When Microsoft introduced Windows 10 and its "Windows as a Service" model, the company promised Windows users a steady stream of updates to their machines. The days of being stuck on an old version of Windows would be forgotten; once you were on Windows 10, you'd have access to the latest and greatest forever. But that support came with a small footnote: you'd only receive updates for the "supported lifetime of the device" that you were using Windows 10 on.
The old system of Windows development, with substantial paid upgrades every three years or so, had many problems. Not least among those problems was how many people opted to stick with older versions of Windows, which was bad for both system security (old Windows has fewer security protections than new Windows) and software developers (old Windows APIs have wider market share than better, newer ones) alike. But the old system did afford a certain advantage when it came to hardware support: each new release of Windows represented an opportunity to revise the system specs that Windows demanded. A new major version of Windows could demand more memory, certain processor features, or a particular amount of disk space.
Moreover, if a given version of Windows worked on your hardware, you'd be assured that it would continue to receive security updates for a set period of time, thanks to the 5+5 support policy that Windows had: five years of security and feature updates, followed by five years of security-only updates. Exactly how many years of updates you'd get would, of course, depend on how far through that ten-year cycle your purchase was made, but at least the end date was predictable and known ahead of time.
Windows 10, however, doesn't follow that policy in general (there are enterprise-only versions with long-term support that do stick with the 5+5 policy). Instead, Windows 10 offers security and feature updates forever... subject to that ill-defined "supported lifetime" constraint.
It now appears that the first victims of that policy may have materialized.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @02:13PM (4 children)
VAGINA LINUX!
Coming soon for all females and males who wish they were females and males who are now females. For females.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 18 2017, @02:34PM
Does it ship with systemd?
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday July 18 2017, @03:30PM (2 children)
Well, Gentoo works fine for me, but I'm not a womyn-born-womyn. You forget that “males who wish they were females and males who are now females” are also part of the grand conspiracy of 3.6 billion people (I've just received a new membership total from the Grand Misogynerd Poobah) to keep womyn-born-womyn out of tech careers, so as far as I can tell Linux works very well for that demographic already.
In fact, if you cater to that demographic, then you're not going to be able to create a Linux distribution for womyn-born-womyn. At the very least, you won't get feminism's stamp of approval that way. You should also name it something like Womb Linux or Goddess Linux, since woman suits can now include vaginas. I'm sure feminism will move the goalposts once it becomes possible for trans women to become pregnant. Why not Vagina Linux? It's because there are so many advanced infiltrator bathroom rapists running around that vaginas no longer matter. Review both of Sarah Connor's rants (see T2 for the generic criticism of people born without a womb, unless they have cisgendered privilege as a woman of course, and a TSCC episode for criticisms leveled against trans women specifically), and that will help you understand why it needs to be Womb Linux. (That character's rants don't touch all of the concerns feminists raise, particularly missing the infiltration as an agent of the patriarchy aspect iirc, but that character captures the basic bigotries feminists display.)
And to address sibling post, it should come with systemd and NetworkManager, because womyn-born-womyn—and again I have this on authority from various feminists—, being superior, complete beings, would never hate handicapped people. It's not the fault of handicapped people they were born without certain body parts or the ability to do certain things. Feminism just believes all cisfemales have a prerogative to hate people who were born without a womb and aren't able to grow a child in their bodies.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday July 18 2017, @07:12PM (1 child)
Having a bad day, kurenai?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday July 18 2017, @08:56PM
Naah. Just wondering what the next iteration of the misogynerd narrative is going to look like. It would be nice to get out ahead of it if this is an iteration with consequences for me personally. Sometimes it isn't.