The endorsements by the popular YT people, the Steam gaming, the Windows constantly getting bad rep and the LLMs making it easy to fix things that actually make Linux finally a really good option for a wider audience.
A Linux user has access to a huge ecosystem of software they could pay to add any feature to they wanted, especially with the capabilities of self hosted LLMs these days.
Why would anyone with this much freedom pay money for proprietary software they are not allowed to change, with no external accountability it is free of backdoors and can be maintained long term?
This is so strange to me.
Because getting the F/LOSS alternative to feature-parity is going to require a multi-million-dollar investment, and using the proprietary product is $30 / month?
This really isn't rocket science. You're not going to get tens of thousands of people to throw $10 / month at random borderline-MVP F/LOSS projects in the hope that they'll eventually mature - especially when there isn't even anything resembling a mature project management structure around it. Without serious corporate backing, most of those projects will go absolutely nowhere.
Your comment reads like a vegan trying to moral grandstand over meat eaters. IME it’s unlikely to do much except annoy anyone who’s not already aligned with your viewpoints.
My question remains. What is the appeal of paying someone for proprietary software anymore when you could pay dramatically less or nothing to get exactly the software you want because of the hard work of the FOSS community?
Selling binaries is no longer a viable business model anymore for a technical customer, or so I thought.
This is new, it wasn't like that last year. But this year? People who have SteamDeck, saw it works, and then went and installed Linux on their own devices.