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

  • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    That sounds like an insane duration, even LTS distros are not usually anything like 15 years

    • iesha_256@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      this isn’t about the age of the OS, it’s the age of the device. I can install linux on a device from 20 years ago if not more.

      • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        28 days ago

        I don’t know. just the other day somebody on lemmy was asking about installing a 32bit linux distro on an old netbook and the majority of comments were discussing whether there was any practical reason for distros to continue 32-bit support.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          That’s unfortunate, but still leaves you 20 years worth of devices if they drop 32-bit.

    • ratten@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      These multi-billion dollar corporations have more than enough resources to provide updates for 15 years.

      There’s nothing insane about it, unless you’ve been conditioned to live vicariously through business owners.

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        27 days ago

        Pretty sure postmarketOS isn’t made by a multi-billion dollar corporation. Such a requirement would mean ONLY multi-billion dollar corporations can release an operating system. You do not want to give them that power.