Storm Linux 150
Stormix, a Vancouver-based
start-up, has announced the release of Stormix Linux v0.99 Alpha r1, their
first public release. The new distro is based on Debian, and uses
dpkg as its package management system. It seems they have some
new ways of going about things, and even an interesting project called SAS. SAS allows
developers to write a program once and have a text-based and a GUI interface. Thankfully, they
have stated they will release all of their software under the GPL (or a "related" license).
Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (Score:1)
There is a reason: they want to make it look as much like Winblows as they can to suck in the idiots. It's so far from original you could paint an Apple with it.
No, no... it's a good thing. (Score:2)
You have some distributions that are geared towards making small systems, like the Linux Router Project.
You have some distributions that are based off of one another, like the 158 RedHat based distributions... but each one has its own merit. Each one is different. And since most / all of the software is open, new changes can be incorporated back into RedHat if they are good and they are what RedHat is interested in. RedHat might not be interested in having to support a MkLinux port -- but having MkLinux have a RedHat base allows the MkLinux people to get a great headstart on having a nice distribution.
And are these distributions incompatable? If a distribution is libc5, then maybe they can't run libc6 binaries. (But then again, there are incompatabilities between glibc 2.07 and 2.1... but I digress)... But things tend to compile out-of-the-tarball on most distributions I have seen.
If the Debian people love their package manager, then they will do everything to make it the best. Likewise, RedHat folks try to make the unbeatable RPM. Slackware folks just stick to a tarball with a script. Does this mean that if everyone used Slackware that tar would would have features like rpm or dpkg? Of course not. Different distributions foster growth and new ideas. Different distributions appeal to different groups of users with different tastes or hardware platforms.
And having their own distribution probably helps Stormix keep tabs on the systems that they have to support. They can make sure that the packages they want to support are in their distribution and that packages they don't want to deal with aren't. This is an amazing feature of Linux, one that will make it (in my opinion) great for companies doing support. They don't lose anything (compatability with debian means most things work really easy) and they gain immensely (they control what they have to support). And after they've modified the distro how they want, why not offer it to everyone else? It costs them little. If three random users have it fill a need, great. And if no one uses it besides their customers, well that is fine, too.
Re:This is getting inflationary (Score:1)
Next since SUSE is leading in sales, I say we make it the one true Linux. If anyone is not using it, then we should send them to New Zealand or something. And since SUSE has KDE, GNOME needs to go by the wayside as well. And since most new users will be confused by crazy command lines, we can do away with them as well. Besides, who makes utilities so archaic anyways? If there isn't a GUI to it, it must be inferior/antiquated.
Only if we do away with the other 68.239 distributions, applications, etc will there be any future in Linux. Allowing people to just copy/modify anything without approval from one central person (I suggest me) is pure lunacy!
I think I've grown up too...
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Re:Who Dares Wins! (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
:)
Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (Score:1)
Re:Debian unstable.. I Second this idea!! (Score:1)
Linux's problem is you (Score:2)
Perhaps some of you have. Possibly many of you. But to those of you who haven't (and I am one of them), stop complaining about everything that you see straying from the norm. This seems like Europe in the 15th century! Luther "recently" started the reformation with his ninety-five theses and suddenly people are beginning to wonder about what they had accepted up until that point. (not to say the repercussions have even close to the same significance here as they did for Luther and the world in general) We have the OS equivalent of the inquisition running here.
"Do you believe in the one true distribution as the one true church has seen fit for you to believe?"
"Yes... well mostly, except that I'd like this feature added"
"Well, then you shall be flamed for your beliefs and audacity to feel differently than the church has ordained for you!"
Do we really need a force like Catholicism running our operating systems? If you see a true problem with the way that these distributions are dealing with things, then talk to one of the standards groups out there. Ask them what you can do to help develop standards for whatever it is that you feel needs standardization. At the vary least, read the Linux Advocacy How-To. But don't cry "Foul" every time something happens that you don't like.
Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
BSD's are doing well. Just not as well as Linux. There's certainly plenty of room for both in the "marketplace".
Re:This is getting inflationary (Score:1)
(heck, I love my FreeBSD, but I certainly don't want Linux to disappear!)
That's the last name I'd choose (Score:2)
The interface, documentation, and particularly the on-line help are so bad in SAS that it tends to be easier to start from scratch and write in Fortran. That stupid program is still emulating a card reader in its handling of data sets. Once I figured this out, I coudl predict its eccentricities and limitations.
