A Unified Linux

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2086365,00.asp

I don't know if it was posted before. If it was, delete it. If not, shoot

 

On the other side:

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/55412.html

 

Hello,

Consolidation of Linux is not a bad idea, alongside existing variety. It's the variety that makes it so attractive. On the other hand, you need a simple unified approach to attract unknowing masses.

As to EU vs. Vista, my prediction is that in 10-15 years, EU will be the exclusive Linux domain while Windows will remain popular in USA.

Mrk

 

I see your point. Linux is also attractive to todays users because of the variety. But with this move, standards could be created, in order to develop drivers, programs, etc. that can easily be adopted by a wide range of distros.
Then the appeal would be greater to add support for Linux. For average joe and me that's one of the most important things, easy compatibility. As you say, the masses.

Diversity need not be afected. It's still open source.

Lets see your predictions. So far there has been some indicators in that sense (governments, etc.). The World does seem to be changing in this respect, but don't quote me on that, yet.
I only predict this: untill Jully, i will switch

 

I'd agree

Supporting articles

France - http://www.newsfactor.com/news/The-...o-Microsoft/story.xhtml?story_id=13000CYN8S0K

Germany - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39283603,00.htm

India

1. http://www.hindu.com/2007/01/18/stories/2007011801800700.htm
   
2. http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/sep2006/gb20060921_463452.htm
   
3. http://mandriva.blogspot.com/2007/01/tamil-nadu-india-may-shut-door-on.html

Georgia Public Library - USA - http://enterprise.linux.com/enterprise/06/12/04/1538214.shtml?tid=101

Google will reveal many more hits.

While I like the idea of standardizing some 'core elements' and file structures, I'm dead set against a single Linux, it's the diversity of the specialization of different distros that really keeps Linux evolving and fresh.

 

It's not about a single Linux, as i said. See this:
The Linux Foundation
And an explanation:

Also, the about page is good to see what's the objective. It's not about making a single Linux OS.

 

I probably got the links here in Wilders, but it's worth posting here. Linux approaches the masses:

Software installation on Linux: Today, it sucks (part 1)

Software installation on Linux: Tomorrow, it won’t (with some cooperation) (part 2)

I'm glad this is happening. Whatever method is employed, installation of software must be simple as in Windows, or almost, and there must be some basic rules that apply to the mainstream Distros, in order to develop software for "Linux".

Other distros can simply ignore this (for diversity, user preferences...), but some/most cannot.

 

Apart from using Linux via Acronis I have never knowingly used Linux.

Having various favors of Linux has not been my main reason for not moving away from Windows - the idea, which may not even be correct, that I would have difficulty running my software has been the main reason for not changing.

Will Paperport 11 work with Linux ? will my wireless Canon printer be ok ? what about my visioneer scanner ? does DVDRebuilder come as a Linux build ?

Then I get a headache and can't be bothered. One day when I have some spare time I will probably try a copy.In the meantime if Linux is to even think about penetrating the mass market it needs to show that it will work out of the box and not require the end user to know a great deal.

 

Maybe security concerns can arise here
This is the only possible problem i can see, but i don't know if it is a problem.
In usability, it would be a little revolution.

 

I hope this does happen. I have wasted time looking and asking questions in various forums and all he time I was given obscure commands to enter in which made no sense and never achieved the object. Then someone (not you ) posted a link and indirectly I found an automated scpipt to do the job. I an not interested in going to command mode, I just want it to work. As it says in the blog, I want to click on install and for it to do it. However even when it does run smoothly I do not see the options of where to install or where to place it in the menu system.

 

We posted at the same time .

Yes, that's what i think. Ubuntu, SUSE and maybe others are getting there, as to work from start. But software availability is an issue. The ones that these distros already provide, will install painlessly. But anything else out of this picture seems to envolve work.

I have to rush and get the hard part
Next year it may well be too easy, and harder to learn the in's and out's of Linux

 

Linux is already unified, linux is a kernel, period. Each distribution adds onto it with different ways of starting, organizing a file system, package managing, etc. This choice is good, but very intimidating for a new user.

Installing applications is actually much easier in linux than windows. Say I want to install firefox? Type pacman -S firefox and guess what, I have firefox installed ready to go. If I want to upgrade my entire system including every application, I type pacman -Syu then I'm done. Much simpler then windows if you ask me. Also, there are GUI frontends for this application, so it is all done graphically for those who prefer it.

Debian, ubuntu, arch, and gentoo all have large repositories that contain practically every single thing I need.

If I need to install something obscure that is not in the repository (I haven't found anything yet except for dwm, which is configured through the source code), then I download the source code, extract it, the just type ./configure, then make, then make install and it is installed. Also very easy.



Alphalutra1

 

Alphalutra1: thank you for the Linux' user input. Yes, it seems to be simple to install programs on the list. Maybe i won't need anything outside of the list, but it isn't simple. One has to learn. I want to , but the masses and people who don't find the time want a simple way always.

But anyway, i think the main problem is for software vendors, that don't find it profitable to develop software for each distro. It's the Windows trap. So, the real question for you, Alphalutra1, is do you think the solution above is the right way?


On a side note:
http://linuxmafia.com/~karsten/Rants/spyware.html
It's huge, but i can't stop reading. Debian seems much more appealing now

 

On the last link:

I don't know what to make of all this. I have to think about it more i guess...

 

The thing is, that software vendors DON"T develop software for each distro. They release the source code, which then each distro has its own developers who are in charge of compiling it and writing all the rules of where it needs to install, then it is available. However, for closed source projects, the same thing occurs, except they just take the binary (that the vendor already compiled for linux in general) and tell it where to install along with its documents.

For conveniece though, some software vendors compile prebuilt packages for specific distros (usually the most popular ones such as debian and opensuse or the ones that there developers are using)

So yes, I do feel it is the right way, having individual repositories with thousands of applications on hand for users, ensured to work with their system.

Cheers,

Alphalutra1

 

I'm reading from the GNU.org site, and i must say, there's more to it.
Alphalutra1, you should have said something about it. Now i begin to understand. Free software, different from open source, why things are the way they are, etc.

It's a good read, though a long long read

 

Cheers for that.

Would be impossible to make a single linux, I mean we would have to get over the KDE V Gnome issue for starters

 

Hello,
I absolutely love KDE, but recently I've started liking Gnome too. My SUSE machines are all KDE, Buntu machines go 50/50 between KDE and Gnome. Slacky and Gentoo are Xfce - most of the time.
Mrk

 

Haven't seen KDE yet. I have to check that out.
Also, as my syg. says, now i understand what GNU is. The OS discussed here is GNU/Linux, and there will be a GNU HURD, all GNU.

 

kde is great!
as you can see in my other thread im building my own pc and it costs me £50 to get windows xp home oem.
i will dual boot linux on it and will probaly then not use my current pc.
if i didnt get xp home oem on it i could probaly get a better cpu or gpu but i dont really want to have just linux on it since im just starting to learn linux
lodore

 

Good lodore. Some day i'll...

Another read: Linux, GNU, and freedom, by Richard M. Stallman.

He's not very kind to Linus himself, either. It doesn't look good for the latter