| |||||||||||||
Must ... Not ... Have ... ChoiceMust ... Not ... Have ... ChoicePosted May 9, 2012 11:12 UTC (Wed) by spaetz (subscriber, #32870)In reply to: Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice by nhippi Parent article: Fragmentation on the Linux Desktop (Is it Normal?) (Datamation)
> 1) because having one good implementation is better than having multiple implementations of varying quality.
Ahh, that is why Linus started to contribute to the BSDs in 1991 rather than founding a new competing offspring, I see :-)
> 2) because most users are unable to make fact-based decisions between the choices and just end up choosing based on anecdotal hearsay.
You'll be happy to hear then that they mostly have no choice anyway when buying a new computer. Problem solved.
> People just google "best email server for linux", seing a forum post from 2004
If this is your best approach to fact-based decision making, I am happy that you are not making fact-based decisions for me :)
> Meanwhile, someone who wants to make linux fileserver for windows machines will only find leads to samba.
And they should be using alternatives (if there are any?) exactly why? Remember we should all help to improve the "one true codebase" rather than exploring alternatives according to you.
People do have different preferences and use cases. Emacs works great for me, but I don't think it will necessarily be the best tool for you.
(Log in to post comments)
Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice Posted May 9, 2012 11:22 UTC (Wed) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
Well, paranoid GPL-haters might choose to use smbx...
Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice Posted May 9, 2012 23:33 UTC (Wed) by jjs (guest, #10315) [Link]
You realize that one reason Linus created his own was that BSD (as in without the lawsuits) didn't exist in 1991?
http://gondwanaland.com/meta/history/interview.html (interview with Linus in 1993):
Meta: What is your opinion of 386BSD?
Linus: Actually, I have never even checked 386BSD out; when I started on Linux it wast available (although Bill Jolitz series on it in Dr. Dobbs Journal had started and were interesting), and when 386BSD finally came out, Linux was already in a state where it was so usable that I never really thought about switching. If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened.
Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice Posted May 10, 2012 5:48 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
Let's take a look at one of the original newsgroup postings by Linus, announcing Linux.
> I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and
Just the first paragraph mentions two competitors, "gnu" (which would later become Hurd) and Minix, by Andrew Tannenbaum.
Oh nos! Fragmentation! If only Linus had left it to the all-knowing central planning overlords to decide everything.
Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice Posted May 10, 2012 7:57 UTC (Thu) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] Just the first paragraph mentions two competitors, "gnu" (which would later become Hurd) and Minix, by Andrew Tannenbaum. Let's have a look at those »competitors«:
Must ... Not ... Have ... Choice Posted May 11, 2012 1:04 UTC (Fri) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
Linus had a different philosophy than GNU Hurd and Minix. So it was entirely appropriate that he create his own project to express that philosophy.
Similarly, ngnix has a different philosophy than the apache web server (raw speed vs. features). Xfce has a different philosophy than GNOME3. And so on, and so forth. Debian focuses on different goals than Red Hat, or Slackware. Dismissing all of this as undesirable "fragmentation" is just stupid, and that's my whole point.
|
|||||||||||||