I never said that it was totally worthless. I gave the example of the iPhone (which is a mobile device). My argument was like this: some guy says linux overall sucks because it doesn't have touch support. My response was that it doesn't need touch support to be successful because it isn't a main stream feature of any OS and that it never will be the main stream feature of any OS because it brings with it inherent pitfalls. I listed them. I never said adding touch to linux was a bad idea and I never implied it. If it makes it more complete then do so. It is just improper to deny an OS a place on the desktop because it has little support for a little used feature (except in devices such as hand helds).
You are simply carrying on an argument (from someone else) based on the misreading of my intent in my posting and carrying it on to the point that you have concluded by reading someone elses post that I don't support touch on devices.
I would have to disagree that people swing their arms, etc all the time. They do not. Most computer use is a relaxed thing. You use a keyboard & mouse. You have chairs to keep your back from aching.
There's really no refuting what I said about using an iPhone as it is a valid example. I understand the value of touch screens is what I meant.
You, nor any family member you have, nor anyone you meet day in and day out, will use a touch screen regularly. Maybe for a few things such as reacting to some dialog box such as those prompting to turn the computer off, but ultimately they will switch back to the keyboard and mouse because those are comfortable devices.
If we had a tiny computer with limited screen real estate then we'd be more inclined; and the incline of the screen would also have to be as such that the neck isn't forced at an uncomfortable angle for long periods. People do use computers for extended periods of time.
Screens last today because people take care of them and they don't put their fingers or anything else on them. And unlike a tablet PC people won't be laying things on their screens. Pressure on LCD screens causes damage and increases wear. Long term use will damage the monitor which will force disposal of dead displays more frequently.
Imagine playing WoW with a touch screen and moving around the world, picking up objects, backing up, etc. It just isn't going to be a comfortable prospect. Most playing WoW play for extended periods of time.
I can see some combination of keyboard, mouse, and touch but that'll be quite limited also. Usually for purposes such as shutting down the computer (hit the button on screen).
Large LCD monitors won't work because it will require people in a sitting position to raise one arm up repeatedly for long periods of time and that will stress their arms causing not carpel tunnel in the wrist but elbow and shoulder socket/joint issues. Older people will have the most concern here.
We aren't going to small screens, we are going to larger screens, larger TVs, etc., because it is cost effective to make them. It is not going to be a good experience to have to interact with them.
Right now I'm writing this on a Linux box connected to my 47" LCD TV with the desktop running in 1920x1080 resolution. Everything is photo realistic clear and I would not want to be standing up constantly to interact with my computer. Instead I sit back in my comfortable chair and use my mouse and keyboard to write this text.
There is touch screen support for Linux. And touch screen support is constantly in development for Linux. There's a guy prototyping a Linux based touch screen multimedia device that was demo'd and which I think you can still find on youtube.com.
As the technology becomes more popular you'll see it implemented more and more. We've gone nearly 25 years without home users adopting touch screens for the desktops. There are reasons for this.
We can further say that even those buying Photoshop Elements don't use it regularly enough to justify saying that their OS is not worthwhile because that product doesn't exist for it, especially when there are good photo editing tools available.
If the popularity of an OS is based on the lowest common denominator then you don't rule out the alternatives because "a package never used by those expecting the lowest common denominator" doesn't exist for that platform. And further we don't belittle an OS due to the lack of popular product, when clearly we can run that product in an emulator or a virtual machine.
I think you when are saying "misleading information presented by Linux fans/users" of a given distribution, is not actually that they are wrong or misleading, since nothing misleading has been proven, but that it is your opinion that it is. I also don't believe that being a fan is bad. I do believe that being a mindless zealot is bad.
KDE 4.0 and 4.1 were pretty bad. No question. But it was still useful. You could still do everything you can do in the Mac and Windows. The slickness of the interface, as far as bringing utility goes, it is no less utilitarian than OS X or Win Vista/7.
KDE 4.2 (4.2.2, provided by default in a Kubuntu install) is extremely nice and quite stable. It is exceptionally well designed and I can do more with it more easily than I can with Windows Vista/7/XP (though I'd question the whether it is more "utilitarian and simple" than the OS X GUI).
Suffice it to say, your argument is just emotional feldercarb.
