Mark Shuttleworth, the founder of Ubuntu Linux, has explained why he thinks the DCC (Debian Common Core, but don't let the Debian guys hear that) will fail. "The vision behind DCC, which is indeed compelling, is that it would provide a common platform for certification, and that the distros that make up the DCC would all ship exactly that same core. But it strikes me that this approach has never worked in the past. In fact, every distro ALWAYS modifies elements of the core, and with good reason. And while we would love that not to be the case, the truth is that the reasons to specialise outweigh the benefits of homogeneity."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-07
You say "The administration of a GNU/Linux system is easier then both APPLE and Microsoft , because everything is upgraded and secured , not just the base" and "Binary is the problem , it work on one single system , static and source are always better and the way to go it you whant your application to work.
Surely you jest. Administering a GNU/Linux system may be easier for an experienced admin, but for the average home user? Have you used an OS X machine for extended periods of time? Drag and drop install of applications. Drag your unwanted applications to the trash and voila it's uninstalled. I use Linux as much as the next geek, and to say that OS X is harder to administer than Linux is misguided at best.
One of the major hurdles Linux is facing is the lack of the ability to run binaries on all systems. We've all experienced them, being unable to install a particular binary because it wasn't packaged for our system. Diss Windows and OS X all you want, but with Windows, most programs work with Win9x all the way to XP in a single binary. Same goes for many programs in OS X. No, open sourcing everything is not the answer, as there are many commercial software companies who are jittery about releasing all code.
So no, as Linux is Poo mentioned, homogeinity is key if you want desktop Linux to succeed. Anything that simplifies things for the user is going to help.
Member since:2005-07-06
Define "desktop Linux". If you're talking about the corporate desktop, then the things you mention are really not that important. Instead, what is important is the ability to maintain a large number of machines with minimal effort from an experienced admin. Linux excels in this regard much more so than does Windows or OS X.
Attacking the home desktop market with Linux is, at this point, a useless endeavor. The home desktop market sucks. The margins are small, the customers are demanding, and the required software base is enormous. The business desktop market, in contrast, is much less varied, with bigger support contracts and knowledgeable customers (professional IT folks). Why try to sell 100 copies of Linux to 100 different home users, all of whom need different software, and none of whom will pay for technical support, when you can sell 100 copies to a single company to install on 100 PCs all running the same software, along with a nice fat support contract?
Edited 2006-01-04 21:11
Member since:2005-07-06
No , the major GNU/Linux problem is driver and hardware maker support , I know that instalation "Drag and drop" style of software is not what anyone would consider the only thing to do when administering a system ( Klik exist ).
Its not because you allow your vendor to sell you binary software only that the system is the problem , if it run on one GNU/Linux it can be made to work on all GNU/Linux system. Your vendor just choose to remove your ability to do so , not GNU/Linux. BTW I whant to see you install *ALL* windows 98 software on XP and *All* Mac OS 9 software on Mac OS X , yet binary compatibility there is never a problem , its the software fault in those cases , yes right ...
I Agree Open Source is shit alone , because of some of the traitor license who allow closing of the source. Noble principle who cant work in reality in human society as show by 35 years of existance ( Open Soure created everything in IT ).
Linux is Poo is wrong as usual and so are you , people dont say my Debian is not blue Like Mandriva or Brown Like Ubuntu so its not working , they say it dont work because the hardware they bought whas not made for GNU/Linux and the community as not yet made driver for it. Go look at the desktop of your friend , unless its in a closed corporate environment not one is similar to the other after a couple of days of use.
Before you continue Crying and ranting and foaming at the mouth :
- Most people dont install OS
- Most people dont install software
- Most people dont administer there System
- Most people go out and buy turn-Key
For the momment GNU/Linux dont have its own Dell like turn-key vendor. For the rest people think there is no support vendor for GNU/Linux.
BTW why do you need to install software , GNU/Linux as Live-CD and DV this days ?
Member since:2005-07-17
but that long term binary compatibility is why windows is so hole-ly! programers have to always choose to cut off customers or to write secure programs for windows... in addition the binary "push forward" of releases sees versions constantly requireing "compatibility" modes that emulate the bugs of old versions.
The advantage of the OSS way is that when you recompile and repackage a program it gets made up-to-date... using all the latest patchs for all the libraries it needs. If something breaks, it breaks because it should be fixed and it's not done like that anymore. It makes the pain of security spread out over time rather than big huge bites of incompatibility at once.
Of couse, that's why commercial companies like binaries... they can require you to purchase new versions to fix "bugs" that shouldn't have been there anyway. Also, the binary thing is a bit of a sore spot with most of the core OSS development teams. They opened their work up for everybody, and it's core operating system work... it's rather silly for driver and utility makers to complain about opening their work for just one part in a whole system. Also, there's the fear that if the core OSS parts get to have too stable a binary base they can be co-opted by sheer mass of programs that "require" each other with hiden binary only stuff. We already have binary only nVidia drivers, what if a proprietary program for DRM media required them? video editing? playing music? every cool little web app your kids want?? sooner or later the core binary players have cornered the market away from the very people that created it... sure you'd have "linux" but it wouldn't work with "real programs" without paying "tax" to a cabal of driver writers.
Member since:
2005-07-06
GNU/Linux is homogeneous over all the diferrent distibution and category of distributions.They all use the same software , kernel , basic tools , DE , WM , Xserver etc ... Whats not homogeneous about that ?
You really think that because a platform exist , and its all the same that vendor/driver will pay to make there version run on any platform ? Why is there absolutely NO BSD's support at all then , beeing the oldest and if we follow the lies of some who dont know what freedom means freest ?
The administration of a GNU/Linux system is easier then both APPLE and Microsoft , because everything is upgraded and secured , not just the base.
"and binary applications that will run for ages and ages on the same kind of system?"
Binary is the problem , it work on one single system , static and source are always better and the way to go it you whant your application to work.
"What could be more important than that"
Freedom , Right of ownership , Security , Access to all regardles of any racism or special criteria (economics) , Evolution , possibility to build on the shoulder of giants , etc ...
"unless you're not actually interested in Linux adoption?"
The kernel come with every GNU/Linux distribution.
Shuttelworth as shipped more GNU/Linux CD , DVD , computer and as done more for all of GNU/Linux adoption then the vaporware from the DCC and all the member who are in it.
GNU/Linux system and Real OEM vendor will come in time , Just as they did in every other category.