Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • All Topics
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Caint logo. It's just text.
  1. Home
  2. Technology
  3. Campaigners urge EU to mandate 15 years of OS updates

Campaigners urge EU to mandate 15 years of OS updates

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Technology
technology
129 Posts 77 Posters 22 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • ell1e@leminal.spaceE ell1e@leminal.space

    I will stop discussing since suddenly this is about “normal” and I guess “abnormal” donations, and I don’t think we’re having a clear-headed debate here.

    B This user is from outside of this forum
    B This user is from outside of this forum
    buffalox@lemmy.world
    wrote last edited by buffalox@lemmy.world
    #104

    There really are differences, Linux kernel membership could be called based on donations, but they are clearly more than that.
    Also you haven’t mentioned a single 1 man FOSS project that could be affected, which was the original claim could be even from just being a maintainer, which is bullshit.

    We hear these EU warnings over and over again, and they are always wrong.

    ell1e@leminal.spaceE 1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • B buffalox@lemmy.world

      There really are differences, Linux kernel membership could be called based on donations, but they are clearly more than that.
      Also you haven’t mentioned a single 1 man FOSS project that could be affected, which was the original claim could be even from just being a maintainer, which is bullshit.

      We hear these EU warnings over and over again, and they are always wrong.

      ell1e@leminal.spaceE This user is from outside of this forum
      ell1e@leminal.spaceE This user is from outside of this forum
      ell1e@leminal.space
      wrote last edited by ell1e@leminal.space
      #105

      I continue to believe the risk is real and supported by my links and quotes. You might notice some people in the linked discussions who seem to be thinking it’s not entirely baseless. You’re free to disagree. I’m not a lawyer anyway.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R ratten@lemmings.world

        Because Linux is free software, we can implement the fixes ourselves.

        Doing so with Windows or Crapple would literally be illegal.

        R This user is from outside of this forum
        R This user is from outside of this forum
        ronigami@lemmy.world
        wrote last edited by
        #106

        Yes, but to fulfill that requirement the company would have to be around to review the code changes and merge and provide QA. For 15 years.

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • R ratten@lemmings.world

          Good.

          If we’re going to pretend corporations are people, then we should treat them like slaves.

          V This user is from outside of this forum
          V This user is from outside of this forum
          vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
          wrote last edited by
          #107

          That was sarcasm. Making a regulation to punish a big corporation that automatically disqualifies everyone smaller is not punishment for it.

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • M minorkeys@lemmy.world

            Or legislate that unsupported software becomes public domain or is open for development and the public can try and make the updates themselves.

            Forcing people to upgrade entirely depends on the nature of the upgrades and the motive of the company. What we need is competition so there are alternatives for people to use if they don’t want to upgrade. But somehow Microsoft is not considered the monopoly of the PC OS market, despite being a monopoly, and uses that position to force changes nobody wants but them, like turning window into an AI data farming scheme that violates user privacy.

            T This user is from outside of this forum
            T This user is from outside of this forum
            thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            wrote last edited by
            #108

            Mandatory open source public domain release at EOS.

            At Win10 EOS, people would make Windows distros, and ReactOS would no longer have to be a clean room implementation.

            Also this would be a success for Stop Killing Games.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • P panda_abyss@lemmy.ca

              This is stupid.

              15 years is a massive time to just update your OS.

              15 years ago instagram didn’t exist, the iPad was new, and people were just updating from Vista to Windows 7. I think Hadoop was just created then.

              That is a massive amount of time to support software that would have almost no architectural protection against things like heartbleed.

              T This user is from outside of this forum
              T This user is from outside of this forum
              thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              wrote last edited by thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              #109

              Better laws would be:

              • to mandate open source relaease at EOS
              • automatically public domain at EOS
              • require paid operating systems to supporr hardware from 15 years ago (as a consumer protection law, so that it only applies to paid OS’s (and also ones that require a license, even if it’s “free” due to coming with the hardware), so that foss projects arent hurt)
              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • J justaraccoon@lemmy.world

                I think I’d prefer if there was a minimum updates guarantee that OS sellers would have to disclose, but even then I’m more in favour of other companies being able to pick up the work by making sure devices have their bootloader unlockable after they don’t get any more updates for X amount of time, rather than add burden to OS makers, because forcing people to support a project for Y amount of years would really harm indie developers releasing Linux distros and the like

                T This user is from outside of this forum
                T This user is from outside of this forum
                thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                wrote last edited by
                #110

                forcing people to support a project for Y amount of years would really harm indie developers releasing Linux distros and the like

                Solution: implement as consumer protection that only applies to paid OS’s (and also ones that require a license, even if it’s “free” due to coming with the hardware)

                J 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • I ieatpwns@lemmy.world

                  Would Linux even count since it’s foss?