You are misusing the term proprietary here. Non-proprietary software is of the sort where you can view the source, use the source, alter it, redistribute it. Proprietary software on the other hand is closed, where you can't look at the source, you can't alter it, you can't distribute it. You are confusing commercial software with open source and applying it to cars (which is an apples to oranges comparison -- in your example), as a car can be taken apart and looked at, can be modified, and can be resold. So can computers (well most models from most manufacturers), but not proprietary software.
You make another mistake in that you seem to be saying that software in the Linux form is taken from so many different sources that it can't be cohesive due to that because the developers never talk to one another.
Sir, the whole industry of commercial software is exactly like that. You don't buy a cohesive built computer (with all parts manufactured by one source), not even from the software perspective. Those parts that go into those Dells, HPs, Gateways, etc are doing exactly the same thing you are claiming is happening in the Linux software world. All these hardware companies buy their parts from other companies and put them together in their own fashion then tack an OS and GUI on top either from their own design or from a 3rd party. This is the same for the end user on the desktop. They take software from disparate sources and run them in their Windows environment.
All of your premises are wrong and based on the false assumption that; this is not the case for computers from companies that sell them. You are saying that Apple is different because all its pieces come from one source -- which is incorrect. Apple manufacturers next to nothing. In fact, Apple's OS is based on the free Unix kernel. They just put their proprietary interface upon it. When Apple makes changes to the kernel (to support new things) they give those changes back to the community. Their UI is another matter, that's closed source and no one can look at it except those Apple permits.
In the Linux world you have a distribution system that is made up of a cohesive group of people who are working to a common goal--e.g., the release of a given distribution such as Ubuntu 9.04 upgraded from Ubuntu 8.10. These people generally get paid.
As far as the kernel goes in the Linux world this is maintained by a group of individuals headed by Linus Torvalds himself and is funded by large entities such as IBM, Sun, etc. These people aren't playing games. They have invested billions into producing the Linux kernel.
Drivers on the other hand in the world of Windows are far more disjointed than in the Linux world. It was the opposite a few years ago, but Linux has surpassed driver implementation procedures vs. that of Windows (with a few exceptions). What I mean is that when you install Linux, almost any distribution, when you boot into the OS the drivers are there and functioning. This generally includes a decent video driver and solid wireless support. For those that want the proprietary drivers from say ATI or NVIDIA the process of downloading and installing the drivers takes place, as in Windows and OS X.
Under Windows we spend too much time looking for some drivers (e.g., for the high definition audio bus, codecs, etc.), whereas under Linux they are already there and function well.
Every machine requires some sort of configuration.
Yes, the Macintosh has a more cohesive plug and play strategy for any given model and their UI is very good and sharp and they are providing some awesome software for the beginner and intermediate audiences included in the package.
With Windows based pre-fab computers you get an ad supported machine (HP, Dell, etc., adding trial-ware in order to advertise software to unsuspecting consumers who don't realize there's a choice -- un-install the trial-ware and download products such as open office).
I have an iphone and ipod. I'm not worried about connecting them up to my linux box. I also have a couple Macs running OSX, and some windows computers. It isn't that big of a deal to me. I rarely switch out music.
I also have a 47" TV and connecting a linux box up to that screen is about the most awesome thing I've seen. Especially when running XBMC or Boxee. I bought an iphone app that allows me to totally control XBMC. I also bought the app at that allows me to control VLC. I can start and stop anything in my library, be it video, music, photos, last.fm, etc.
You don't have to. You can just download and install it. It is free you know and extremely simple to set up. I own and operate a small business where I do repairs, upgrades, and sales. Linux is tremendously easier to get up and running than Windows. I've been involved in computers for almost 25 years. You can't beat the value and ease of use of Linux today, on the desktop at that.
Touch is good for handheld devices. But for reglar use they are almost worthless, except as you said for a kiosk.
Your arm is going to get worn out raising it to select each item you want to act upon. And touch isn't precise so you end up doing it more than once sometimes.
Touch also smears your screen, making it dirty. It's not like the old days of glass tube monitors (CRTs) that can be wiped clean with windex. You have to be careful of your flat screen when touching and when cleaning.
Also, I tend to relax when using my computer so I don't want the added stress of constantly having to raise my arm and moving my arm and hand around.
Arguments about the lack of something when it adds stress and complexity don't add value to it.
Windows 7 has some support for touch screens. But That's pretty limited. And, it isn't like we all have touch screens. Sort of like "virtually no one" has touch screens on their computers.
