package some apps that you could manualy download. What updates are you refering to?

[–] lumony -3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (2 children)

Why lock anything behind a paywall? They do it to take advantage of users who don't know any better. Otherwise, they would just ask for donations.

Why are you defending scummy practices? Are you a shill, fanboy, or useful idiot?

[–] FrameXX@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I am not a Zorin OS fanboy or anything, but honestly I don't see anything scummy about requiring payment from the user to get access to certain features of the product. It's just shareware. It's their product FOSS or not. I think they make it clear about what you get for free and what you don't. If you don't like that you don't have to use their product and you can use an alternative instead. It's not like they were a monopoly in the world of Linux distros and you have no other option. I see nothing scummy about this. It would be scummy if they would do some kind of false advertising (adverties features you actually don't get or adverties features in a misleading way) or if they started moving features from the free to the pro version that used to be free, because some people may have relyed on these features.

Can you elaborate? Because to me this feels like saying that the local grocery shop is scummy because it wants people to pay instead of relying on donations. If the whole OS was paid like RedHat Linux is than it would be OK or you consider that to be also a case of taking advantage of users who don't know any better.

[–] lumony 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Congrats.

Businessmen bank on people with low standards like yours so they can make more money off of you than they would with me.

[–] FrameXX@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Why don't you explain your arguments or make counter arguments instead of attacking your opponent personally. How do I matter here?

[–] HotCoffee@lemm.ee 3 points 10 hours ago

Nah people just frame it as if you need to buy it, while that's not true. No I'm not defending scummy practices, I'm just pro supporting software that you enjoy. That people like you can't handle others opinions and immediately resort to calling it "fanboy or useful idiot." The world doesn't need to be a copy pasta of opinions

[–] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 hours ago

There is a difference between a donation and a purchase. You can buy Ubuntu Pro like Zorin Pro. Its not free

[–] easily3667@lemmus.org 25 points 19 hours ago

Brave hates gays

[–] gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 29 points 21 hours ago

"we replaced the browser with ad ware, that we even admit we had to ship settings to minimise its malware effect"

[–] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 44 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Brave marketing has gone crazy to convince people it's less dodgy than Firefox. Come on!

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 hours ago

Every time someone says anything positive about Brave I assume they're part of the Crypto scheme, or love Brave's CEO.

[–] lumony 3 points 11 hours ago

Yeah. Viral marketing is real but people never seem to be able to identify it.

[–] arsCynic@beehaw.org 53 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They should've picked LibreWolf which ships with uBlock Origin. Brave is a disappointing choice because it supports multi-level marketing pyramid schemes which says enough about their moral compass.

--
✍︎ arscyni.cc: modernity ∝ nature.

[–] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 hours ago

I kinda dislike the default LibreWolf settings. Unsure if they changed it, but I remember that you have no history except you change it in the settings.

A Windows refugee wants a history. Addituonally, many pages just dont work.

My University also does capture a picture and reads it from the Canvas or something, which LibreWolf blocks. It doesnt show again if something is okay or wrong. I just got a Mail that I need to reupload it and go by myself to pickup my University-Card.

I wasnt the only one as Informatics has many Linux users and some Librewolf users.

[–] Peasley@lemmy.world 108 points 1 day ago

“Mozilla has a bit been shady lately, so we are making the difficult decision to change our default browser to something significantly more shady. We are confident our users will feel safer knowing their data is in even worse hands than before"

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 day ago

talk about bad taste

[–] markinov@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Recent firefox policy change is controversial, but how brave is better?

[–] Patch@feddit.uk 6 points 12 hours ago

"We don't like the proposed new Coke recipe, so we're switching to drinking raw undiluted sewage instead".

[–] juipeltje@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Seems like a strange choice. If anything i would've expected them to just use a firefox fork or something.

[–] SpatchyIsOnline@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Zen is literally the best browser around right now, I do understand the UI isn't for everybody but if you vibe with it, it rocks

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

How's the ad blocking or add-ons? Last I looked there was none.

[–] Unmapped@lemmy.ml 69 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm actually not familiar with this distro. But if I installed a Linux distro, and it had brave installed. I would immediately switch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 36 points 1 day ago

That's gonna be a no from me, dawg

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 36 points 1 day ago

Firefox is bad, Brave is evil. Why did they decide switching is a good idea?

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 164 points 2 days ago (30 children)

While FF's evil quotient has been on the rise, Brave definitely isn't a better option. If anything, librewolf is the way to go.

load more comments (30 replies)
[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 day ago
[–] azron@lemmy.ml 123 points 2 days ago (13 children)

How is brave the lesser of those two evils?

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›