Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Jan 2012 13:30 UTC, submitted by davidiwharper
Mandriva, Mandrake, Lycoris Somewhere in 2001, I bought a computer magazine which came with a Linux CD. I had heard of Linux before, but while we did have broadband back then and was technically capable of downloading a Linux distribution, this method was far easier. This was my first foray into Linux - it was Mandrake. Now, though, it seems the curtain has really dropped for the French Linux company.
Thread beginning with comment 502753
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Good News
by sbergman27 on Tue 10th Jan 2012 21:34 UTC in reply to "Good News"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

True enough. But in all fairness, they did manage to suck at business for 13 years. Which is, I suppose, worth something. They even hobbled through a (French equivalent of) chapter 11 bankruptcy back in the day. I'm with you, though. Competition on a "survival of the fittest" playing field is good for Linux. It's not like we don't have enough distros.

Edited 2012-01-10 21:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Good News
by spiderman on Wed 11th Jan 2012 07:35 in reply to "RE: Good News"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

We don't have enough distinct distros. We have hundreds of Ubuntus with different wallpapers. Ubuntu itself is 99% dependant on Debian. There are different distros but they all specialize in a niche. There are few general purpose desktop distros.
"Survival of the fittest" means no desktop GNU/Linux, only Windows. MacOS should have died 13 years ago. Windows on the Desktop and GNU on the server. No BSD, no Solaris.
But anyway you don't care as long as it's not the distro you use. It's just Mandriva after all, isn't it?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Good News
by sbergman27 on Wed 11th Jan 2012 16:51 in reply to "RE[2]: Good News"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

We don't have enough distinct distros. We have hundreds of Ubuntus with different wallpapers. Ubuntu itself is 99% dependant on Debian. There are different distros but they all specialize in a niche.

Nonsense. Right off the top of my head I can divide the desktop distros into 3 major families with different philosophies: Debian family, Redhat Family, SUSE family. Or divide them another way: Fast & Loose (Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, OpenSuse...), and Conservative (RHEL/CentOS/SL/SLED).

Granted, there is a bit of a glut in the fast & loose, for newbies subcategory. And it would probably be better if that were pared down a bit.

MacOS should have died 13 years ago.

Apple has a solid product, which would qualify for the Conservative category, were it a Linux distro. Certainly, it's been of sufficient quality to blow the doors off Linux regarding desktop market share, even though it is hampered with the same market disadvantages, re: Windows as Linux bears, but comes at a premium price compared to the Linux giveaway.

But anyway you don't care as long as it's not the distro you use. It's just Mandriva after all, isn't it?

I use several distros personally and professionally. Don't get so emotionally involved with Mandriva. It's one of (too) many in the same class. And it appears that its time has come. Since you're already familiar with Linux, I'd suggest graduating to one of the enterprise desktop clones. Having the very latest packages used to be a benefit. But the Linux desktop has matured to the point that, today, it's more of a damned nuisance.

Edited 2012-01-11 16:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Good News
by zima on Mon 16th Jan 2012 23:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Good News"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

"Survival of the fittest" means no desktop GNU/Linux, only Windows. MacOS should have died 13 years ago. Windows on the Desktop and GNU on the server. No BSD, no Solaris.

Well if you yourself say that Windows is better suited for the desktop than Linux... yeah, I'd say it deserves to continue dominating, in such case (while we watch over and pair down any abuses of that ~monopoly; in itself it isn't a bad thing, only its abuses are)

Though it seems you naively interpret "survival of the fittest" (or even what "fittest" means) as not far from "survival of the one" ...look around you sometimes, that's not nearly what evolutionary processes unfold - starting from possibly / essentially one organism, or at least a fairly similar group of very basic ones.
With most noticeable differentiations, diversity, explosion of new possibilities happening during the last half a billion years, when pressures increased drastically (when other life became the biggest one), when organisms started to die as a manner of "habit" (earlier, before sexual reproduction, they didn't really ever die - essentially at most just destroyed)

Oh well, another organism dies, but its code moved on...

Reply Parent Score: 2