“A number of Linux vendors will announce on Thursday that they have agreed to standardize on a single Linux distribution to try to take on Red Hat Inc.’s dominance in the industry. A media advisory issued on Tuesday said executives from Caldera, Conectiva, SuSE and Turbolinux on Thursday will make ‘a major announcement that will change the shape of Linux worldwide.'” Read more at eWeek.
Linux Vendors to Standardize on Single Distribution
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
If people are already standerdizing on Sun/Redhat for now, why try to Make another standard for people to try and stick to. Why not just make redhat the standard since it already is? Not like Suse ever had anything to offer, they have the worst distro of them all
So now that a Linux company is actually making progress the religion splinters and is attempting to overthrow the most successful Linux company ever.
Sense? No.
When was the last time you saw Linux users or vendors agree on anything? Thursday’s “news” will be no news at all.
I always thought, Linux Standart Base was created to standatize all distributions, so that developer can write software which runs on all distributions. Now we have two opposite parties and maybe in a few years the same situation like with Unices. 🙁
>>Why not just make redhat the standard since it already is?<<
Well why not just make windows the standard and scap all other OS’s since it all ready is the standard. I think it is good they are trying to get some uniformity. I wonder what each of these vendors selling points will be then if they are the same, will they just be about support?
I am confused by the above comments. How does merging several disparate distributions into one qualify as “splintering” the market? Personally, I would call that “consolidation”.
Also, we should all stop trying to improve Linux because one version sells more than the others?!?! I guess we should just trust one big company to do what’s best for us, rather than offer alternatives, right? After all, that’s the model that’s served us so well for all these years!
I am missing something here.
> So now that a Linux company is actually making progress the
> religion splinters and is attempting to overthrow the most
> successful Linux company ever.
> Now we have two opposite parties and maybe in a few years the
> same situation like with Unices. 🙁
Thank god for those wonderul, non-commercial Linux distributions!
As long as they are around, Redhad, Suse, Caldera etc. can fight as much as they want, people still have great alternatives.
And I don’t just refer to Joe User but to corporations that ship Linux systems as well. For instance, HP (where Bruce Perens works) has been using debian for a while now.
[i]Well why not just make windows the standard and scap all other OS’s since it all ready is the standard [i]
If Windows was a standard that could branch off into other distributions, then sure why not make it a standard. The problem is that its owned by one company that wants all the control including what is standard for the entire computer industry. This is bad.
Linux does not have this problem since most distributions are made up of thousands of different people from hundreds of different places.
Since Red Hat has already established itself then why not have a Red Hat linux-like standard. Think of how many distributions out there are already based on Red Hat anyway.
Not like Suse ever had anything to offer, they have the worst distro of them all
Personally, I think Mandrake is the worst and RedHat is a close second. Mandrake’s installer is pretty, but what you’re left with afterwards is not. RedHat always seem to leave something small, yet very important undone. RedHat releases always have the look of a rushed product instead of a polished one. I think Caldera offers the most polished distribution.
As for SuSE, I think they offer one of the best localized and internationalized distributions. Caldera’s is also very nice, but takes a little more effort to set up than SuSE does.
For all you computing needs, however, you just can’t beat Debian.
Not like Suse ever had anything to offer, they have the worst distro of them all
Do you not like RedHat because everything works out of the box? How horrid, you can’t sit at your computer trying to ge your soundcard to work for 5 hours. You might have to … gasp… GO OUT AND GET LAID.
Debian is for those little script kiddies who like to have colored bash prompts, and talk with bitchx all day.
Personally, I think Mandrake is the worst and RedHat is a close second. Mandrake’s installer is pretty, but what you’re left with afterwards is not. RedHat always seem to leave something small, yet very important undone. RedHat releases always have the look of a rushed product instead of a polished one. I think Caldera offers the most polished distribution.
As for SuSE, I think they offer one of the best localized and internationalized distributions. Caldera’s is also very nice, but takes a little more effort to set up than SuSE does.
For all you computing needs, however, you just can’t beat Debian.
Listen up, shit-head – we all know that NONE of the linux dorqs get laid. It’s the *BSD and Solaris admins/hackers that get all the tuna
Hey, the time I don’t spend setting up linux, means I can go to work to make money to pay for a hooker!
