Choice is certainly not a problem for Linux in trying to reach more users.
Linux: Now 400 Distributions Strong : Read more
Linux: Now 400 Distributions Strong : Read more
- Status
megamanx00
Splendid
- Sep 3, 2008
- 8,216
- 2
- 31,465
Ugh too many Distros. There are probably less that are active though. The problem with so many Distros is that you have alot of people duplicating efforts resulting in the Community as a whole working harder not smarter.
runswindows95
Distinguished
- Dec 24, 2005
- 2,715
- 0
- 21,160
I agree. I think they might be less then 10 distros widely used. I personally just run Linuxmint.
sayakbiswas
Distinguished
- Oct 14, 2011
- 17
- 0
- 18,510
sayakbiswas
Distinguished
- Oct 14, 2011
- 17
- 0
- 18,510
goatsetung
Distinguished
- Jan 28, 2010
- 47
- 0
- 18,530
-Fran-
Illustrious
- May 3, 2007
- 8,938
- 2,112
- 42,140
Choice is good, but requires a lot more effort into it and we all know "people" is/are lazy.
I agree with you all that they should actually try and work on a common basis a lil' ahead of the kernel into X territory.
And where's Gentoo in all that? XD
Cheers!
I agree with you all that they should actually try and work on a common basis a lil' ahead of the kernel into X territory.
And where's Gentoo in all that? XD
Cheers!
LuckyDucky7
Distinguished
- May 5, 2010
- 303
- 0
- 18,780
Why can't they just make a concatenated Linux OS?
Call it something like, I don't know, Grand Unified Linux or something.
Which can install any package you throw at it.
Which works with most plugins and software out there.
If you can do that you can get some more adoption since developers know what they're developing for.
Call it something like, I don't know, Grand Unified Linux or something.
Which can install any package you throw at it.
Which works with most plugins and software out there.
If you can do that you can get some more adoption since developers know what they're developing for.
halcyon
Splendid
- Dec 4, 2004
- 5,566
- 0
- 25,810
[citation][nom]LuckyDucky7[/nom]Why can't they just make a concatenated Linux OS?Call it something like, I don't know, Grand Unified Linux or something.Which can install any package you throw at it.Which works with most plugins and software out there.If you can do that you can get some more adoption since developers know what they're developing for.[/citation]
There you all go making sense again.
Its better the way it is...nice and scattered and somewhat disorganized. Just what most users are looking for. /sarcasm
There you all go making sense again.
Its better the way it is...nice and scattered and somewhat disorganized. Just what most users are looking for. /sarcasmthaile4ever
Distinguished
- Mar 16, 2011
- 28
- 0
- 18,530
The problem really is that anyone can take a distro change somethings and call it a new distro. Like the Hanna Montanna Distro, which just changes the background and some icons.
rjq
Distinguished
- Jul 13, 2011
- 39
- 0
- 18,540
As far as I can tell, there is just one linux, and then four-six (more or less) DEs, then a handfull of WM, then hundreds of aplications and more than a few ways to package them... by saying 400 linux distributions it means there is 400 succesfull (more or less again) convinations of the just metioned data... and if you still don't see one that it fits you, just make your own.
70camaross396
Distinguished
- Apr 26, 2010
- 48
- 0
- 18,530
I personally prefer to roll my own. www.linuxfromscratch.org. if you really want to know how linux works, this is a great place to start. it will walk you through compiling your own linux from source code. when your finished you will have a very limited linux system, which you can customize to you likeing by using Beyond Linux From Scratch.
halcyon
Splendid
- Dec 4, 2004
- 5,566
- 0
- 25,810
I think the problem remains that Linux isn't mainstream. When Johny, heading off to school, says "I need a computer" he isn't thinking Linux. He's thinking Mac or Wintel. I would like to see that change. Is there no profit in making a version of Linux that has the device and technical support AND ease of use to be the preferred platform for the average user? Something with emulation built in so that folks could still, easily, run all their Windows programs without having to be computer enthusiasts to do so. A distro that can play at least some of the Windows games well enough to be a true alternative.
If they can get this together and MARKET IT TO THE MASSES using TELEVISION we might see a change one day.
If they can get this together and MARKET IT TO THE MASSES using TELEVISION we might see a change one day.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Guy goes into a computer store and asks the guy behind the counter:-
Guy behind the counter thinks:-
Guy behind the counter says:-
That's the real reason Linux is a 'hobby' OS
...
Guy behind the counter thinks:-
...
Guy behind the counter says:-
...
That's the real reason Linux is a 'hobby' OS
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Guy goes into a computer store and asks the guy behind the counter:-...Guy behind the counter thinks:-...Guy behind the counter says:-...That's the real reason Linux is a 'hobby' OS[/citation]
Linux Mint for anyone new to Linux.
