To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Have you ever counted the amount of Linux distributions available in Distrowatch, each with different set of APIs, many ignorant of the LSB, disparate packet systems, development tools, ...?
Just today I can see around 300.
I did groceries on the weekend and was shocked, SHOCKED I say, to find that there where several options to choose from in every product category.
Ok, jokes aside, if we're being honest then it's not every potential Linux based OS distribution versus X. We're comparing fragmentation to Windows; a single vendor's OS distribution. We need OS distributions which intent to compete for desktop installs.
Novell? Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop and Suse Linux Enterprise Server.
Red Hat? Red Hat Enterprise Linux (server) plus a desktop option.
Mandriva? Three versions when I was last in that world; Free, One and whatever the paid premium was.
Canonical? Ubuntu, Kubuntu and Ubuntu Server?
That's four major vendor options with a maximum of three product versions each? Should we look back at Microsoft's list of current version Windows OS SKU?
Have you ever counted the amount of Linux distributions available in Distrowatch, each with different set of APIs, many ignorant of the LSB, disparate packet systems, development tools, ...?
Just today I can see around 300.
Actually most of them (if not all) will have API compatibility. The differences between distros is largely only skin deep.
And LSB just states states what must exist, not the default. Hence why Debian is LSB despite preferring .deb over RPMs; because Debian also offers support for RPMs even if it doesn't prefer them.
The real issue between Linuxes is with API version numbers between bleeding edge distros and the older / stable-focused distros. Which is why package managers come into their own. However that's akin to compiling a .NET 3 application and then complaining that it doesn't work on .NET 2.




Member since:
2012-01-13
I am not a coder. I am a power user, and I do some sys admin and user interface work. So excuse me if I am wrong - here we go - Actually I find Windows more fragmented then Linux. Windows has xp, vista, 7, 8; various servers; WinPhone 7; winphone8; now we have a seperate ARM version (was there a lack of Windows-versions??); home/student/enterprise/professional/media/ etc versions; English/French/Spanish (Windows has seperate programs for every language - the concept of language packs was too simple I suppose?); a jungle of licenses and activations; and a general tendency to make simple things very complicated.
The linux landscape is for me (as a non-expert) much simpler. Yes, some applications requiere certain frameworks, but I never had problems with that..... might be different if you code though.
Edited 2012-07-15 14:42 UTC