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Regarding there being lots of distros, anyway, I perceive this as a strength. For instance, I believe Mandrake kept Redhat on its toes by offering Redhat + KDE back when Redhat refused to ship KDE - citing licensing objections as the reason. Now, Redhat includes a version of KDE shipping with pre-2.0 qt, which has the same licensing terms as it did when they refused to ship it. Also, Mandrake is becoming Pentium-optimized (may be already, I don't follow it too closely, so I'm not sure).. This puts additional pressure on Redhat and co to do something similar. Simply put - competition. Which means, even when merging doesn't take place, the "dominant" distros will tend to copy the successful ideas, in effect using the upstarts as testbeds.
Aside from competition, "custom-tailoring" can be nice as well. For instance, Debian encourages others to base distributions on Debian, and has recently partnered with Corel. This sort of thing is mutually beneficial, because the end-user may want the technical qualities of Debian, but think it's too hard to use, or want it to be stronger in some other area - like Linux for hams, or an office-specific distro with only DFSG-free office apps already nicely laid out to make it easy to set up a workstation for a secretary, for instance. I don't see how any of these would cause real problems. Users will care about how easily they can get j random app to run on their system, and those who don't provide support with what's out there probably won't stay around long. If the users want compatability, it's obvious where to get it.
For the record, I use Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD and Solaris daily. Although Solaris gets on my nerves at times, all of them have their endearing qualities.
SAS... (Score:3)
> and have a text-based and a GUI interface.
...not to mention its strong build-in support for statistical analysis.
Pendulum Swings (Score:1)
based commercial distribution. I don't see any
reason why new distributions cannot be useful and
successful if they can differentiate their
product. But if the ability to differentiate
is eroded we'll start seeing more mergers, I
guess.
The more the merrier and a note on Linux vs. *BSD (Score:1)
Regarding yet another GNU/Linux distribution, I think too many people fail to appreciate evolutionary behavior and competitive benefits.
This GNU/Linux vs. *BSD thing is so silly. How many of us like one or the other? Quite a few, huh? Well, what's the problem, then? Here is an idea for any doubters: work on fun projects that benefit both, such as KDE, GNUStep, or GNOME. I hope this settles this pathetically petty bickering.
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
As soon as the FSF makes their own Linux distribution
I think you are confused, AC. You don't mean distribution, you mean kernel, right? Don't worry about it, the Hurd still lives and GNU/Hurd will eventually be released by Debian. When? I am not sure, the FSF is a non-prophet organization. :)
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
FreeBSD
NetBSD
OpenBSD
BSDI
What am I forgetting?
To say BSD isn't fragmented is... Well, it's rather obvious what it is.
Linux not Unix (Score:1)
Chill out, Read, Think, THEN Say something!!! (Score:2)
A minute of research [stormix.com]
Contentions:
They are swiping Debian. They have stated that "We will be using the GPL or a related license for all of our products." So if Debian want's their install then nothing is stopping them. The Debian developers as a whole need to figure out if they wish to be a main stream distro, or a custom distro for Debian developers and power users. There isn't a right or wrong choice in this.
This is a KDE distro? It includes both GNOME, and KDE. Is there something wrong with choice? There are no rational people who content that GNOME is currently more stable than KDE. Given the relative ages of the 2 projects this isn't an attempt to slander GNOME. Stabity is relative to what you use the desktop for, however.
As far as KDE looking like windows. This is a good thing. (IMHO) I want people using linux, and KDE gets former windows users up and productive quickly. Once they are using linux they may find GNOME more to their liking. Personally I prefer E without gnome, but I really only use a WM for holding up xterms/Eterms/kvts, and netscape.
Another sign of Linux fragmentation. Ok folks repeat after me "Linux is not Unix". There is this little thing called the GPL. This means that anything produced under it can be used or adapted by anyone. This means that we can take the best of any distro and use it in another distro. In addition many of the so called distro are simply value added version of another distro. Mandrake Linux is a good example of this.
It's not in Stormix's best interest to get too far away from Debian. Once Stromix breaks with Debian they need to start doing all the heavy lifting themselves. By same token it's in their best interest to see Debian impliment many of their changes so they don't need to reimpliment everything every new release.
Note: My views should not be take to reflect the views of VALinux. They have been known to incite internal flame wars. This of course is sometimes part of the fun;-)
--
Don't look at me I'm just a mushroom.
Re:SAS... (Score:1)
There even is an effort to get SAS ported to Linux [netcom.com].
-- Jochen
Re:Worse than UNIX fragmentation (Score:1)
The Linux distros 'add value' too - both in the form of choice & flexibility and also by bundling extra software which is useful for the tasks the distro is intended to solve. (e.g. Caldera OpenLinux has a shedload of NetWare utils)
The big benefit with Open Source software is that this added value is available to a much wider auidience.
