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

Groups > alt.comp.freeware > #253346

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

Show all headers | View raw

On 1/25/2016 9:15 AM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Yrrah wrote:
>> "One of the things that some people say about the Linux platform is
>> that it's fragmented (...)."
>
> article:  "This means that some vulnerability found in Android, most
> people won't even get an update for it. It also means that the Android
> platform, in its entirety, is the most exposed. That is fragmentation."
>
>
> IMO, the first point the article wanted to express was to contrast one
> concept of 'fragmentation' of the android platform as opposed to what
> one might call the 'diversity' of the gnu/linux platform.
>
> (other article) Today's DistroWatch had a section addressing the
> comparison of the gnu/linux platform with the BSD platform.
>
> The words used to address that were that gnu/linux wasn't an operating
> system, but a family of closely related OSes, as is BSD.
>
> So, whether you want to call the android family (or the gnu/linux or the
> BSD) family diverse or fragmented or to turn it on its head and call it
> 'unified', you/one must surely conclude that the variables make for
> differences that must be dealt with somehow.
>
> Those similarities and differences, including their differences from
> other evolving OSes such as the Wins and the Apples are part of what
> their 'operators' and administrator/users have to deal with.
>
> Many people who use the OSes of their mobile and stationary devices
> would like to have LESS learning curve to deal with rather than more.
> What is a 'boon' to a developer in terms of the power of flexibility of
> a platform may be a bane to those who are new or less experienced with
> the nuances of their device's OS.
>
>
Problem with that "boon" is that there's no way for a developer to test his
app in combination with any combination of all the other stuff in the
biosphere.  All they can do is throw it over the transom and let the
users figger out all the compatibility issues.
For commercial hardware and software vendors, that translates
into support costs that they can't recoup with sales revenue.

On the user end of that stick, if you have a problem, you google for
a solution.  You get a zillion hits.  The one you pick won't work for
you because your version of this distro with that user interface
came with a different set of tools and utilities.  So, you try to load
those tools and run into another layer of potential incompatibilities
to deal with.  It's the linux onion of tears.
Fix one thing and another lies beneath.
Often it works, but there are still many cases that don't.  Bad news
travels faster than good news.  All it takes is one thing you
absolutely need, but doesn't work for you.

Desktop linux needs to ATTRACT developers and users alike.  Current
strategy of driving newbies away isn't working.  CHAOS is not better.

A first step to the solution might be a single desktop linux distro with 
fixed
defaults and a VERY EASY GUI way to make it anything you want from
the single repository where everything has been vetted and works with
everything else.  All you'd need to create any custom distro would
be an install script running off the same repository.  It would all stay
updated with fully evaluated updates to the repository and JUST WORK.
When you googled a problem, the solution would use tools you already
have installed and work on files in fixed/known locations and formats.
All it really takes to make it happen is LEADERSHIP and a community
willing to follow.

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