Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Wed 8th Jul 2009 18:34 UTC, submitted by rlem6983
Google's recent move of revealing the Chrome OS to a suspecting public has put a great many people on alert. Some say it's a major privacy issue, some say Google oughtn't to become more and more monopolistic, while others think that the wide array of popular Linux distributions shouldn't become even more fragmented than it already is. "Google's decision to create its own Linux distribution and splinter the Linux community decisively once again can only be seen as foolhardy and self-obsessive.
Instead of treading its own path, Google should have sought to leverage the stellar work already carried out by Mark Shuttleworth and his band of merry coders and tied its horse to the Ubuntu cart."
Permalink for comment 372968
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-03-26
Besides, where did I say that the GRUB display was the kernel? That list is certainly evidence of the kernel.
Nice "safe" windows is evidence of the kernel.
You can't have an OS without a kernel so the fact the OS even exists is evidence of the kernel.
By the way, sorry for assuming you meant it was the kernel. the previous poster made referrence to the kernel so I assumed you were following on from the same thought.
The more things shown, the more confusion ensues, especially when they can no longer see their "safe" Windows in the list.
Agreed. But like I said, the init scripts have been hidden from home users for years now and even the grub menu itself can be skinned, options auto-selected and shown for as long or short as the users / distro developers want. so the whole grub arguement is moot.