Now I know that you’re not a TRUE linux fan/zealot. Everybody knows that linux kiddies are afraid of women because “they have coodies”. Linux babies are also afraid of corduroy, leaving their parents basement and coming to terms with their own sexuality.
The food was not undelicious
Could be worse, you could use bsd. Bsd users have come to terms with their own sexuality. They sit in their parents basements rubbing corduroy all over themselves pretending its chewbaca giving them sweet sweet kisses.
Listen pal, She’s not a “chewbaca”, she’s Italian. All women of that descent are a little harier!
Priceless!
Well this conversation sure degraded quickly.
This is most definitly a good thing.
While it’s clear that Linux does need some standardization, I’m not so sure this is the best way to go about it. Even if this new distro is successful, you’d have Red Hat vs the new distro and then there would still be Slackware, Debian, Gentoo, etc all doing their own thing. So, what does this accomplish besides having one more big commercial distro?
I think a better way would be to get all of the current distros to standardize on things such as package managers, login scripts, etc. Of course, I realize that even if such a thing were possible, many longtime Linux users would consider such a thing an abomination, but it would sure make things a heck of a lot easier for those who are getting their feet wet with Linux for the first time, if (for example) you could run the exact same command in any distro to install your apps. (As apposed to rpm, apt, pkgtool, etc).
…is binary-compatibility between distros. Sure, it’s “l33t” to be able to say “I compile all my applications from source!”, but it’s also a pain in the ass for people who want to actually *use* their computer.
With Microsoft and Apples already gobbling up 99.99999% of the desktop market, it’s good to see there is so much interest from such a number of companies fighting for the leftovers.
A dominant standard isn’t goot (ej. windows), and who wants a second m$ in the linux world (redhat)?.
A lot of standards make scrap (lonux.org reports more than 150 linux distros). . .
and the crazy thing. . . distros based on RPM (redhat’s RPM) want to make an wannabe-of-anti-redhat standard.
😮
BSD rules.
If people are already standerdizing on Sun/Redhat for now, why try to Make another standard for people to try and stick to. Why not just make redhat the standard since it already is? Not like Suse ever had anything to offer, they have the worst distro of them all
Linux companies are standardizing on Sun?
Anyway, Red Hat’s disstribution isn’t the best distribution. If RPM breaks, which often does *snicker*, its next to impossible to manage the system. Unlike Debian, where stuff are kept away properly….
So now that a Linux company is actually making progress the religion splinters and is attempting to overthrow the most successful Linux company ever.
Sense? No.
Makes some sense to me, Caldera, Suse and Turbolinux should have more market share when combined. They are overthrowing a sucessful Linux company. Why? Red Hat has the potential of killing them off one by one…
When was the last time you saw Linux users or vendors agree on anything? Thursday’s “news” will be no news at all.
The last time was on LSB. Since LSB was not there to improve business for the distribution, I think the news would be significant for the Linux community.
But I just hope it is better than RedHat, and not the same old crap where they say “Its Different”.
Well why not just make windows the standard and scap all other OS’s since it all ready is the standard. I think it is good they are trying to get some uniformity. I wonder what each of these vendors selling points will be then if they are the same, will they just be about support?
Windows became the de facto standard. Why should we follow an defacto standard if we want a piece of the market too?
I am confused by the above comments. How does merging several disparate distributions into one qualify as “splintering” the market? Personally, I would call that “consolidation”.
From what I read, they aren’t merging, but going to use the same standards, so its compatible. Besides, how is a US company gonna merge with a German and a company.
CliMonkey: Amazingly, I got Mandrake 8.2 up in 20 minutes, SuSE 7.3 up in 20 minutes and Debian up in 2 hours.
While it’s clear that Linux does need some standardization, I’m not so sure this is the best way to go about it. Even if this new distro is successful, you’d have Red Hat vs the new distro and then there would still be Slackware, Debian, Gentoo, etc all doing their own thing. So, what does this accomplish besides having one more big commercial distro?
I think a better way would be to get all of the current distros to standardize on things such as package managers, login scripts, etc. Of course, I realize that even if such a thing were possible, many longtime Linux users would consider such a thing an abomination, but it would sure make things a heck of a lot easier for those who are getting their feet wet with Linux for the first time, if (for example) you could run the exact same command in any distro to install your apps. (As apposed to rpm, apt, pkgtool, etc).
