Linked by Christian Paratschek on Thu 23rd Sep 2004 05:59 UTC
Editorial After reading Adam Scheinberg's original article "The Paradox of Choice" and Kevin Russo's response, I want to add my personal comments to this discussion. I will quote Adam and Russo several times and pick up their arguments.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
By Sardaukar (IP: ---.dyn.optonline.net)
by Wolf on Thu 23rd Sep 2004 17:17 UTC

You misinterpreted my comments and well congratulations if you 7 year daughter can install software on linux. She must be a genius.

I will re-quote my comment again for you:
Too many distributions is bad if they are only minor variants of existing ones and doesn't provide true value. Also if they don't provide 100% binary compatibility than its even worse. It affects:
1. Users - who now have to make sure they everytime get a correct version of the application. If they downloaded application on a slow connection and then they upgrade to a newer distro, shouldn't the archived application be able to install itself? I would want it to work fine. I don't want to go to the pain of reinstalling every single damn application on my box and then making all its settings.
2. People want software to work. Period. Software should *just* work. And to be true, it 99% of the time works fine on windows. In linux unless u get it right, it will never work.
3. Too many incompatible distro means programmers are screwed because they have now much more burden on them. This tends to turns programmers off the platform. Reason, programmers likes to focus more on creative work rather than doing shitty work like maintaining same code for 10 different distros.

Same goes for companies. They turn to Linux thinking it will decrease TCO but if they need to do some much more maintainence then their TCO will increase. Windows TCO is higher due to Viruses and Patches but their excellent backward compatibility and application support lowers the TCO. The day Microsoft gets rid of these viruses and have a secure platform (they already have stable platform with XP and 2003) then Windows TCO will dramatically redduce and i really feel that the chance of Linux that time becoming a major platform other than in developer world will diminish to ZERO, if it didn't fix the 100s distribution issues.

Choice is good if it has a *value* and that too a distinct value. Too much choice with no value is *BAD*. Too much choice is a slippery slope and IMHO if Linux keeps going this path, it will not be able to come back with a sustained growth.