Prove me wrong

Some sort of variation is given since humans generally suck at self-perception but I doubt the "huge" part. Deriving political preferences from the preference of "just works" software and hardware, I don't know, man.

I'm an ancap and I use linux

Nah, the environmentalist bro who uses apple is clearly completely wrong about who they are

I dunno, Apple does a lot of virtue signalling in the way of being "green" like all their products have obnoxious notices about how the packaging can be recycled (duh, I'm going to use it to decorate my house). So I can see why an "environmentalist" would choose Apple.

apple.com/environment/

Attached: appleguydrawing.jpg (2000x2000, 547K)

The green thingy is more than environmentalism, the humanism aspect is more important IMO. Besides, Applel does at least pay lip service to the environmentalism unlike most large corporations (and then makes disposable stuff like AirPods) … but more importantly; you don't have to like a company or their practices to like their products.

highly discouraged self repair and yearly disposable products; its very hard to take someone who claims to care about the planet srsly who is hard struck in apples ecosystem, and the bloggers who made paper straws a thing werent doing shit anyway

Basado y rojo pastilleado

Their products also tend to last longer without needing repair, and tend to be more recyclable; plus you can always resell them.
In the end, high tech stuff isn't a huge factor for the environment either way; not driving a car and not eating meat while updating your hardware yearly is better for the environment than doing all the shit but sticking to a ten year old CumPad.

Honestly, it's probably just better to ignore and avoid the OP.

Yeah but they don't actually care about the environment. They care about others thinking that they care about the environment. That's why they get behind companies that do initiatives like the paper straw example.

I heard one anecdote from a chain where they swapped from recyclable plastic straws for paper ones that couldn't be recycled. One chain near me has likewise replaced the straws with shitty soggy paper ones, it's bullshit. They do a lot of virtue signalling about how their meat is "raised without hormones", or their eggs come from "chicken fed on a vegetarian diet."

It should be mirrored. Why the hell is the GPL considered libertarian-right? FSF ideology is about as green square as you can get.

Apple should be Authoritarian Left (commies love apple)
Windows should be Authoritarian Right (normal US fags run Windows and are Authoritarian Right)
GNU should be Libertarian Left (Freedom by forcing release of source code)
Free BSD should be Libertarian Right (Do what ever th fuck you want, just dont claim you wrote it and dont sue me if it doesn't work)

Attached: 1563369769931-k.jpg (288x288, 12K)

its good to know that linux is so user friendly these days that even the mentally challenged are able to use it

OP a shit
this is the real OS political compass

Attached: oscompass.png (2000x2177, 403K)

but if we take into account economics, then it would look more like this (because god essentially made templeos, meaning it works under god's law, but it was released under a free license).

Attached: oscompassexpanded.png (2000x2177, 625K)

So are you enjoying it?

>I suck corporate cock and I use linux

>a world without linux
Good. GNU Hurd and Mach would have been completed, so we would use an actual sane kernel instead of a hobbyist hackjob.

All my software for me should be free but nothing else

>technology

Ganoo is red square
BSD is purple square
Mac is green square
Windows blue square

You need to go back negro

dumbest reply here

you know how to use transparency so i'm gonna go with this one

this is GNU not Linux

bumpang for the true political compass thread, the one we deserve.

No, Apple uses a fork of a fork of Mach with parts forked from the BSD kernel. This comes from NeXTStep, which predates FreeBSD by half a decade. But Apple should definitely be more toward the free side than Microsoft. The majority of macOS is free software.

This guy gets it

Move Microsoft to the same place as Apple then move GNU to authoritarian left.

>Microsoft to the same place as Apple
Apple is mostly free.

>pay money
>have no freedom
They're the opposite of free. If not far right authoritarian they'd be far left because of their "everyone must be the same" bullshit.

Free as in freedom, not free as in free beer.

>Free as in freedom
>no source code
>no customizability
>garbage hardware support

opensource.apple.com/

The majority of macOS is licensed under the APSL, Apache license, or the BSD licenses. iOS is also based on Darwin, which is free.

