Is Linux moving too fast?

[hhhhhx]

Ive recently been reading a bunch of articles about Linux's (specifically Ubuntu) progress, and after after some more time on my own system, testing linux's limits, it seems to be that there are very few things Linux cant do. And everyday it is like i read one more article about some new feature in Linux. SO anyway to get down to my point, what happens when there is nothing more for Linux to do. Is Linux moving too fast that when it has crossed all of its ground people will be disappointed because its not developing fast enough?

This is just my personal opinion though. I know Linux is still a good bit shy of Microsoft or apple (market, not power/usability). I am just talking about when Linux gets there.


xhhux

[Whiffle]

No. There will always stuff to be added/improved, new hardware, new things to play with, etc etc.

Besides, theres always the "keeping up with the joneses", windows and mac..

[~LoKe]

There are no limits in computing. There's always another level; if not, we'll make one.

[ramkumail]

Hi,
I dont think linux has to stop when it equals (by 'equals' I refer to hardware support and cool apps like 3d games, office 2007 GUI and good voice support for Gtalk which i am in need badly) commercial softwares. The amount of people involved is so large that it will never saturate since creative ideas will dominate development of linux rather than just compatability issues and bug fixes. We are already witnessing such situations with compiz fusion. By the way it will take linux atleast another four or five years to become a dominating market force which is important if it wants to have good hardware drivers from 'all' manufacturers. I look forward for the day when a label of hardware reads 'compatabile with kernel x.y.z.a'

Edit: what a fast responding community ubuntu has. Before i finish typing my post two new posts have appeared. Well I might have to reconsider 'four or five years' to 'one or two years' in my post.

[Presto123]

Unlike a date that many people can't get rid of, no, it's not moving too fast. :P

After all these years of seeing Linux as something I could never fully figure out to this day that almost any mid-level tech savvy person can work with...it's come many leaps and is always improving.

I'm definitely cool with Linux moving fast. :)

[~LoKe]

Unlike a date that many people can't get rid of, no, it's not moving too fast. :P

After all these years of seeing Linux as something I could never fully figure out to this day that almost any mid-level tech savvy person can work with...it's come many leaps and is always improving.

I'm definitely cool with Linux moving fast. :)

According to your sig, God uses improper synthax. *IMPLOSION*

[delphiguy]

I don't think that it is moving too fast, but at least almost everyday I heard
of people ditching out windows for Ubuntu, and this is healthy for Linux.

No OS can move too fast because theres always new hardware and
technology to support.

But what is true in my opinion is the adoption rate of Linux is steadily
increasing.

[LaRoza]

Ubuntu does a very good job of keeping up with hardware, which is the main goal.

Linux works on very old computer, and the newest. Its development is perfect (well, as perfect as it can be in this world)

[adam.tropics]

..what happens when there is nothing more for Linux to do..

We train more people to 'do' Linux. One of the obvious benefits of everyone having been doing their development jobs so well, is that we have accumulated a great number of users with less, for want of a better word, geekyness! Bringing them up to speed in the way of the penguin is a community effort as important as the actual software development itself, and one that also will need a huge community effort. But things are definitely getting better.

As mentioned above though, there will always be the next big project, because one thing you can be sure of is that the moment there isn't, someone will create it.

[fatality_uk]

That's like saying, "Is dating super model Elle MacPherson bad because she's just TOOOO pretty?"

The answer is no :D

[SoberWarlock]

I don't think there is such thing as moving too fast. There will always be a problem for everything, but will be fixed.

[insane_alien]

there is no such thing as perfection. everything can be sped up, trimmed down, bolted on, taken away and generally improved upon in every regard.

if you don't feel that way, try sticking with windows 98.

[Tundro Walker]

The reason Linux seems to be "moving fast" is because a lot of the capital / financial hurdles have been removed.

When a company develops things for profit, they'll add small steps of innovation, because they want to recoup a profit margin from each. But when you remove that need, you can toss innovations in it as soon as they're developed, without having to number crunch "ok, if we put it in here, we'll only get $X, plus folks will expect more, so let's pad it out until next version". Thbbbttt...

Linux has all kinds of folks attacking its problems from all kinds of angles, from the kernal programmers, to the distro maintainers to the hobbyists that like to see if they can get some totally off-the-wall combination of hardware to work on it. All of that merges together, because you don't have to stop and bicker about who gets what cut of royalties, who's patents you're infringing, do you need to pay these people to use their lib, etc, etc...what a headache.

So, yes, Linux seems to move fast, because there's nobody purposefully stepping on the breaks so they can pick up the change on the side of the road as they drive by.

[barbedsaber]

untill there are enough distributions and they are all perfect ( so that everone has a distro that suits them) then fast movment is the best thing we could have.

[Samhain13]

...I look forward for the day when a label of hardware reads 'compatabile with kernel x.y.z.a'

Maybe we're not that far off? Picture shows a box of a Genius Look 316 camera, arrow pointing to an emblem that says "Linux Support". True enough, I used that very camera to take a picture of the box. :D

[samjh]

I like to use old-fashioned military analogies when comparing Linux with larger commercial OSs.

Linux (and other free Unix-like projects) is like numerous small warlords. They don't have large logistical requirements, and each warlord only commands relatively small hosts. So they move quickly and are unpredictable. Some warlords work together, some dont. Some get crushed by larger armies, some fight amongst themselves, and face losses. Some, such as the forces of Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, and Fedora clans, manage to successfully harass larger armies by innovative tactics. Some warlords have backing from larger armies, such as Novell and Red Hat.

