Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.freeware > #253358

Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united"

Show all headers | View raw

On 1/25/2016 11:53 AM, Yrrah wrote:
> "One of the things that some people say about the Linux platform is
> that it's fragmented (...)."
> Using the term fragmented to describe Linux is not correct. If
> anything, Linux is one of the most cohesive platforms available right
> now and that's actually really easy to prove. The biggest problem
> Linux has seems to be the large number of distributions available, but
> that's only an illusion.
> For the most part, there are only a few big ones, and the rest are
> pretty much filling various niches.(...) They all share the same core,
> the Linux kernel.
> This is the backbone of the operating system and its single piece of
> code. The illusion of fragmentation is also given by the many desktop
> environments and window managers available right now, but that's also
> related to user preferences, more than anything else.
> The glue that keeps all the Linux platform together is something that
> prevents the very idea of fragmentation, the GPL license.(...)
> Linux is not fragmented at all. It's a solid block of code that moves
> in all directions and a single direction at the same time. This is the
> reason for its security and the huge diversity it is capable of.
> <http://news.softpedia.com/news/saying-linux-is-fragmented-is-wrong-this-is-why-499386.shtml>

That was lame in so many ways. Someone had a deadline to meet and just 
threw out some babble. Wish I could get paid for putting out crap like 
that.

-- 
Mark Warner
...lose .inhibitions when replying

Back to alt.comp.freeware | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

"Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Yrrah <Yrrah-acf@acf.invalid> - 2016-01-25 17:53 +0100
  Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-01-25 09:15 -0800
    Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-25 12:26 -0800
      Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-01-25 12:57 -0800
      Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" »Q« <boxcars@gmx.net> - 2016-01-25 15:05 -0600
        Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mark Warner <mhwarner.inhibitions@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:25 -0500
      Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-25 20:24 -0200
      Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Spamblk <ZapSpam@SpamMeNot.invalid> - 2016-01-26 13:49 +0000
        Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" »Q« <boxcars@gmx.net> - 2016-01-26 09:10 -0600
          Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Spamblk <ZapSpam@SpamMeNot.invalid> - 2016-01-26 19:34 +0000
  Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mark Warner <mhwarner.inhibitions@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:28 -0500
  Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 22:05 +0800

csiph-web