                  T This user is from outside of this forum
                  T This user is from outside of this forum
                  thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  wrote last edited by
                  #111

                  If implemented this should only apply to paid OS’s or ones where a licence comes with the hardware

                  No license is needed for Linux

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • T thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                    forcing people to support a project for Y amount of years would really harm indie developers releasing Linux distros and the like

                    Solution: implement as consumer protection that only applies to paid OS’s (and also ones that require a license, even if it’s “free” due to coming with the hardware)

                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                    justaraccoon@lemmy.world
                    wrote last edited by
                    #112

                    Then Microsoft makes windows free and monetizes the shit out of services in the OS.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • B boonhet@sopuli.xyz

                      This comes after e-waste watchers revealed that 75 million iPhones could be rendered obsolete – tipping the scales at around 1.2 million kilograms of e-waste – following the release of iOS 26.

                      Not strictly true because the phones they counted here will still get security updates for 2-3 years AFAIK. 7 year old phones, mind you. But yeah, no more feature updates. Which are so meaningless these days anyway.

                      K This user is from outside of this forum
                      K This user is from outside of this forum
                      kayazere@feddit.nl
                      wrote last edited by
                      #113

                      The security updates for old iOS versions are a sleight of hand. Most companies only support the three latest versions of iOS, so soon that will be iOS 17 as the minimum. I had a device stuck on iOS 15, which was released in 2016, and banks and other major apps dropped support. So while the phone did get security updates, it can’t run the apps I needed.

                      B 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • K kayazere@feddit.nl

                        The security updates for old iOS versions are a sleight of hand. Most companies only support the three latest versions of iOS, so soon that will be iOS 17 as the minimum. I had a device stuck on iOS 15, which was released in 2016, and banks and other major apps dropped support. So while the phone did get security updates, it can’t run the apps I needed.

                        B This user is from outside of this forum
                        B This user is from outside of this forum
                        boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                        wrote last edited by boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                        #114

                        That’s the app devs being idiots.

                        My two local banks that I use support 15.1 and 16. My two globally useful neobanks support 13 and 16. None of them have any features that the one on 13 doesn’t have (in fact, that gets the most updates and has the most features of them all).

                        So iOS 16, which most apps still seem to support, at least ones that I use, supports devices as far back as the 6s, which came out in 2015. It also still gets security updates for now.

                        I just don’t get why Apple gets the most shit for generating e-waste on their phones when they actually have the longest lasting phones (barring tech enthusiasts flashing custom ROMs to old Androids, which is what, 1% of the population?)

                        What Apple REALLY should be getting shit for is software support for their Macbooks, particularly considering that with the Apple Silicon ones, the Linux drivers are still iffy for most things. They need to figure out a way to offer at LEAST 10 years, ideally 15 years of security updates for any device sold, since these devices are only meant to be used with their software, and one expects a computer to last longer than a smartphone, or at least how that’s how it was a few years ago still, when smartphones were still somewhat getting better year over year.

                        K 1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • C Cricket [he/him]

                          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.

                          pathosK This user is from outside of this forum
                          pathosK This user is from outside of this forum
                          pathos
                          wrote last edited by
                          #115

                          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.

                          C 1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • R ratten@lemmings.world

                            I have no sympathy for anyone using microsoft products.

                            They made their bed, now they get to sleep in it.

                            S This user is from outside of this forum
                            S This user is from outside of this forum
                            squizzy@lemmy.world
                            wrote last edited by
                            #116

                            I didnt my finance and IT team did.

                            If you ever want to create a google fan, make them use M365

                            S 1 Reply Last reply
                            4
                            • B boonhet@sopuli.xyz

                              That’s the app devs being idiots.

                              My two local banks that I use support 15.1 and 16. My two globally useful neobanks support 13 and 16. None of them have any features that the one on 13 doesn’t have (in fact, that gets the most updates and has the most features of them all).

                              So iOS 16, which most apps still seem to support, at least ones that I use, supports devices as far back as the 6s, which came out in 2015. It also still gets security updates for now.

                              I just don’t get why Apple gets the most shit for generating e-waste on their phones when they actually have the longest lasting phones (barring tech enthusiasts flashing custom ROMs to old Androids, which is what, 1% of the population?)

