Should OS makers, like Microsoft, be legally required to provide 15 years of security updates?

  • pathos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    What we REALLY need is to curb microsoft’s market dominance. If more alternatives for OS and usable replacements for MS office em would exist, this would not be a problem and would not need to hamper innovation for the sake of back porting (the main counter-argument as a dev).

    • Cricket [he/him]@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Hmmm, I don’t agree. The trend is in the opposite direction. Microsoft Windows used to have a larger market share and supported hardware indefinitely. Now that their market share has shrunk, they are also limiting support for older hardware. This only shows correlation, not causation, but it does show that more competition has not improved the issue and that we need laws to do that instead. MacOS, the primary competitor to Microsoft Windows which also has Microsoft Office available, only supports their hardware for 6-8 years as well.

      Edit: just to add, if anything, this actually shows that more competition and reduced market share probably increases the pressure to cut support for older hardware because it probably becomes less profitable to do so.

      • pathos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        I didn’t go into the specifics but I was thinking more in line with prosumer friendly linux distributions that can be dropped in to replace win 10. I know stuff like linux mint exists for that case.