Linux definitely exists.... except that it isn't free from this philosophy either. From the "don't theme my apps" movement, to Wayland's "security above usability" philosophy... I recently even read about some kallsyms functions being unexported from an 5.x release because it could be used to lookup symbols and it shouldn't be that easy to access internal kernel symbols or something.
Not to mention many projects refusing to add configurability and accessibility, citing vague maintainibility concerns or ideological opposition.
Another blatant example is the 6.7 kernel merging anti-user "features" in AMDGPU... previously you could lower your power limits as much as you wanted, now you have to use a patched kernel to lower your PL below -10%...
Everywhere you go, you can find these user- and tinkerer-hostile decisions. Linux isn't much better than Windows for the semi-casual tinkerer either - at least on Windows you don't get told to just fork the project and implement it yourself.
I'm a bit hesitant to call this corporate greed as it's literally happening in the OSS ecosystem too. Sadly I don't have answers why, only more questions. No idea what happened.
> Everywhere you go, you can find these user- and tinkerer-hostile decisions. Linux isn't much better than Windows for the semi-casual tinkerer either - at least on Windows you don't get told to just fork the project and implement it yourself.
The obvious difference being that in Windows you can't even do that or (easily) apply a patch. Isn't this very ability to patch (or create a fork of) the kernel the opposite of being tinkerer-hostile?
> Linux definitely exists.... except that it isn't free from this philosophy either.
Yes it is, through the power of choice.
>From the "don't theme my apps" movement,
Which anyone is free to ignore and actively do.
> to Wayland's "security above usability" philosophy...
1. wayland is super usable right now and has been for at least a number of years so your statement is mostly a lie. Only thing missing right now are color management and HDR. This impact a small portion of the users who can still fallback to xorg.
2. we are free not to use it. Distributions made it a default choice only recently and you can still install and run xorg, and will so for pretty much as long as you want, especially as some distros are targeted at people not liking the mainstream choices.
> Not to mention many projects refusing to add configurability and accessibility, citing vague maintainibility concerns or ideological opposition.
So you are saying having opinions is bad?
You are still free to use whatever desktop you want or patch your kernel. You have the source and the rights to do whatever you want with it.
> Another blatant example is the 6.7 kernel merging anti-user "features" in AMDGPU... previously you could lower your power limits as much as you wanted, now you have to use a patched kernel to lower your PL below -10%...
I don't think putting safeguards in a GPU driver to make sure users don't fry their expensive GPU inadvertently is an attempt against your freedom. The kernel and gpu driver are still under an open source license that expressly permit you to do the modifications you want.
> Everywhere you go, you can find these user- and tinkerer-hostile decisions.
What is more tinkerable than having the source available and the right to modify them and do whatever you want with it?
I think you are mistaking user and tinkerer-hostile decisions with your and users excessive entitlement mentality. Developers have finite resources and can't possibly agree and accept all users suggestions and desires, and have to put limits on the scope of their projects so they can maintain it, support it and not be overwhelmed by bugs/issues. This is not about freedom.
Not to mention many projects refusing to add configurability and accessibility, citing vague maintainibility concerns or ideological opposition.
Another blatant example is the 6.7 kernel merging anti-user "features" in AMDGPU... previously you could lower your power limits as much as you wanted, now you have to use a patched kernel to lower your PL below -10%...
Everywhere you go, you can find these user- and tinkerer-hostile decisions. Linux isn't much better than Windows for the semi-casual tinkerer either - at least on Windows you don't get told to just fork the project and implement it yourself.
I'm a bit hesitant to call this corporate greed as it's literally happening in the OSS ecosystem too. Sadly I don't have answers why, only more questions. No idea what happened.