The biggest problem with Linux is that there is no standardized GUI viewpoint into the kernel. Whenever you have a driver problem, or some device isn't working, or a program crashes, either you interact with the kernel via command line or you use GUI applications like GNOME's task manager that are built on top of it and rarely compatible across desktop environments. The result is there is no standard device manager or way to fix hardware problems, so any software problem gets blown out of proportion by relation.
But really, Linux Mint for new people, non-Unity Ubuntu for the middle user, Debian / Arch / Suse / Gentoo for the hardware with a command line fetish.
I think we are generally heading in a single direction though. Debian has become the distro tree for consumer Linux, because its package system beats everything else at navigation. Meanwhile, Red Hat / Fedora wins at the server space, because it is so customizable down to the Kernel modules even at run time.
Everyone else, really, is just reinventing the wheel. It is better to start arguing with the people working on X or RPM or some other already built up codebase application than to say "well, they already spent 10 years on it, but I'm sure we can reinvent it and make it even better than the already at market product in a few months, because we are motivated!".
Linux Mint for anyone new to Linux.
The biggest problem with Linux is that there is no standardized GUI viewpoint into the kernel. Whenever you have a driver problem, or some device isn't working, or a program crashes, either you interact with the kernel via command line or you use GUI applications like GNOME's task manager that are built on top of it and rarely compatible across desktop environments. The result is there is no standard device manager or way to fix hardware problems, so any software problem gets blown out of proportion by relation.
But really, Linux Mint for new people, non-Unity Ubuntu for the middle user, Debian / Arch / Suse / Gentoo for the hardware with a command line fetish.
I think we are generally heading in a single direction though. Debian has become the distro tree for consumer Linux, because its package system beats everything else at navigation. Meanwhile, Red Hat / Fedora wins at the server space, because it is so customizable down to the Kernel modules even at run time.
Everyone else, really, is just reinventing the wheel. It is better to start arguing with the people working on X or RPM or some other already built up codebase application than to say "well, they already spent 10 years on it, but I'm sure we can reinvent it and make it even better than the already at market product in a few months, because we are motivated!".
captaincharisma
Glorious
- Oct 13, 2004
- 10,963
- 76
- 45,290
wow it is no wonder they are bad in the dektop world. anyone wanting to take the plunge wouldn't know which version to go with and which version will be able to work with all there hardware.
halcyon
Splendid
- Dec 4, 2004
- 5,566
- 0
- 25,810
[citation][nom]Zanny[/nom]Linux Mint for anyone new to Linux.The biggest problem with Linux is that there is no standardized GUI viewpoint into the kernel. Whenever you have a driver problem, or some device isn't working, or a program crashes, either you interact with the kernel via command line or you use GUI applications like GNOME's task manager that are built on top of it and rarely compatible across desktop environments. The result is there is no standard device manager or way to fix hardware problems, so any software problem gets blown out of proportion by relation.But really, Linux Mint for new people, non-Unity Ubuntu for the middle user, Debian / Arch / Suse / Gentoo for the hardware with a command line fetish.I think we are generally heading in a single direction though. Debian has become the distro tree for consumer Linux, because its package system beats everything else at navigation. Meanwhile, Red Hat / Fedora wins at the server space, because it is so customizable down to the Kernel modules even at run time.Everyone else, really, is just reinventing the wheel. It is better to start arguing with the people working on X or RPM or some other already built up codebase application than to say "well, they already spent 10 years on it, but I'm sure we can reinvent it and make it even better than the already at market product in a few months, because we are motivated!".[/citation]
Why would someone go through this when they can get a Mac/OSX or a PC/Windows? ...THAT is why Linux is not more successful. It doesn't compete in the way that is important for at least 90% (I'm being generous) of the users, who just want their computers "to work".
Its 2011, going on 2012. Computers have become commodities for most of the industrialized world. They need to work as well as your toaster or refrigerator for everything you want to do with them. The closer a computer is to that goal the more popular it will be with the non-enthusiast. This is why Windows and OSX do as well as they do. More features but easier to use...with each version.
Why would someone go through this when they can get a Mac/OSX or a PC/Windows? ...THAT is why Linux is not more successful. It doesn't compete in the way that is important for at least 90% (I'm being generous) of the users, who just want their computers "to work".
Its 2011, going on 2012. Computers have become commodities for most of the industrialized world. They need to work as well as your toaster or refrigerator for everything you want to do with them. The closer a computer is to that goal the more popular it will be with the non-enthusiast. This is why Windows and OSX do as well as they do. More features but easier to use...with each version.
- Status
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram