• QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Android obviously isn’t a good desktop operating system, but it doesn’t fit the description of

    an industrial OS not well suited for the average desktop user

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      it absolutely fits the second part of that sentence:

      OS not well suited for the average desktop user

      You’re literally just getting hung up on the word industrial and making a pointless semantic argument. Android also isn’t a viable consumer OS without the closed source Google Play Services bundle

      • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fact that Android is not an “industrial OS” proves that Linux is not just an “industrial OS”. The fact that Android is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user” does not prove that a Linux is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user”, so of course I didn’t use it to prove that point.

        Even so, you seem to take issue with the point that I did make. Is it, or is it not, “an industrial OS”? They’re your words, don’t come complaining to me because you chose them poorly.

        Android also isn’t a viable consumer OS without the closed source Google Play Services bundle

        This is patently false. The fact that Google Play isn’t even available in one of Android’s biggest markets, China, should have been a clue.

        Bonus:

        1. The average desktop user seems to be digging those newfangled Chromebooks. What say you about those devices?
        2. Would you consider BSD to be “an industrial OS not suited for the average desktop user?” Because, cards on the table, the BSD and Linux kernels are quite similar in the grand scheme of things, and one of them has a 17% desktop/laptop market share.