On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> Just to address this specifically, I am referring to Apple's penchant for >>>>>>>> stuffing their machines with hardware from vendors that don't play well with >>>>>>>> open-source (for example, switching to wifi-only devices and shipping Broadcom >>>>>>>> chipsets with no open-source drivers). Then also playing games with their >>>>>>>> bootloader system so that we have to go through lots of hoops to trick it into >>>>>>>> letting us install. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Apple's entire business model is predicated on the idea that they know best and >>>>>>>> you should only ever run software on their devices that they have provided to >>>>>>>> you... at a substantial percentage for themselves. They do whatever they can at >>>>>>>> a technical level to enable this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (Note: I'm not attempting to vilify Apple here. Their devices are usually >>>>>>>> sturdy, well-constructed and certainly attractive. They are however a company >>>>>>>> trying to make money and they have a certain business model that is largely >>>>>>>> dependent on *not* enabling us.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Apple's business model is based on selling you a golden cage. They are entitled >>>>>>> to do that and we are entitled to dislike it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Certainly. My point is that I don't feel that we are necessarily responsible for >>>>>> working around their antagonism either. Yes, it would be nice if Fedora >>>>>> supported all hardware ever made. But the simple truth is that Apple tries very >>>>>> hard to make it *not* work. They have a vested interest in that. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I assert that while support for Apple hardware is desirable, I don't believe >>>>>> that the lack of it should prevent us from shipping Fedora for all the other >>>>>> hardware that we do support. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you stop supporting certain hardware right before release due to a >>>>> regression bug you set a very troublesome precedent. It not only means >>>>> that the work people did developing and testing the features where >>>>> wasted, it also means that Fedora can toss out any feature at any time >>>>> if there is a bug. And that is not a very stable OS to use and >>>>> contribute to. >>>> >>>> If the features were developed and tested during the creation of the >>>> release, why would they fail criteria at the last minute? You are >>>> making a good argument to not throw away something because "people >>>> don't like it", but in the context of this discussion there seems to >>>> be a distinct lack of resources actually doing the work. It may be >>>> perfectly justifiable to do a release anyway under that premise. >>>> >>> >>> AFAIK, you have been able to install Fedora on Intel Macs since 2008 >>> (that was when I first tried). To not be able to install Fedora on >>> (Intel) Macs is a regression. >> >> Yes. Nobody is arguing that it isn't a bug. >> >>>> Also, there is a large difference between shipping a release that >>>> works on a majority of hardware with the goal of fixing it where it >>>> doesn't after, and "stop supporting certain hardware". >>>> >>> >>> How do you fix it if you can't install the release? Do you make a new >>> release with all the testing again (to make sure you do not have other >>> regression bugs)? >> >> Anaconda has updates.img, which might be usable post-release. Barring >> that, there are the update respins that other community members do. >> Pretending those don't exist seems silly. > > Well to the average user they don't exist. They got to getfedora.org > and download the image there, it doesn't work, they go and get another > distro that does work and move on with life. If we're going to reduce arguments to absurd simplicity, then to the average Mac user Fedora doesn't exist and this isn't a problem. Look, we have resources. If we need to leverage them, we can. Which means we can modify websites. Let's not pretend we don't control what we display on our own infrastructure. josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
