| |||||||||||||
Linux fragmenting at last? Give me a break.Linux fragmenting at last? Give me a break.Posted Feb 28, 2006 20:29 UTC (Tue) by proski (subscriber, #104)Parent article: Linux fragmenting at last? The difference from UNIX fragmentation is that major players in the GNU/Linux field can easily abandon their approach and take the competitor's technology. For example, Novell can abandon AppArmor in favor of SELinux is the former fails to achieve community support. Likewise, Red Hat can ship Xegl if it has better hardware support. Moreover, RedHat can implement AIGLX on top of Xegl and keep using its patched Metacity. In a similar vein, Novell could provide some compatibility layers for the software relying on AppArmor. In the UNIX world, anything like that would involve big money changing hands. That's why UNIX companies kept working on their own software even if it was inferior in some serious aspects.
(Log in to post comments)
Linux fragmenting at last? Give me a break. Posted Feb 28, 2006 21:05 UTC (Tue) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link] >The difference from UNIX fragmentation is that major players in the GNU/Linux field can easily abandon their approach and take the competitor's technology.
Conversely, if everyone used exactly the same thing, we would see
Linux fragmenting at last? Give me a break. Posted Mar 3, 2006 14:26 UTC (Fri) by addw (guest, #1771) [Link] Quite. The main cost of one distribution recognising that another is using better technology (and thus adopting it) is: loss of face.It also means that their users will feel a change - which might involve some pain. I suspect that loss of face is the more important issue, although the second point will be the most often quoted.
|
|||||||||||||