What's wrong with linux?

[deri]

I am just trying to start a conversation what's messed up on Linux. What's not working like it should. Tell me your opinions.

I think we are waisting lots of resources developing several kernels at same time. And publishing so many different distros.

I am happy because Linux finally has native steam client. It will benefit the hole linux community to have native linux games.

[Elfy]

Thread moved to Recurring Discussions.

[nothingspecial]

I think we are waisting lots of resources developing several kernels at same time. And publishing so many different distros.

Well, that's kind of the whole idea.

[deadflowr]

You're not really starting a conversation, but rather joining one.

For my two cents though, the oft heralded fragmentation of the gnu/linux world, is a benefit for all, as diversification is a good thing.
Monotonous development has a habit of creating some horrible stuff.

[presence1960]

How would you like it if your favorite ice cream shop only offered vanilla...Although I still have windows on my machine I rarely use it. Having one flavor would be the equivalent of what windows is about. A lot of us have abandoned windows altogether or use it sparingly because we don't agree with the way Microsoft operates. So no, we don't want linux to become an open source version of windows. Diversity and competition keeps everyone on their toes and honest. In that type of environment everyone wins.

[deri]

But you don't have the time and money to test all the ice creams that the shopkeeper offers. Seriously there is something like 100 distros. And that's not even all of them. I don't see this amount of distros improving the hole community.

I don't know exactly how this thing works.

But let us assume that I have a distro called mylinux And I create a feedback site like launchpad for it. To fix issues, problems, bugs etc.

Going through those posts and trying to figure them out takes a lot of time.

And I bet that those same issues are on other same linux that was used to build mylinux.

I am trying to say that we are trying to fix the same problems multiple times.

[tartalo]

There are so many Linux distributions because the software licenses allow it.

This article talks about some of your concerns:
http://go2linux.garron.me/mt/linux-h...butions-1.html

If that article doesn't convince you, there are many more to choose from: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=why+so+man...+distributions

[deri]

How about the work used to maintain several kernels that are basically doing the same thing, newer just better supported.

[3rdalbum]

The Ubuntu community is better than the wider Linux community, but there's some seriously bad attitudes being displayed lately amongst Linux users. I've heard Ubuntu users being called "morons" and worse, and a lot of people seem to be saying that Ubuntu is destroying Linux or something like that.

I looked at the proposed features for the new Fedora. It's all under-the-hood stuff and things that might only excite server admins. Where are the headline new features? The innovation? The daring attempt to try something new? When was the last time you heard about a distro other than Ubuntu really doing anything new and exciting?

It seems like most other distros, perhaps even all, are so afraid to rock the boat and actually do anything rather than bump software versions every six months. Maybe it's more of a traditionalist movement - "Everything is just easy enough for us current users, let's keep everything how it is. It'll keep the riff-raff away too".

And it's not just the distros. What about major new features in the leading software? Everything has reached a plateau of mediocrity - you might be able to get some amateur work done with the software, but it's not particularly nice to use nor does it have the number of features of proprietary competitors. You know what software I'm talking about: Gimp, Inkscape, Scribus, Audacity, and Libreoffice to a certain extent.

I would happily let the rest of the Linux community stagnate and die off for the way they're talking about us, but unfortunately there aren't enough Ubuntu users to actually write decent desktop software. It also seems like software development needs disciplined management, not just coders; whereas in FLOSS there's lots of coders but almost no management. Hence, one of the biggest new features in Libreoffice has been that you can now use Firefox themes on it. What about something actually useful? The same with Gimp - it took them literally years to implement single-window mode, when professionals have been asking for the same features they're used to in Photoshop.

The problem is not "too many projects". That's never been the problem. The problem is too little management, too little competition with the proprietary software that we're trying to entice people away from, and too many people willing to badmouth others based on petty distro preferences.

[nothingspecial]

But you don't have the time and money to test all the ice creams that the shopkeeper offers. Seriously there is something like 100 distros. And that's not even all of them. I don't see this amount of distros improving the hole community.

I don't know exactly how this thing works.

But let us assume that I have a distro called mylinux And I create a feedback site like launchpad for it. To fix issues, problems, bugs etc.

Going through those posts and trying to figure them out takes a lot of time.

And I bet that those same issues are on other same linux that was used to build mylinux.

I am trying to say that we are trying to fix the same problems multiple times.

That's not how it works. Ubuntu devs fix Ubuntu specific issues. If a bug is raised in launchpad about rhythmbox, for example, the bug is sent to the rhythmbox project, who fix it and send the fix back to Ubuntu and all the other distros.

If the bug is at kernel level, the bug is sent to the kernel devs who fix it and send the fix to Ubuntu and all the distros.

So having lots of distros and lots of bug trackers does not hinder development so long as the bugs get sent to the right place.