That's like complaining it doesn't have photoshop when the vast majority of those complaining that there's no photoshop have pirated it to begin with, as the program is $700.00.
You shouldn't really complain about something you don't have just to make someone else look bad.
It's like the kid in the high school that tries to make some other kid look bad because his dad doesn't have a porche, all the while, neither does his dad.
Segfaults are unique and specific to KDE. You won't find that in gnome. FYI, I use KDE 4.2 which is pretty cool and though I have segfaults at times it is no different than any other platform encountering problems.
I tried K9 Copy Assistant just to see how well it worked. I downloaded it from getdeb.net.
I inserted the DVD, launched the program, clicked a few options relating to which language, told it I wanted an.ISO (though it looks to support.mp4), and started the process. I went to get a few things done and when I came back it was finished. I dragged the.iso onto VLC and it presented me with the menu. I clicked play and off it went. The video looked good.
The size of the.iso file was 4.3 gigs. I then used brasero to burn the.iso to a DVD to see if it played well.
Playback off the new backup dvd worked great too.
As for a comment regarding those that think the purist linux movement is bad (or good). First, a mixture of both is necessary but whenever you can get a native app for your OS you should. Linux is an OS in and of itself and it stands on it's own. That's the direction we are taking it and the direction everyone should view it.
Just because one category on the platform is lacking doesn't mean the whole OS has a problem. As far as I can see the K9 copy assistant did a fantastic job of keeping it simple and performing the job well. It had enough options to customize things yet did the job flawlessly. I've only tried one commercial DVD to see if it worked. I can't guarantee that any others won't cause issues, but hell, it worked and it was simple, straight forward, and a native linux app.
Linux is an OS in and of itself and it has no dependency on Windows or any other platform and that's the way it should be and stay. I do use a combination of programs on linux and a few games on linux in wine, but I don't make a habit of trying to get programs to run under wine. I'm here to support and promote Linux to the future.
I don't like that a company can use patents on old decadent technology, and a patent that is so obvious anyway, to manipulate a competitor. It would be different if Microsoft wasn't a convicted criminal predatory monopolist.
FAT is junk and it is unnecessary. The industry should never have chosen to accept M$ way of doing things they should have come up with an industry standard.
All the industry players should come up with an ISO standard. After they have completed this it wouldn't be a stretch to see Microsoft submit FAT or FAT32 to that just to keep from loosing the pole position. Just like with OOXML. If Microsoft didn't come up with something they might find themselves at the receiving end of a tech implementation where they had to pay back something to everyone else.
As far as TomTom getting out from under the legal threats the removal of a technology doesn't mean that they made a bad choice. They may have chosen to remove a technology that they felt was decadent and unnecessary and wasn't worth the license fees instead choosing to move to a different technology altogether.
You say nothing to the higher ups. You do nothing. That's the answer. The company could care less about you. You document and keep the info as future ammo. That's it. If you feel inclined to get even after you have left the company you can do so then. This isn't an issue where you have to be pure. Earn your living and realize the fault is with the company and the managers. Just do your job, document these things, and don't ever tell the higher ups anything, PERIOD.
Your company doesn't care about you. PERIOD. Your company would do anything to keep you from doing a lot of things. You live in a world of restrictions under your company, even to the point of spying on you in order to view your phone calls, who you hang with, investigating your past. Everything. If you don't believe it could happen then you don't remember HP nor have you come to grips with the Bush admin and what they did.
Of course, you all know there's a difference between open source and Microsoft's opened source. Microsoft's offerings don't qualify as open source. It isn't free of restriction to use and reuse and it isn't free of the restrictions of the OS.
There's no word for open source in Microsoft's vocabulary. It is opened source which is simply an opportunity to view the source but you can't use it outside of your closed project and can only be used under Windows.
I believe if you start the update manager and there's an update to the distro it tells you this and provides you with a single click button to initiate the process.
And, next time, could you write with paragraph breaks?
Slashdot Mirror
I never said that it was totally worthless. I gave the example of the iPhone (which is a mobile device). My argument was like this: some guy says linux overall sucks because it doesn't have touch support. My response was that it doesn't need touch support to be successful because it isn't a main stream feature of any OS and that it never will be the main stream feature of any OS because it brings with it inherent pitfalls. I listed them. I never said adding touch to linux was a bad idea and I never implied it. If it makes it more complete then do so. It is just improper to deny an OS a place on the desktop because it has little support for a little used feature (except in devices such as hand helds).
