Why doesn't Linux select one distribution to work on?

Question

I mean, it makes sense. Linux has a small opportunity to use one distro, such as Ubuntu, to gain popularity while Windows 8 is flopping. It would be was easier for developers to program for one distro and I feel like Linux could finally beat Windows 8 now that the Microsoft OS chose to become a more closed platform. I mean, I feel like the one downside to getting Ubuntu right now is that it lacks support from developers. If I'm not going to be ale to run half the programs I want to on Linux, or if I have to use Wine, a Virtual Machine, or Dual-Booting to get the job done, then what's the point? I mean, I don't want to stick with Windows 7 for any longer than maybe two years now because it's going to go out of date, but I don't think that I want to use Windows 8, at least the way it is right now, with the Windows store going more toward Apple with it's 30% third-party "tax," and I just think there could be hope for Linux to fill the gap. Do you guys have any thoughts on this?

Answer 1

You don't really know what you're talking about, nor do the other smart guys commenting here. Windows is successful because of it's value, plain and simple. There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of applications available to do virtually anything, it's everywhere, it runs on all generic pc hardware, and it's universally compatible with itself. You can't beat the value added with Windows, period, and I don't think that will change in the forseeable future. Hundreds of millions of people and millions of businesses depend on it. There is a vast develper community supporting it. Linux holds only 1-2% of the personal desktop market because it's fragmented, there are a thousand versions, many of which are unstable and incomplete, and which use libraries and packages that are not compatible. None of the big industry-standard software packages run on Linux, nore are they likely to. Open source alternatives are incomplete, often abandoned, and just don't offer the same functionality. You asked why "Linux", as you put it, doesn't work on one distro. That's because there is no such thing as "Linux" as an entity. Linux is a kernel, supported by a few people, nothing more. Distributions are the responsibilty of whatever person, group, or company is providing them, and what they provide is entirely at their discretion. The problem is that two Linux programmers generally can't agree on anything, so rather than pooling their efforts, they split off and make a new application or a new distributiion that lingers for a couple years, then fades away...or they argue endlessly about what hardware to support, whether to allow binary blobs, what's free and what's encumbered, etc., etc., and not much gets done. Linux's greatest weakness, and it's greatest strength, is that it's a thousand little operating systems that no one can control, and therefore it will probably always be a hobbyist OS as far as the desktop goes. Every attemp to provide an out-of-the-box experience with Linux generally fails for the simple reason that people want their apps and games that they are familiar with to work, and that ranges between hard and impossible with Linux. Ubuntu has done the best job of evangalizing the system, and bringin in a larger user base, but more people in the Linux community hate Ubuntu than like it. Some of them hate it a lot more than Windows or Apple. In short, don't worry about it. This is something that's been going on for 20 years now and it's far from played out. Microsoft owns the desktop, small business, and many web servers, Linux is strong as a web server and in specialized applications and embedded devices, Android and Apple dominate the phone market.



...

Answer 2

There are a few misconceptions you have about Linux. Linux is not an Operating System, it is only a Kernel that files connect with to make an operating system. Developers are constantly supporting Linux by fixing files and updating them and getting them on line so everyone can keep their system up to date. The misconception you have here is Software vendors are the ones who do not support or create software for Linux. The other misconception is the fact no matter what the Distribution name is, they all use the same basic file systems, software and programs. The difference is what some one chooses the distribution to use as default programs and what they choose as a default Desktop Environment, but under all this dressing they are all the same operating system wise. The whole point that isn't understood is the fact if you do not have software vendors supporting an Operating system, it will simply never reach the Top and be a System Of Choice and Preference and the fact people tend to think developers only write software programs. There isn't any thing that I do on a computer that would require me to be using Windows. I'm not even going down the trail of all the different advantages there are in using Linux. Take an example of an older Linux Like Ubuntu Hardy. The DVDs with the complete repositories for every thing that can be installed in that distribution is over 30GB of only files for that operating system itself. I have used DOS and Windows all my life, but quit using it two years ago. I don't consider myself to be a Microsoft Hostage any more. You can buy Commercial Linux and get support for that operating system, but you still will not find a lot of Software Vendor software for it. I do agree that there is a big void and gap that needs to be closed up. There is only one problem with that issue, it would create problems and issues like Windows has.

Answer 3

Every distro has its own perks and desireable aspects. There are a handful of major distros that are worth following, and a lot of splinters off them that specialize in some aspect... like some people prefer full Ubuntu while others like the look and feel of Mint.



The image joke going around has a title like "Updates available for your operating system" -- the Linux user says "yay, more free software!", the Windows user says "what now?", and the Mac user says "wow, only $99!".



If you don't want to use Windows 8, don't use it. This is what you get when you forget to ask users how they work and make an interface that isn't intuitive to what people do.

Answer 4

"that it lacks support from developers"

Lots of support better than microsoft.

Windows 8 is restriction development due to cost .

Linux is the kernel therefore has no control over the distro development.



" If I'm not going to be ale to run half the programs I want to on Linux,"

There is an alternative for most programs. I run a successful TI business with linux only. Itunes is the only common program I don't have an alternative for.



"Do you guys have any thoughts on this?"

You seem to want Linux to be like microsoft, that's not the point. Linux has 10,000s of developers and testers. Its also the diversity that is the advantage in the long term.



Linux will not work on one distro because there is no enterty thats linux to make that decision.

Answer 5

Linux is just one of several Unix systems available today. Unix was created in 1969 and has been floating around as an important operating system ever since. During those 40-odd years though it has never made it as the mainstream system of choice.



We're now entering a period when the operating system becomes less visible, it's FreeBSD hidden inside Macs or Linux hidden inside Android. Windows though remains extremely relevant, it has massive amounts of commercial grade software available for it that is not available on comparable Linux systems, while anything worthwhile that is available for Linux is also available for Windows.



The point is people want computers to solve problems. The want a machine to engage with Facebook, they want a machine to play games on, they want a machine to do their company accounts on. They don't want a Unix machine or a Linux machine or a Windows machine, they just want the solution. Today it just so happens that the cheapest way to deliver that is often machines built on Windows.



Even if Android washed away other distributions or some other Linux or true Unix flavor became the dominant Unix standard, Windows is likely to remain the dominant system. Windows will be replaced, but not by an operating system it will be another way of delivering computing.

Answer 6

Linux already beats Windows and Mac. People make different distros because people have different tastes. You don't walk into a pastry shop and see 200 cakes of the exact same flavor available.



I agree in some of your aspects. I know a lot of devs who make programs on windows, their excuse is "Linux is to much of a hassle to understand" or "programming on Linux is entirely different then windows' which are excuses to prevent more software from being produced on Open Source platforms. People don't bother to learn how it works, but instead they complain about how complicated it is. Which it's honestly not once you understand it. That's like saying that a movie sucks even though you've never seen it.



Opinions will be opinions, but one day Linux will be used more often. Seeing how Windows8 came out and Microsoft is now steering towards it's blandness of a design, Linux will probably become Superior over the next Half or so decade.

Answer 7

Windows is for gamers. When hardware manufacturers are able to make realistic, portable games that will work in the bathroom, you will see Linux in all its variations dominate desktop machines.



Different purpose for different distros. Redhat because you get business support. FreeBSD for security. Ubuntu for free software.



Cannocal is working on TV-media streaming. That should introduce more consumers to Ubuntu. What is really needed is an Android-Linux cell phone. In as far as the phone, we're waiting to see what Oracle wants to do with Google.