Please get me right, this is not a rant against linux.-iphigenie
And then you go on to rant about... Linux.
I am a big fan of opensource, i think it is the future and have been saying it for over 15 years. I have forced it down the throat of numerous people... But it is not perfect, it does not have the monopoly on innovation, good ideas, efficency.-iphigenie
Who's making this "monopoly" claim?
But as someone who has used many OSes, I get tired of the arrogance of some linux users, an arrogance that often makes claims that are totally untrue.-iphigenie
Again, who exactly is confusing distro flaws with the kernel? Neither is perfect, and no one is claiming them to be. In fact, I've never even read anyone claim such a thing. What follows is a matter of defining terms such as "Linux," "free software," "open source," and the difference between a "distribution" and the Linux kernel.
The one that really irks me is that many of the claims are linked to things used by linux distributions which arent at all linux. They are used by linux, but they come from other projects, other people, and they existed independently of linux. Open souce is not Linux! Most innovations do not come out of linux, they are just compiled on it or ported to it.-iphigenie
But Linux is open source software. I sense a straw man argument here, unless you mean that Windows will not run those programs. I'm not sure. Most of the major apps on Linux are cross-platform to Windows.
Innovation happens in open source projects, and also in closed source projects, and in universities and companies. Most of it does NOT happen in linux distributions, very few innovate in anything (very few write anything apart an installer and package manager, very few create anything except a wallpaper and icons), all the rest comes from other projects.-iphigenie
Of course. What's the problem, then? A project like the Fedora distro serves as a testbed for the Red Hat Linux server software. Every other major version is a disaster because it's bleeding edge, not leading edge. (Fedora 10 is fantastic, whereas 9 was user hell.)
Innovation finds its way onto major linux distributions after it appears elsewhere. Now some people involved in some distributions volunteer on some of the innovative open source projects, but that is usually after these projects have left the forefront of innovation. Neither is there that much innovation in the linux kernel, it is all about stabilisation and steady performance on multi cores these days (as it should be!!! don't mess with it!!!).-iphigenie
Yes indeed, and the problem again is? The real "innovative" advantage to Linux occurred as it was being built: scalability to any device. I don't know
anyone claiming innovation for distros, except lots of newbie praise for Ubuntu since 2006.
And while we are at it, gnome is not linux, kde is not linux, gimp is not linux, firefox is not linux, apache is not linux, perl is not linux, openoffice is not linux, reiserfs is not linux, iptables is not linux, mysql is not linux neither are the hundreds of librairies everything rests on, or the applications everyone uses, or the windows managers, or the games... oh sorry, i ranted about this already.-iphigenie
Glad you cleared that up, or did you? Let's clarify our terms.
Linux = the kernel.
GNU/Linux = the larger OS and free software surrounding it, and used to build the kernel.
Distribution = distributions change the appearance and function of Linux completely. They range from large, fully supported complete systems (endorsed by companies like Novell, HP, Red Hat, Sun, IBM) to lightweight ones that fit on a USB memory stick or run on old computers (often developed by volunteers). The Ubuntu family is currently the most popular "distribution."
Open source =
Open source is a development methodology.
Free software =
Free software is social movement; more specifically, it is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.