Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Oct 2009 12:07 UTC
I'm in a bit of a pickle here. I have an Atom 330-based tiny computer which I use as my HTPC. It performed its job fine running Windows 7 and Boxee, and over the past few months, it ran Mac OS X Leopard with Plex. Now, however, I want to try Linux as an HTPC operating system, but I kind of ran into a roadblock there with Ubuntu 9.10 - so the question is: what is a good HTPC Linux distribution?
Thread beginning with comment 392079
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[10]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by sbergman27 on Fri 30th Oct 2009 23:38
in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
Member since:2005-07-24
Maybe we could call it a "distribution".
That's reasonable. And yet I can't help but feel that we could do better by adding some overall strategy at somewhat finer grained levels. What good does it do if the DE is at its peak if Xorg is in the cess pit phase of its development cycle? KDE was at an embarrassing nadir for a year of more. Xorg has been at an embarrassing mess for about a year. Shouldn't we all at least try to come together in some semblance of order, from time to time, just to see how we're doing? Are we a total flop? Or are we capable of getting it together when we really want?
RE[11]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by smitty on Fri 30th Oct 2009 23:50
in reply to "RE[10]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
Member since:2005-10-13
Shouldn't we all at least try to come together in some semblance of order, from time to time, just to see how we're doing?t?
That always sounds really nice, but think about what it is really asking. You're talking about thousands of different developers, spread out across the globe, all working on their own timetables suddenly coming together with a single purpose. I just don't see that happening. The proprietary world has an advantage here with the Cathedral approach to software development and a clear hierarchy.
Edit: But you could certainly try to have a few key groups release synchronously, like X + Kernel + Gnome + KDE. That's basically happening now with them all moving to 6 or 3 month timed releases.
Edited 2009-10-30 23:52 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-10-13
We are all in this together. All the projects. And yet each project acts as if its own schedule existed totally independent of the whole.
If only there was some kind of group out there that existed, which could look through the projects and only upgrade to newer versions when they weren't in complete disarray, and stick with older versions of the software when newer stuff broke.
Maybe we could call it a "distribution".
I mean, is it really KDE or X.Orgs fault that Ubuntu ships broken software? Shouldn't someone at Canonical have realized that shipping working software is more important than bumping a version number?