                              What Apple REALLY should be getting shit for is software support for their Macbooks, particularly considering that with the Apple Silicon ones, the Linux drivers are still iffy for most things. They need to figure out a way to offer at LEAST 10 years, ideally 15 years of security updates for any device sold, since these devices are only meant to be used with their software, and one expects a computer to last longer than a smartphone, or at least how that’s how it was a few years ago still, when smartphones were still somewhat getting better year over year.

                              K This user is from outside of this forum
                              K This user is from outside of this forum
                              kayazere@feddit.nl
                              wrote last edited by
                              #117

                              I think Apple is responsible by releasing new APIs that are only available on the specific iOS version. Rarely have they back ported functionality to older iOS versions. Apple draggles shinny new APIs in front of developers causing them to update the minimum version.

                              Yeah Apple rapidly dropping support with Intel Macs is really terrible. I have a 2018 Mac mini that is already obsolete, what a joke. That was the last Mac I buy.

                              B 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • S sleafordmod@feddit.uk

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

                                I This user is from outside of this forum
                                I This user is from outside of this forum
                                ironfist79@lemmy.world
                                wrote last edited by
                                #118

                                People have had plenty of time to upgrade. 15 years is an incredibly long time to be supporting an OS. Even RHEL doesn’t do that.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                2
                                • K kayazere@feddit.nl

                                  I think Apple is responsible by releasing new APIs that are only available on the specific iOS version. Rarely have they back ported functionality to older iOS versions. Apple draggles shinny new APIs in front of developers causing them to update the minimum version.

                                  Yeah Apple rapidly dropping support with Intel Macs is really terrible. I have a 2018 Mac mini that is already obsolete, what a joke. That was the last Mac I buy.

                                  B This user is from outside of this forum
                                  B This user is from outside of this forum
                                  boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #119

                                  The shiny new APIs are rarely required for most apps tbh. Hence Revolut having a fully functional neobank app with minimum iOS version of 13 (meaning you could run it on a 10 year old device right now). Wise actually has less functionality theoretically, but it requires iOS 16. Neither one of them does anything special in the client anyway, probably could make the same apps on iOS 10 APIs and not notice a difference, but nobody uses that anymore anyway.

                                  I understand games, VR apps (lol vision pro) and such requiring the shiniest new APIs… Hell, even things like video players, etc - maybe Apple added some fancy new video codecs, etc. But basic business apps have no real reason to switch to the newest target version every year or 2.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S sleafordmod@feddit.uk

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

                                    Z This user is from outside of this forum
                                    Z This user is from outside of this forum
                                    zink@programming.dev
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #120

                                    This seems backwards. Let’s just assume we’re always going to be willingly beholden to tech giants, and so we’re going to pass a law to make our masters treat us well.

                                    Maybe instead campaign for a law that says all publicly funded computer resources must be reliably usable for 15 years. So you either go FOSS and save money too, or you get guarantees in writing before you hand over your hand over money to the people who won’t even let you see what their code is doing on your hardware.

                                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                                    4
                                    • Z zink@programming.dev

                                      This seems backwards. Let’s just assume we’re always going to be willingly beholden to tech giants, and so we’re going to pass a law to make our masters treat us well.

                                      Maybe instead campaign for a law that says all publicly funded computer resources must be reliably usable for 15 years. So you either go FOSS and save money too, or you get guarantees in writing before you hand over your hand over money to the people who won’t even let you see what their code is doing on your hardware.

                                      S This user is from outside of this forum
                                      S This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Spice Hoarder
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #121

                                      You can already patch windows as much as you want.

                                      B 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S squizzy@lemmy.world

                                        I didnt my finance and IT team did.

                                        If you ever want to create a google fan, make them use M365

                                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Spice Hoarder
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #122

                                        seems you were already a Google fan, they are a unique breed of horrible.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • N nucleative@lemmy.world

                                          15 years is too long, it doesn’t match the state of the industry or technological progress.

                                          If anything this slows down innovation which leads me to suspect the 15 year idea was though of by someone who dislikes any technical changes.

                                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                                          stuner@lemmy.world
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #123

                                          15 years is too long, it doesn’t match the state of the industry or technological progress.

                                          How is this too long? I would consider it a reasonable amount of time to receive security updates on a computer.

                                          I have a notebook that I bought in 2012. It can run Ubuntu LTS 24.04, which is supported until 2034, without issue. There is no indication that the next release will stop supporting this hardware. I don’t see why Microsoft couldn’t provide this.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • All Topics
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups