"Any OS" is clearly wrong. [LWN.net]

"Any OS" is clearly wrong.

Posted Apr 4, 2009 19:03 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
In reply to: Light and Cheap, Netbooks Are Poised to Reshape PC Industry (New York Times) by danielpf
Parent article: Light and Cheap, Netbooks Are Poised to Reshape PC Industry (New York Times)

Here Linux is used to mean any OS based on the Linux kernel, so there is no reason to distinguish Android from other Linux based OS's.

Sorry, but no. You can argue as much as you want about "any OS based on Linux" but for "normal people" Linux is GNOME/KDE/XFCE thing. Non-XWindow- based system is clearly not Linux for them. It can be called "Linux-based OS", "Linux-derived OS", but it's not "Linux". Just like XBox's OS is not Windows - even if they use the same (or almost the same) kernel.

(Log in to post comments)

"Any OS" is clearly wrong.

Posted Apr 5, 2009 16:44 UTC (Sun) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link]

> Non-XWindow- based system is clearly not Linux for them.

What a bizarre concept... So, you're saying that a Linux server with no running (or perhaps even installed) X server is not really running "Linux", whatever that means?? I'm sorry, but that's simply insane... I can think of no one whose definition of "Linux" is tied to X at all... (Plus, if X and the related desktop environments are what supposedly define "Linux", then does that mean that every other system that X and they run on are now also "Linux"? That makes absolutely zero sense...)

"Any OS" is clearly wrong.

Posted Apr 5, 2009 19:53 UTC (Sun) by sim0nx (subscriber, #23065) [Link]

hahaha lol