On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 19:19:27 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/8/2011 18:05, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I didn't know I could install Adobe Acrobat, Flash, or other third
>> party software from Windows Update. ;)
> 
> You can, if it passes Microsoft certification requirements. I saw
> instructions somewhere for setting it up with Microsoft.

Not really the point, though.

>> (That's actually what I was talking about - not about driver installs)
> 
> And device drivers aren't third party software? Some of the DRM plug-ins
> are similar as well.

Sure, they are - but then again, Linux tends to include a lot more device 
drivers on the media than Windows does.  But sure, ATI and nVidia 
drivers, for openSUSE, are installed from a repository.

>>>> Getting the software makers to agree might take some work,
>>>
>>> And that is the problem. That, and commercial entities don't really
>>> want their software in Windows Update where people could install it
>>> without paying for it. The model really only works for free software.
>>
>> The software in question I'm talking about is available gratis as it
>> is. Like Flash, Acrobat Reader, Java, etc.
> 
> Sure. But people giving away free software want to be in your face about
> it, not as a silent background install. There's a reason that Adobe
> plasters their icon on your desktop on every update regardless of the
> fact you never start it without a file.

Oddly, that doesn't happen with the Linux versions.  Certainly not on 
systems running GNOME3 (which actually won't let you put icons on the 
desktop).

>>>> but then again, Adobe has Acrobat Reader in most distributions'
>>>> official repositories.
>>>
>>> Probably because Adobe doesn't have to deal with it. They just have to
>>> give permission.
>>
>> So why not something like that for Windows, too?
> 
> Sure. Feel free. Go ahead. :-)  The point is that it costs Microsoft
> real money to provide that service, and people generally don't want to
> use that, because Microsoft controls it too much.  Commercial entities
> don't like that, but they'll put up with it if that's the only way to
> get their free software in front of their target audience.

I don't use Windows enough for it to be useful.

But you're saying that it doesn't cost the folks who run Pacman money to 
host repositories?

Jim

Post a reply to this message