[tmtvl]

Eroding user's rights is good if it means users have fewer choices because choice is bad? I suppose it would mean that resources could concentrate in a smaller, more focused set of software, but I really can't see how that would justify the harm caused.

[duskdozer]

Just think about how easy it would be though - imagine - one single OS, one single version always immediately up to date, one consistent set of installed software, attestation to ensure no adversaries are attempting to modify or install unsupported software, full accurate and thorough analytics, what a dream...

[daurentius523]

Yea what a Fall of Rome type dream - just look what happened when people overused a specific measure - we had Crowdstrike with around 8.5 million devices crashed to BSoD. Identical OS, identical apps, identical updates, identical crashes at same time.

If you centralise then it is not the question "Will?" but "When?" it will fail.

[dogleash]

> Just think about how easy it would be though

Endlessly painful. Right?

The defining characteristic is that everyone is using it, not that it's your personal ideal operating system. We have a few major players trying to create their version of the one single os. They're already nobodies ideal, and they have the luxury of telling people to go elsewhere if the system isn't right for them. Imagine how much worse it would be if they had to support everything.

[tmtvl]

Isn't that what Apple purports to sell? There's also Haiku, but I don't know to what extend it matches that description.