Is there really any difference between one Linux distro and another?
Other then packaging:
variant choices of desktop environment (slim or not)
preinstalled application.
distro name
logo
community
rpm or deb.
I’m not putting down Linux I think it is a great operating system, but also see that it is run by a community that has a mindset with no real focus. Reinventing the wheal over and over and over again. Nothing wrong with doing so to learn or even share. But there should be one and only one officially supported and managed operating system for the home and business sector. The rest should only be considered results from personal development, enhancing code, features, creating new proposed software for the official version . personal use and sharing. And should be noted as such. Linking back to one officially managed standard Linux and package system. Linux could be so many more years ahead of Microsoft and OSX.
Linux is it’s own worst enemy. They think they are fighting a war against Microsoft. But the troops are only marching to drum beats of distro’s egos. So many chiefs. Microsoft is just laughing. How does Microsoft manage to sale products that are known to unstable over free products. Well its the only choice. Linux just has too……… many choices (really just pkg customization, custom names, and logos). But the average person doesn’t know that. And linux user will argue differently. But it is the same. Some better packaged then others. But the same nonetheless. None linux user think "which way do i go, which way do i go, ah yes Microsoft the choice is clear." Same thing applies for Game development Shops.
You might not agree with this scary thought ( I say scary because for some linux people its like tearing off their hearts) but what doesn’t grow eventually goes out of scope in life. Remember Eventually Microsoft, OSX will master each and every technology to great perfection. The effort of Linux will become nothing more then a college project and history knowledge. Your passions lives through the code past down and perfected, from one generation to another. Your code.
I hope the Linux community gets its act together. Or there is always PC-BSD (Free-BSD + user friendly). They are short on developers but they have one and one focus. Real centralize effort with infocies on quality all the way from the code. If I may say so.
I much rather on the deb side I much rather use Debian then any of the forks. mint, unbuntu,kubuntu,ubuntu ultimate addition,etc … Xandros, Knoppix etc… I tried ubuntu and loved it, I got curios so I tried debian. I didn’t see a difference, Other then the fact that debian is much more stable and the others are prepackaged. The difference is an illusion. Its just some logos here, name there,wall paper, prepackage so software, packaged choices of desktop, etc..
From the deb side I would go with Debian. On the rpm side I would go with Centos. Debian = Centos.
imho their should be only one official standard linux. Runned by some form consortium. If only the distros could put their ego aside.
I much rather on the deb side I much rather use Debian then any of the forks. mint, unbuntu,kubuntu,ubuntu ultimate addition,etc … Xandros, Knoppix etc… I tried ubuntu and loved it, I got curios so I tried debian. I didn’t see a difference, Other then the fact that debian is much more stable and the others are prepackaged. The difference is an illusion. Its just some logos here, name there,wall paper, prepackage so software, packaged choices of desktop, etc..
From the deb side I would go with Debian. On the rpm side I would go with Centos. Debian = Centos.
imho their should be only one official standard linux. Runned by some form consortium. If only the distros could put their ego aside.
Tagged with: average person • beats • business sector • chiefs • choice linux • custom names • deb • desktop environment • egos • game development • history knowledge • mindset • operating system • own worst enemy • passions • personal development • personal use • quot • rpm • wheal
Filed under: rpm
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Ya its true, what started as a free revolution has not turned commercial with a lot of commercial and free linux distros. Major difference between Linux distros is that they are technical variants of Linux and come with different bundeled software.
Putting Linux, beware I have heard only one software Wine that can help you install MS Office and other software on Linux. Wine itself is under development and some distros don’t support it.
