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."
Thread beginning with comment 372964
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: would take google os any day
by Laurence on Sat 11th Jul 2009 16:10
in reply to "RE[4]: would take google os any day"
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.
Member since:
2006-01-23
As soon as GRUB starts, you notice the Linux kernel because of the list. Non-technical users should never see that. It's good to see that Ubuntu has limited the periodic file system check to the login display, instead of showing a scrolling display of text which will once again confuse the non-technical.
Again, that's not the kernel, that's the init scripts, which are user space.
Plus I don't know which distro you're using/used, but most desktop distros hide the output from the init scripts behind a graphical screen. In fact, graphical booting has been a included feature for many a distro for a good number of years now.
I know Arch and Slack have a text boot, but those are aimed squarely at the geeks who like to tinker and not the average home PC user. [/q]
Maybe, the "Ubuntu" in my comment should have been a clue as to the distribution being used. ;-) Besides, where did I say that the GRUB display was the kernel? That list is certainly evidence of the kernel. The more things shown, the more confusion ensues, especially when they can no longer see their "safe" Windows in the list.