You are simply carrying on an argument (from someone else) based on the misreading of my intent in my posting and carrying it on to the point that you have concluded by reading someone elses post that I don't support touch on devices.
I would have to disagree that people swing their arms, etc all the time. They do not. Most computer use is a relaxed thing. You use a keyboard & mouse. You have chairs to keep your back from aching.
There's really no refuting what I said about using an iPhone as it is a valid example. I understand the value of touch screens is what I meant.
You, nor any family member you have, nor anyone you meet day in and day out, will use a touch screen regularly. Maybe for a few things such as reacting to some dialog box such as those prompting to turn the computer off, but ultimately they will switch back to the keyboard and mouse because those are comfortable devices.
If we had a tiny computer with limited screen real estate then we'd be more inclined; and the incline of the screen would also have to be as such that the neck isn't forced at an uncomfortable angle for long periods. People do use computers for extended periods of time.
Screens last today because people take care of them and they don't put their fingers or anything else on them. And unlike a tablet PC people won't be laying things on their screens. Pressure on LCD screens causes damage and increases wear. Long term use will damage the monitor which will force disposal of dead displays more frequently.
Imagine playing WoW with a touch screen and moving around the world, picking up objects, backing up, etc. It just isn't going to be a comfortable prospect. Most playing WoW play for extended periods of time.
I can see some combination of keyboard, mouse, and touch but that'll be quite limited also. Usually for purposes such as shutting down the computer (hit the button on screen).
Large LCD monitors won't work because it will require people in a sitting position to raise one arm up repeatedly for long periods of time and that will stress their arms causing not carpel tunnel in the wrist but elbow and shoulder socket/joint issues. Older people will have the most concern here.
We aren't going to small screens, we are going to larger screens, larger TVs, etc., because it is cost effective to make them. It is not going to be a good experience to have to interact with them.
Right now I'm writing this on a Linux box connected to my 47" LCD TV with the desktop running in 1920x1080 resolution. Everything is photo realistic clear and I would not want to be standing up constantly to interact with my computer. Instead I sit back in my comfortable chair and use my mouse and keyboard to write this text.
There is touch screen support for Linux. And touch screen support is constantly in development for Linux. There's a guy prototyping a Linux based touch screen multimedia device that was demo'd and which I think you can still find on youtube.com.
As the technology becomes more popular you'll see it implemented more and more. We've gone nearly 25 years without home users adopting touch screens for the desktops. There are reasons for this.
We can further say that even those buying Photoshop Elements don't use it regularly enough to justify saying that their OS is not worthwhile because that product doesn't exist for it, especially when there are good photo editing tools available.
If the popularity of an OS is based on the lowest common denominator then you don't rule out the alternatives because "a package never used by those expecting the lowest common denominator" doesn't exist for that platform. And further we don't belittle an OS due to the lack of popular product, when clearly we can run that product in an emulator or a virtual machine.
There's always more than one way to solve this.
I think you when are saying "misleading information presented by Linux fans/users" of a given distribution, is not actually that they are wrong or misleading, since nothing misleading has been proven, but that it is your opinion that it is. I also don't believe that being a fan is bad. I do believe that being a mindless zealot is bad.
Though, I do agree with your dog analogy.
KDE 4.0 and 4.1 were pretty bad. No question. But it was still useful. You could still do everything you can do in the Mac and Windows. The slickness of the interface, as far as bringing utility goes, it is no less utilitarian than OS X or Win Vista/7.
KDE 4.2 (4.2.2, provided by default in a Kubuntu install) is extremely nice and quite stable. It is exceptionally well designed and I can do more with it more easily than I can with Windows Vista/7/XP (though I'd question the whether it is more "utilitarian and simple" than the OS X GUI).
Suffice it to say, your argument is just emotional feldercarb.
I smell stink.
You are misusing the term proprietary here. Non-proprietary software is of the sort where you can view the source, use the source, alter it, redistribute it. Proprietary software on the other hand is closed, where you can't look at the source, you can't alter it, you can't distribute it. You are confusing commercial software with open source and applying it to cars (which is an apples to oranges comparison -- in your example), as a car can be taken apart and looked at, can be modified, and can be resold. So can computers (well most models from most manufacturers), but not proprietary software.