Leave Gentoo out of this. Gentoo is made for hobbyist who wants to compile all their apps, nicely optimized for their system. This doesn’t spell well for major mainstream distros.
With Microsoft and Apples already gobbling up 99.99999% of the desktop market, it’s good to see there is so much interest from such a number of companies fighting for the leftovers.
Actually, Linux has 2% market share in the world. 😀
A dominant standard isn’t goot (ej. windows), and who wants a second m$ in the linux world (redhat)?.
A lot of standards make scrap (lonux.org reports more than 150 linux distros). . .
and the crazy thing. . . distros based on RPM (redhat’s RPM) want to make an wannabe-of-anti-redhat standard.
Oh, so by being the only profitable software-only Linux company, and the largest Linux company that actually helps in the development of GNOME, GNU tools and the kernel, they are evil? This is proof enough that you guys see RedHat is evil because they secured a high market share. If some other company, say Suse, becomes number one, there would be a lot of anti-Suse distros?
Anyway, I went for a search of RedHat based distros, and read up 20 of them, they all came to existance because RedHat doesn’t target that niche and this niche and doesn’t have their distro for that platform and this platform…
From what I read, they aren’t merging, but going to use the same standards, so its compatible. Besides, how is a US company gonna merge with a German and a company.
This suppose to read:
From what I read, they aren’t merging, but going to use the same standards, so its compatible. Besides, how is a US company gonna merge with a German and a Japanese/Korean (?) company.
“From what I read, they aren’t merging, but going to use the same standards, so its compatible”
isn’t that what LSB is for?
Muthaf*ckers!
Why gang up on RedHat?
Microsoft is the real enemy. And Bill Gates is Satan incarnate.
Instead of trying to attack Redhat, the other distros should find out why RedHat is (barely) commercially successful.
It may be that Redhat is making money through targeting the enterprise and large corporations.
Whatever, as several posters have said, they should follow RedHat’s distribution standard.
Otherwise, they will be playing into Microsoft’s evil hands.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the Microsoft scumbags are behind this somehow.
The ‘divide and conquer’ strategy worked well for the Roman Empire for hundreds of years.
You make an excellent argument! I am sitting here thinking of all the hookers I missed out on while wasting time trying to setup linux! Damn! Oh well I made up for it while in Amsterdam a few weeks ago!!
Well personally i think they have taken the right decision.
The lacks of Linux (against Windows) is the large amount of distributions that disorient almost everyone.
A standard distribution could have more penetration on the OS market (RedHat is now considered “the” Linux, that’s why thay considered a standard)
This new competitor to Red Hat will be beneficial
to all users (including Red Hat users).
I believe that standardization will take a great leap forward thanks to this.
Let the game begin, Darwin rules.
I think this is a good thing. It will force Red Hat to add an extra bit of polish and sparkle, and United Linux will come up with a smooth distribution to really push for the top of the linux pile.
Over the next 5 years the worlds companies who haven’t upgraded yet will leave behind Windows 95/98 and Windows NT (a phenomenal amount), and many if not the majority will move to linux. Being the best linux distribution will be an enviable spot indeed.
>So now that a Linux company is actually making progress the religion splinters and is attempting to overthrow the most successful Linux company ever.
I love all this talk about how “competition” is going to be a bad thing for end consumers (whether business or home). And Linux is supposed to be communist with all these companies fighting for market share?
And what has “religion” got to do with this? This is a business decision by a group of companies who feel that they will make more money by sticking together. I’m finding it more than pathetic that anything to do with Linux is tagged as “zealotry”, even when involving nothing more than a quick buck. Your knee-jerk reaction sounds like zealotry to me….
>Now we have two opposite parties and maybe in a few years the same situation like with Unices.
Assuming that this “United” Linux will differ significantly from RH which it may not do. I think this grouping is an attempt at market branding more than anything. Besides, it represents the consolidation of several distros.
>Debian is for those little script kiddies who like to have colored bash prompts, and talk with bitchx all day.
Like all those *nasty* l33t kiddies who work for Hewlett Packard. Bastards.
>So, what does this accomplish besides having one more big commercial distro?