>majority of macOS
You mean almost nothing. They're also unfair to software developers, often banning specific apps as soon as they make an app of their own providing same features.
Look at iOS. It doesn't allow browsers that aren't just a safari skin.
Look at their hardware and repair support, it's garbage. They even forbid non-1st party repairs, meaning you don't own your device. This is socialist and authoritarian as fuck.
Apple is the most anti-free company here.

>You mean almost nothing.
No, the vast majority is free. What are you referring to as non-free?
>They're also unfair to software developers, often banning specific apps as soon as they make an app of their own providing same features.
You can compile anything you want.
>Look at iOS. It doesn't allow browsers that aren't just a safari skin.
That doesn't make the underlying OS less free.
>Look at their hardware and repair support, it's garbage.
As someone who has worked with Apple support for over a decade, that is not true. Apple has excellent support, have you ever worked in a company that had a support contract?
>They even forbid non-1st party repairs, meaning you don't own your device
They don't forbid it, it simply voids your warranty. That is standard practice.
>Apple is the most anti-free company here.
Their operating systems are mostly free.

swap apple and ms and it would be correct.

>Look at iOS. It doesn't allow browsers that aren't just a safari skin.
apps.apple.com/us/app/firefox-private-safe-browser/id989804926
and everything this guy said:

Yes I can. Apple controls hardware completely. Apple controls OS on hardware completely. For "Security" (translation money) without certain keys you cannot even boot unapproved OS's. Hardware is restricted by approval process and even if it's compatible at hardware level getting drivers is still a issue.
Windows is hardware agnostic, drivers are available for lots of things., the OS has a licences process. But you can run the OS on lots of hardware. It's easy to run the OS without a live licence for at periods of time.
GNU/Linux/Debian No restrictions on what you can run it on, but some hardware does not support it intentionally or unintentionally thru deliberate restriction or lack of support. OS licence support - varied. Easy to run without contacting the "home office" usually.
Your LEFT/RIGHT axis is not defined. What do you mean by that? I suspect I know but define it please for the sake of argument.

Attached: Apple is run by money hungry artsy types.png (1000x664, 159K)

Are you dumb? Firefox for iOS is webkit based.

>Apple has excellent support
This was proven to be false over and over again. They have shit support.
>vast majority is free.
False.
>What are you referring to as non-free?
Literally any Apple app, feature or server side service. Anything that a user interacts with.

>This was proven to be false over and over again. They have shit support.
So which companies have you worked for who had a support contract with Apple?
>False.
>Literally any Apple app, feature or server side service. Anything that a user interacts with.
None of those are macOS. This would be like me saying GNU is non-free because it can run non-free software. Just silly.

lol btfo

>which companies have you worked for who had a support contract with Apple?
I'm talking from a consumer perspective, which is more important.
>None of those are macOS
Are you this fucking retarded. That's like saying Ubuntu's default apps aren't Ubuntu. MacOS means all the default software in it, not just the core just like Ubuntu doesn't mean just GNU/Linux, but also GNOME/systemd/Firefox/etc.

>I'm talking from a consumer perspective, which is more important.
No, it isn't. The people who buy support contracts are the ones that actually matter.
>Are you this fucking retarded. That's like saying Ubuntu's default apps aren't Ubuntu
They aren't.
>MacOS means all the default software in it
That is retarded.
> not just the core just like Ubuntu doesn't mean just GNU/Linux, but also GNOME/systemd/Firefox/etc.
You can run Ubuntu without systemd, GNOME, or Firefox. Can you please stop being so stupid?

>No, it isn't.
>people who buy support contracts are the ones that actually matter.
>That is retarded.
>You can run Ubuntu without systemd, GNOME, or Firefox. Can you please stop being so stupid?
Jesus fuck, kys. Faggot.

Oh good, you're finally giving up. Now fuck off back to the hole you crawled out of.

According to this I should use Mac OS (I don't), also I don't imagine a commie using Microsoft' software.

That's actually right