Try mint linux ot ubuntu they are more friendly. Try following website to choose between distros, before installing Linux and moving away from Windows all together. Some don’t support Yahoo messenger & other VOIP services. Some are too technical to install, while others would prove to be a shocker. My advice if this is your first time, use Virtual PC or Virtual box that enable running of Linux within Windows or VMware to run to virtual OS before completely migrating.
http://desktoplinuxathome.com/distro.html
Yes there are real differences between Linux distributions, however I have a profound philisophical difference with you. The problem for me, as someone who essentially learned the Mac OS on the Mac plus) Windows (3.1) and X-Windows simultaneously is this sentence:
"The effort of Linux will become nothing more then a college project and history knowledge."
Linux is where it is, for good and bad, for one reason. Micro$oft. Their efforts to remain the default desktop for EVERYONE while defining WHAT you do on your computer has meant that it’s getting harder and harder to do many of the things people started using computers for UNLESS you are a power user. In other words, Linux has spread because it is the OS of last resort for many things. Nicholas Negroponte’s pulling back from Sugar on OLPC can hardly be a surprise to those who remembered the speech where he called EVEN the Linux kernel bloated. Of course Windows is worse but Andy Tannenbaum was the first to criticize the Linux kernel’s size — back when it was first written. Linus Torvalds is a pragmatist and it should be understood that from the start the kernel has been a pragmatic compromise.
To me what is REALLY upsetting is the number of artists who complain that they are being forced to work on Vista — with its large memory footprint restricting file size — by their employers, or the Londone FTSE running Windows Servers when even Micro$oft outsources to a Linux corporation. People are dumb and the choice of OS is generally not rational. It is especially not rational when you look at Linux, however the distributions which CAN succeed is as much determined by Microsoft’s determination that all development take place on THEIR platform.
There will ALWAYS be a need for an OS which is optimized for prototyping, and what is WRONG with that?
To answer your question, though, I’m doing this on a dual boot gentoo and slackware laptop. I originally installed Fedora Core, but the combination of KDE4.x and selinux motivated me to go back to gentoo. Unfortunately gentoo can be tricky (you don’t INSTALL the kernel, you recompile it) and my problems eventually made it so unstable I had to reinstall. Around then I was playing with dyne:bolic and digging under the hood where I found installpkg removepkg and the other pkgtools in /sbin and /usr/sbin — yes, despite its Win-friendliness and so forth dyne:bolic is a SLACKWARE derivative. I couldn’t resist. After all, Slackware can be stable and you do install the kernel. I chickened out and used an install disk though. In essence, it gave me a stable platform to work out the tweaks of my gentoo install, however having switched to slackware current I managed to make my install unstable enough so I am now sometimes using gentoo to fix that. On the other hand I have yet to figure out why x-windows takes so long to start on gentoo (though it has improved to five minutes from seven) while on slackware it just starts right up. I don’t use a display manager anyhow (I start it in text multiuser mode then type "startx" when I’m ready for the gui). Since I do have debian on my other machine and occasionally still mess with Fedora I can assure you that there CAN be SUBSTANTIAL differences between distros, though others are nothing more than remastered derivatives (dyne:bolic, hikarunix…)
Back thirty years ago the Underground was more "respectable" than it is today. More people knew, for example about the Pacifica Foundation and even supported it. FreeBSD and Linux reflect that part of the subculture. Unfortunately it is no longer as respected and we are forced to have our tools defined for us to some extent. What you regard as the bush leagues I consider ONE OF Linux’s most important uses because this is precisely an audience Micro$oft turned its back on when they went to Windoze. The idea of it becoming the predominent operating system is repulsive. Red Flag Linux and these other totalitarian derivatives are very clever but NOT USEFUL. I recently read that Suse actually has more market share in China than Red Flag — though of course the authorities deny this and the source which I won’t name is suspect.
I don’t want the "triumph of Linux" in other words. I want Chaos. I want choice. I want freedom for everyone to
exploit disruptive technologies. And no I am not alone.
EDIT: Some hours later I won’t take this back. But look in the /usr directories for major distros like Debian Fedora Slackware or Gentoo and BELIEVE ME you will see differences. They won’t be apparent and first but they are there.