Microsoft Windows is like a massive army with a big logistical tail. It tends to move somewhat slowly but have the strength to crush almost any other force that stands in its way. It is little a awkward at dealing with raiding parties who use speed and unconventional tactics. But due to its large size, it remain mostly secure against small warlords. It uses its strength to force opposing nations and alliances to pay tributes to it in exchange for protection, such as the forces of Novell. It is a force both fearful and feared.

Mac OS is like a small but tough warrior nation. Throughout history it has constantly surprised larger armies by using the advantage of home terrain and innovative strategies. It remains mostly secure against small warlords, and has even incorporated some warlords, like the Mach and XNU warbands, into its forces. Larger armies look upon it with weariness, occasionally attempting probing attacks which rarely succeed. Its chief enemy is Microsoft Windows, led by General S Ballmer.

[HermanAB]

There will always be a 'next big problem' to tackle.

Linux is much more than just dinky little desktop applications. Desktop use of Linux is only a tiny fraction of the total number of Linux machines out there.

[Tundro Walker]

So, Linux is like ... Feudal Japan or Africa

Microsoft is like cold-war Soviet Union

And Apple is like ... what, China, North Korea?

What would that make BSD?

[samjh]

So, Linux is like ... Feudal Japan or Africa

Microsoft is like cold-war Soviet Union

And Apple is like ... what, China, North Korea?

What would that make BSD?
Doesn't really fit. I was talking about old-fashioned military analogies, like in the ancient Roman era.

Microsoft Windows = Roman Empire and its Legions.

Linux distros = various anti-Roman rebel factions and raiders in the Empire's fringes. Notably the Germanic tribes, Jewish insurrectionists, British Picts, etc.

Mac OS = Similar to the Parthian/Persian Empire.

[daou]

Difference between Linux and MS Windows:

The MS crowd are mostly in one big installation. They see and hear the same things everyday. It's difficult to innovate many new things if everyone has the same mental stimulus. There is also a lot of group-think going on. If someone comes up with a bad idea, but thinks it's good, chances are that most of their colleagues will think so as well. That's how they end up churning out a Vista.

Linux developers are all over the world. They have very different world views because they live in very different circumstances. This creates a lot of new and fresh ideas. And no one is forced to swallow the beliefs of the group. If a developer thinks someone else is working on something completely useless, they can ignore it and do their own thing. I would also say that Linux developers have a completely different motivation for development, being mostly volunteers that have to be excited about their field.

So if it seems that things have stagnated in Windows, it doesn't necessarily mean Linux will have that problem.

[wiscoteiger]

I like to use old-fashioned military analogies when comparing Linux with larger commercial OSs.


Microsoft Windows is like a massive army with a big logistical tail. It tends to move somewhat slowly but have the strength to crush almost any other force that stands in its way. It is little a awkward at dealing with raiding parties who use speed and unconventional tactics. But due to its large size, it remain mostly secure against small warlords. It uses its strength to force opposing nations and alliances to pay tributes to it in exchange for protection, such as the forces of Novell. It is a force both fearful and feared.


I always wondered why ******* was so virus prone :lolflag:

[PriceChild]

Ever heard that famous (mis?)quote
Everything that can be invented has been invented.?

[Dimitriid]

re:gaming.

Point, set and match.

[phoenix5002]

sry if my post is a little late ;) Just thought I'd bring it back with a different outlook.

Anyway, I was just thinking, you all are saying that there will always be stuff for linux to do. Which is so true, I couldn't agree more, however if you look back at the origional post he says some stuff about the speed, ppl will be dissapointed that it isn't moving fast enough.

So to go along with what PriceChild said I'll use another similar example. Take the field of physics. Although there will always be things to study and ways to move forward it becomes increasingly difficult. Physics hasn't changed much in about 50 years. It's funny how I'm reading a "Modern Physics" book but everything in there was discovered around 1920-1950 (just ballparking it).
NOTE: I'm refering to the set and accepted standard model, not currently unaccepted theories.

So although there will always be things for linux to do, it may eventually begin to prove to be too difficult to progress at any reasonable rate. Of course were talking far far down the line...

[regomodo]

we could always make the current tech better, i.e. more efficient, faster, bug-free

[k2t0f12d]

There are physical limitations the will ultimately prevent the hardware from being improved in meaningful ways. Since the transistor, there has been no change whatsoever to the fundamental design. It has been refined and improved to a razor sharp edge, but no completely new technology has presented itself.

The capability to actualize an idea in software is limited to the capabilities of the hardware, and the political, legal, and social restrictions that have been placed on its development, particularly by patents. I think that the present state of software in no wise exploits the hardware anywhere near the edge of its envelope. Without an analogously militaristic control of the hardware, and restriction of information, the dam erected by the proprietary model will (and some say has) burst, and the revolution of software will boggle the imagination where it is simply catching up to scale with the perfection of the hardware.

[L815]

In my strange world, simplistic progresses to complex, which in turn converts to complex progresses into simplistic.

It's an endless ongoing cycle, and computers are a great candidate for such an expression.

Take a complex computer language, Make another language making that language simple to use. Eventually it gets too simple, so then that language becomes complex, adding more and more to it. The cycle goes on and on and on....

[forrestcupp]

what happens when there is nothing more for Linux to do

Until we can sit in our recliner chairs and control all of our household appliances, and telepathically communicate with people across the world just by thinking about it because of a chip implanted on our brain that runs on Linux which also immerses us in Virtual Reality gaming and media by stimulating our brains, there will always be more for Linux to do.