You make another mistake in that you seem to be saying that software in the Linux form is taken from so many different sources that it can't be cohesive due to that because the developers never talk to one another.
Sir, the whole industry of commercial software is exactly like that. You don't buy a cohesive built computer (with all parts manufactured by one source), not even from the software perspective. Those parts that go into those Dells, HPs, Gateways, etc are doing exactly the same thing you are claiming is happening in the Linux software world. All these hardware companies buy their parts from other companies and put them together in their own fashion then tack an OS and GUI on top either from their own design or from a 3rd party. This is the same for the end user on the desktop. They take software from disparate sources and run them in their Windows environment.
All of your premises are wrong and based on the false assumption that; this is not the case for computers from companies that sell them. You are saying that Apple is different because all its pieces come from one source -- which is incorrect. Apple manufacturers next to nothing. In fact, Apple's OS is based on the free Unix kernel. They just put their proprietary interface upon it. When Apple makes changes to the kernel (to support new things) they give those changes back to the community. Their UI is another matter, that's closed source and no one can look at it except those Apple permits.
In the Linux world you have a distribution system that is made up of a cohesive group of people who are working to a common goal--e.g., the release of a given distribution such as Ubuntu 9.04 upgraded from Ubuntu 8.10. These people generally get paid.
As far as the kernel goes in the Linux world this is maintained by a group of individuals headed by Linus Torvalds himself and is funded by large entities such as IBM, Sun, etc. These people aren't playing games. They have invested billions into producing the Linux kernel.
Drivers on the other hand in the world of Windows are far more disjointed than in the Linux world. It was the opposite a few years ago, but Linux has surpassed driver implementation procedures vs. that of Windows (with a few exceptions). What I mean is that when you install Linux, almost any distribution, when you boot into the OS the drivers are there and functioning. This generally includes a decent video driver and solid wireless support. For those that want the proprietary drivers from say ATI or NVIDIA the process of downloading and installing the drivers takes place, as in Windows and OS X.
Under Windows we spend too much time looking for some drivers (e.g., for the high definition audio bus, codecs, etc.), whereas under Linux they are already there and function well.
Every machine requires some sort of configuration.
Yes, the Macintosh has a more cohesive plug and play strategy for any given model and their UI is very good and sharp and they are providing some awesome software for the beginner and intermediate audiences included in the package.
With Windows based pre-fab computers you get an ad supported machine (HP, Dell, etc., adding trial-ware in order to advertise software to unsuspecting consumers who don't realize there's a choice -- un-install the trial-ware and download products such as open office).
I'm not disrespecting the other OSes, I
What a crock of shit. Don't just say something, show us, prove it.
And as far as good design goes, take slashdot (of which you don't complain about), it is chock full of the very same issues you speak about.
The screen shots link I gave earlier/later in this thread absolutely prove you a flat out liar.
The point's moot. We aren't living 20 years ago.
Ha!
I have an iphone and ipod. I'm not worried about connecting them up to my linux box. I also have a couple Macs running OSX, and some windows computers. It isn't that big of a deal to me. I rarely switch out music.
I also have a 47" TV and connecting a linux box up to that screen is about the most awesome thing I've seen. Especially when running XBMC or Boxee. I bought an iphone app that allows me to totally control XBMC. I also bought the app at that allows me to control VLC. I can start and stop anything in my library, be it video, music, photos, last.fm, etc.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1112416&highlight=screen+shots
Lots of screenshots for you to peruse.
You don't have to. You can just download and install it. It is free you know and extremely simple to set up. I own and operate a small business where I do repairs, upgrades, and sales. Linux is tremendously easier to get up and running than Windows. I've been involved in computers for almost 25 years. You can't beat the value and ease of use of Linux today, on the desktop at that.
That's likely your video driver or an issue with configuring your video in bios vs. the amount of ram on your card, etc.
Touch is good for handheld devices. But for reglar use they are almost worthless, except as you said for a kiosk.
Your arm is going to get worn out raising it to select each item you want to act upon. And touch isn't precise so you end up doing it more than once sometimes.
Touch also smears your screen, making it dirty. It's not like the old days of glass tube monitors (CRTs) that can be wiped clean with windex. You have to be careful of your flat screen when touching and when cleaning.
Also, I tend to relax when using my computer so I don't want the added stress of constantly having to raise my arm and moving my arm and hand around.
Arguments about the lack of something when it adds stress and complexity don't add value to it.