Pardon my maths, but making 1 distro out of 4 makes… minus 3? Fewer distros surely? And less “disorientation”
>With Microsoft and Apples already gobbling up 99.99999% of the desktop market, it’s good to see there is so much interest from such a number of companies fighting for the leftovers.
Umm, I think the entire thing is for the business and enterprise market, not the desktop “Joe User” market. Linux has a larger percentage than that (which is growing bigger by the day).
isn’t that what LSB is for?
To my knowlegde, LSB is currently only targeting the file system, and it seems the only people that are following the standards are guys that haven’t release their wares (like Xandros).
Why gang up on RedHat?
Microsoft is the real enemy. And Bill Gates is Satan incarnate.
Red Hat is a much wiser choice. Because Red Hat is an closer enemy, and it would be harder with Microsoft. Before you start running, try crawling.
[b[Instead of trying to attack Redhat, the other distros should find out why RedHat is (barely) commercially successful.
It may be that Redhat is making money through targeting the enterprise and large corporations.
Whatever, as several posters have said, they should follow RedHat’s distribution standard.
And they must team up with their closest rival to kill of an incredibly big company with 40 billion dollars in their banks….
They could go along with Red Hat’s de facto standards, which isn’t the best in the first place, and forever be called a Red Hat clone…
[b[I love all this talk about how “competition” is going to be a bad thing for end consumers (whether business or home). And Linux is supposed to be communist with all these companies fighting for market share?
Read the communist manifesto, a real eye opener.
[b[Pardon my maths, but making 1 distro out of 4 makes… minus 3? Fewer distros surely? And less “disorientation”
From what I read, its 3 distributions, completely compatible, following the same standards. We’ll just wait for the official announcement. I doubt its a merger. Turbo targets Asia Pacific, while Connectiva targets Latin America and SuSE targets Germany. They also have different goals and market they are targeting. Connectiva for example, is all for the desktop.
Microsoft is the real enemy. And Bill Gates is Satan incarnate.
I thought Bill might be the false prophet, unless you are talking about MS accounting practices, in which case we are talking about a false profit.
http://unitedlinux.com/ <— there
its going to be another lame binary os with less configurability than a real NIX system andy real user would make their os from scratch not get it from a company or in this case a few companys
>> I am confused by the above comments. How does merging
>> several disparate distributions into one qualify as
>> “splintering” the market? Personally, I would call that
>> “consolidation”.
> From what I read, they aren’t merging, but going to use the
> same standards, so its compatible. Besides, how is a US
> company gonna merge with a German and a company.
As it turns out, they are merging their distributions into one, as I said above. Obviously they are not merging companies (although it is possible to merge a US company and a German one – there are many multinational corporations, Daimler / Chrysler being a prime axample).
I have no idea whether UnitedLinux will end up being a good thing, I am very anxious to see what they come up with.
No, this is NOT one single distro, each member of UL will have their own distro. They will just adhere to a set of standards, that’s all. And it’s very good.
Also, Slackware, Gentoo, RedHat, Mandrake etc. can join anytime they want. The door is open.
This is excellent for the consumer AND for the administrator! This commoditizes Linux, while adding value and features to it!Each vendor will have to adhere to UL, while compete based on added features that DON*T break the standard.
And if RedHat decides not to join, all the better for the consumer: we have a strongly polarized market —> higher level of competition —> Good Thing (TM)
Looking at what looks to me like a thread full of 4th-graders, I fear that it’s a waste of time to mention that United Linux isn’t a standard, it’s a coalition of Linux vendors who want to produce a server product that’s better than Red Hat’s. If it’s better than RHL, then it stands an even better chance against Windows, no? Maybe this can be a catalyst for a productive discussion…
Shice, I don’t know where you got the idea about binary incompatibility, but I have to say that you’ve been badly mislead. There are only two kinds of Linux binaries, a.out and ELF. Support for both is in the Linux kernel, so it’s not a matter of distributions. And since ELF has become the standard since before kernel 2.0, all current distributions of any consequence all use the same binary format.
Is it possible that you were thinking about FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD etc. and not Linux? Or maybe you don’t understand that binaries compiled for one hardware platform will not execute on another?
Finally we can start making applications for Linux. Great!
its going to be another lame binary os with less configurability than a real NIX system andy real user would make their os from scratch not get it from a company or in this case a few companys
1) The sourcecode is provided
2) There isn’t any releases, a bit hasty on the judgement, no?
