That is astoundingly judgmental. Good lord.

Cloud native is a weird term I’ll agree, but it just means container based.

Bazzite is amazing and worth a try. I’ve been using it as a daily driver for nearly a year now.

Perhaps you’d prefer the Github over their “shit” website: https://github.com/ublue-os/bazzite

Or perhaps you’d like to positively contribute to the state of Linux gaming, and make some suggestions for the website in their post just for that: Requesting input: Bazzite’s website

Well here you go: https://bazzite.gg/

People who want to run a lot of different emulators, for example. You can play all your Steam Deck games and all your other console’s games, from a single device with a great Big Picture mode.

Bazzite also includes Waydroid, which means you can use all your Android apps.

I know that it’s possible to do some (perhaps all?) of that on a stock deck by doing all the setup yourself, but Bazzite handles it OOTB.

Luckily for you this already exists, and it’s effectively SteamOS:

https://bazzite.gg/

You can even put this on a Steam Deck as a drop-in replacement.

They use open source solutions for this, so you can spin up your own version if you want. It’s just Matrix with bridges.

You could use Beeper, which connects with Whatsapp without needing the app installed.

They may have nothing to hide but they have IP to protect to stay in business. What a ridiculous thing to say.

If it’s chunky as hella, you got stew there fella.

I can confirm that Bazzite works flawlessly on a Razer Blade 14 without any additional configuration. Just installed from ISO and it was perfect.

The draw is that you cannot screw them up. Non-power users are the ones who will get the most out of them!

I know that I’ll never get a call from my friend saying, “I ran this command I found on an Ubuntu forum, and now my system won’t boot…”

As a counterpoint, I installed Bazzite on a Blade 14 for a heavy gaming friend who was leaving Windows, and they have had no issues whatsoever.

I personally use Bluefun, and again, no issues at all. Incredibly good experiences on both.

I can’t imagine what you mean by needing more work to configure, they both worked out of the box with no configuration.

I’m not aware of any other enterprise password management where the server source is available and auditable. Proton certainly is not.

What features will depend on the close-source part, and which do not?

There are definitely some terminology issues here.

The SDK is not closed source, you can find the source here: https://github.com/bitwarden/sdk

It might not be GPL open-source, but it is not closed either.

Other than that, I agree with your points. I don’t agree with the kneejerk hysteria from many of the comments - it’s one of the worst things about FOSS is how quick people are to anger (I am not referring to you here).

But all of that still doesn’t explain what their goal of introducing the proprietary SDK is.

Let’s wait and see before we get out the pitchforks.

Sorry that’s my mistake - I should have said “source available”, rather than “open source”. IMO, being source available is the critical component of a password manager like Bitwarden, and is what I meant when I referred to their main competitive advantage.

They might also choose to be open source and fix this specific issue and return to GPL-compatibility, but remaining source available would seem to be the more critical factor.

Well, then it would be nice to hear from them an explanation on why they decided to violate the GPLv3

Lucky for you, they provided that explanation:

1. This is a bug/mistake.
2. Our goal is to make sure that the SDK is used in a way that maintains GPL compatibility.
3. We will fix this.

That may or may not be the case, but the comment I replied to said they locked the thread with “no explanation”.

What part changed the code to closed source?

Gitlab has demonstrated its commitment to keep the core of their product, though limited in features, free and open source. As of now, BW’s clients cannot even be compiled without the proprietary SDK anymore.

None of that makes Bitwarden not open source. Not only that, they specifically state this is a bug which will be addressed.

I would go as far as to say that Bitwarden’s main competitive advantage and differentiation is that it’s open source. They would be insane to stop that.

That would be an issue if they were not open source. Them making their own SDK proprietary is not a pitchfork issue.

Open source !== Non-proprietary

I would go as far as to say that Bitwarden’s main competitive advantage and differentiation is that it’s open source. They would be insane to change that.

The explanation is the second-to-last comment before it got locked. 🤦

This hysteria is really stupid.