Windows 7 has some support for touch screens. But That's pretty limited. And, it isn't like we all have touch screens. Sort of like "virtually no one" has touch screens on their computers.
That's like complaining it doesn't have photoshop when the vast majority of those complaining that there's no photoshop have pirated it to begin with, as the program is $700.00.
You shouldn't really complain about something you don't have just to make someone else look bad.
It's like the kid in the high school that tries to make some other kid look bad because his dad doesn't have a porche, all the while, neither does his dad.
Segfaults are unique and specific to KDE. You won't find that in gnome. FYI, I use KDE 4.2 which is pretty cool and though I have segfaults at times it is no different than any other platform encountering problems.
When you criticize others, look within.
I tried K9 Copy Assistant just to see how well it worked. I downloaded it from getdeb.net.
I inserted the DVD, launched the program, clicked a few options relating to which language, told it I wanted an .ISO (though it looks to support .mp4), and started the process. I went to get a few things done and when I came back it was finished. I dragged the .iso onto VLC and it presented me with the menu. I clicked play and off it went. The video looked good.
The size of the .iso file was 4.3 gigs. I then used brasero to burn the .iso to a DVD to see if it played well.
Playback off the new backup dvd worked great too.
As for a comment regarding those that think the purist linux movement is bad (or good). First, a mixture of both is necessary but whenever you can get a native app for your OS you should. Linux is an OS in and of itself and it stands on it's own. That's the direction we are taking it and the direction everyone should view it.
Just because one category on the platform is lacking doesn't mean the whole OS has a problem. As far as I can see the K9 copy assistant did a fantastic job of keeping it simple and performing the job well. It had enough options to customize things yet did the job flawlessly. I've only tried one commercial DVD to see if it worked. I can't guarantee that any others won't cause issues, but hell, it worked and it was simple, straight forward, and a native linux app.
Linux is an OS in and of itself and it has no dependency on Windows or any other platform and that's the way it should be and stay. I do use a combination of programs on linux and a few games on linux in wine, but I don't make a habit of trying to get programs to run under wine. I'm here to support and promote Linux to the future.
This is LINUX not windows.
ms offerings are not open sourse and in no way does their offering meet with the standard definition established over 15 years ago.
I don't like that a company can use patents on old decadent technology, and a patent that is so obvious anyway, to manipulate a competitor. It would be different if Microsoft wasn't a convicted criminal predatory monopolist.
FAT is junk and it is unnecessary. The industry should never have chosen to accept M$ way of doing things they should have come up with an industry standard.
All the industry players should come up with an ISO standard. After they have completed this it wouldn't be a stretch to see Microsoft submit FAT or FAT32 to that just to keep from loosing the pole position. Just like with OOXML. If Microsoft didn't come up with something they might find themselves at the receiving end of a tech implementation where they had to pay back something to everyone else.
As far as TomTom getting out from under the legal threats the removal of a technology doesn't mean that they made a bad choice. They may have chosen to remove a technology that they felt was decadent and unnecessary and wasn't worth the license fees instead choosing to move to a different technology altogether.
You say nothing to the higher ups. You do nothing. That's the answer. The company could care less about you. You document and keep the info as future ammo. That's it. If you feel inclined to get even after you have left the company you can do so then. This isn't an issue where you have to be pure. Earn your living and realize the fault is with the company and the managers. Just do your job, document these things, and don't ever tell the higher ups anything, PERIOD.
lol, wrong topic. Can't figure out how i managed to get this posted here.
Your company doesn't care about you. PERIOD. Your company would do anything to keep you from doing a lot of things. You live in a world of restrictions under your company, even to the point of spying on you in order to view your phone calls, who you hang with, investigating your past. Everything. If you don't believe it could happen then you don't remember HP nor have you come to grips with the Bush admin and what they did.
This is ammo. Document it and keep it safe.
Of course, you all know there's a difference between open source and Microsoft's opened source. Microsoft's offerings don't qualify as open source. It isn't free of restriction to use and reuse and it isn't free of the restrictions of the OS.
There's no word for open source in Microsoft's vocabulary. It is opened source which is simply an opportunity to view the source but you can't use it outside of your closed project and can only be used under Windows.
I believe if you start the update manager and there's an update to the distro it tells you this and provides you with a single click button to initiate the process.
And, next time, could you write with paragraph breaks?