3) It is the core of the OS, so ISVs and IHVs can create one set of applications/ drivers for 4 different distros.
As it turns out, they are merging their distributions into one, as I said above. Obviously they are not merging companies (although it is possible to merge a US company and a German one – there are many multinational corporations, Daimler / Chrysler being a prime axample).
They are not merging distributions. They are creating a new core Linux distribution where each distributor could add their own stuff (for example SuSE wants KDE default, but Connectiva switches to GNOME, but both include libraries for GNOME and KDE). In other words, all four distributions are based on one standard distribution.
As for merging, merging companiess from different countries is extremely expensive, something all four companies couldn’t afford, and even if they could, I doubt they could merge Connectiva in, cause they have a lot of restrictions in Brazil.
I have no idea whether UnitedLinux will end up being a good thing, I am very anxious to see what they come up with.
Enjoy Linux, cause it is only Q4 2002 (in other words, Q4 2005, LOL), it is released. And then distributions from SuSE, Caldera, Connectiva and Turbolinux would take even more time, cause they would have to release migration releases.
So in other words, no point being anxious now, it is not for a long time more.
No, this is NOT one single distro, each member of UL will have their own distro. They will just adhere to a set of standards, that’s all. And it’s very good.
But one thing I don’t like about UnitedLinux is that only companies can join, so people like Debian who could be compliant with UnitedLinux, in fact maybe based on it, couldn’t have “Powered by UnitedLinux”, nor can they contribute their own ideas. In other words, the more cash you got, the better.
This is excellent for the consumer AND for the administrator! This commoditizes Linux, while adding value and features to it!Each vendor will have to adhere to UL, while compete based on added features that DON*T break the standard.
I don’t know. UNIX was kept behind because of Open Groups standards….
Anyway, it is only 4 distributions joining. Few of them are in clear financial crisises. There are more than 150 distributions. And since to join UnitedLinux, you must be a company with $$$…. I don’t know if it would work out.
Looking at what looks to me like a thread full of 4th-graders, I fear that it’s a waste of time to mention that United Linux isn’t a standard, it’s a coalition of Linux vendors who want to produce a server product that’s better than Red Hat’s. If it’s better than RHL, then it stands an even better chance against Windows, no? Maybe this can be a catalyst for a productive discussion…
I agree with what you said, except that UnitedLinux is made for servers. Participating companies can push UnitedLinux is any dirrection as long they are based on it, and compatible with it. So SuSE caan build an workstation distribution of UnitedLinux while Turbolinux could build a embedded Linux distirbution (I’m not sure of the later, but it just illustartions)
Shice, I don’t know where you got the idea about binary incompatibility, but I have to say that you’ve been badly mislead. There are only two kinds of Linux binaries, a.out and ELF. Support for both is in the Linux kernel, so it’s not a matter of distributions. And since ELF has become the standard since before kernel 2.0, all current distributions of any consequence all use the same binary format.
But it pooses a problem if you link to any other software besides the Linux kernel. Software like libraries, applications and servers are placed in different places by different distirbutions, making it difficult for ISVs to build one package and ship. Drivers also depend on software other than the kernel too, like printer drivers might depend on CUPS, while GPU drivers might depend on XFree86.
Is it possible that you were thinking about FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD etc. and not Linux? Or maybe you don’t understand that binaries compiled for one hardware platform will not execute on another?
You can with emulation (yes, another lame joke).
Finally we can start making applications for Linux. Great!
If you are talking of corporate needs who build their own apps, I don’t know how this would help them, cause they most likely already picked their choice of distributions and develop for it. As in using other ISV’s software, if they use RedHat, they don’t have any problems. Most of the software I seen built by companies that also build software for other platforms (e.g. Oracle) test their apps on RedHat anyway. It helps these 4 distros cause guys like ORacle can have their software to work with their distributions effectively getting more apps designed for their distributions. (Yes, I’m aimlessly blabbering)
rajan r, I see your point, but 1.) I was talking about an alleged binary incompatibility that doesn’t exist, and 2.) the LSB standards handle what you’re talking about. In addition, most installers that I’ve used are smart enough to look for things.
As emulation goes, the binaries would execute on the emulator, not the host CPU.