Not really a fragmentation (Score:3)
When UNIX fragmented, it was due to the competing vendors adding proprietary extras, closing up the code and introducing deliberate incompatibilities in order to lock in customers.
The various Linux distros, on the other hand, are all rooted in the same code base, are largely compatible with each other (bar a few different directory placings & choice of package management, etc) and by & large are not trying to lock out their competition.
Also,of the vast number of distros, a large number are specialist installs or micro distributions for narrow purposes (such as rescue disks, routers, simple IP masquerading for windows networks, etc) and do not need to be 100% code compatible with their mainstream counterparts.
Just chill out, there is room for everybody, it is going to be ok.
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Sad to see that you are so saddened by this. The only reason UN*X was fragmented was because of companies making PROPRIETARY builds against PROPRIETARY hardware for PROPRIETARY applications.
As far as learning lessons, I don't think this is even the same school. Linux distro's are built from mostly publicly available code for commodity hardware to run whatever application you care to write for them. The old UN*Xen imploded because they were exactly the opposite of this.
crufty indeed. :/
Trolls of insufficient quality [Re:BSD is dying] (Score:1)
Needless to say, Walnut Creek CDROM is still very much in business and probably selling more FreeBSD than ever before. FreeBSD has been doing so well that we're even putting on our first conference this year, and I can tell you that such exercises ain't cheap. See http://www.freebsdcon.com for more information on that, and I guess I should thank this troll for giving me an excellent opportunity for a plug as well!
Walnut Creek CDROM also isn't technically for sale unless you have a really big pile of money, of course, in which case by all means let's talk. Like all high-tech companies, the idea of merger or sale for the kind of $$$ which would enable them to get to the next size threshold isn't exactly a new or manifestly unwelcome one.
Welcome to the real world, your trollness, and I'm sorry that you're so clearly unable to deal with it.
Re:Trolls of insufficient quality [Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
It's NOT anti BSD (Score:1)
No, their by hired shills like yourself (Score:1)
I'm starting to think MS is hiring all these AC's to come over here pretending to be BSD users flaming linux. Now that's a good tactic!
sad... (Score:1)
Caldera
Debian (aka Stormix)
RedHat (aka Linux Mandrake)
Slackware
Stampede
Suse
I know I am missing some help me out...
Re:List of distributions (Score:1)
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
Change the record. The linux kernel is released on a regular basis. The distibutions of Linux are a completely different thing. And bashing on Linux users because they have a new kernel to play with is sheer stupidity. Has it occurred to any of you that some people actually like being able to use brand new hardware almost straight away, rather than having to wait up to 3 months for it? Above all, its fun. Stop fucking complaining about it. You don't use it, so whats the problem?
Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
Re:GNU/Linux vs. *BSD posts should be moderated do (Score:1)
INSERT SMILEYS WHERE APPROPRIATE
---
Openstep/NeXTSTEP/Solaris/FreeBSD/Linux/ultrix/OS
depends... (Score:2)
Re:SAS... (Score:1)
This really looks great! Where do I get it? (Score:1)
Thanks,
Ben
(currently using Debain Potato)
Re:Debian unstable.. I Second this idea!! (Score:1)
Potato is wonderful, but was a MAJOR pain to install (but I got through it.)
I really hope that Corel's Debian based distro picks the unstable branch, and not slink.
That's all from me!
Ben
Re:Not really a fragmentation (Score:1)
The biggest argument these days seems to be in the use of
Re:SAS... (Score:1)
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
You know, Linux is just succesful and you are just jealous. Would FreeBSD be as succesful as Linux, you know there would be MyBSD, YourBSD, PepeBSD, JohnBSD, UltraBSD, BSDragon, SBSD, BSDPower, Calavera BSD, BSDLight, YKZBSS, TheBSD, White Cup BSD, BSDebian, RealBSD and more.
All those companies are just making distributions of a succesful OS.
And all those BSD would be really worse than all the GNU/Linux, since all GNU/Linux distributions at least use the same kernel.
Alejo.
Re:LET THE FRAGMENTATION BEGIN! (Score:1)
And that is measuring success in number of users.
Alejo.
Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (Score:1)
This whole fragmentation deal is to me just FUD against GNU/Linux from both the WinNT and the BSD people.
And, in the latter case, I find it ironic since I believe that would BSD be as succesful as GNU/Linux is, we would have 50 BSD distributions. At least all GNU/Linux distributions share the kernel and the C library.
Alejo.
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Debian (aka Stormix)
RedHat (aka Linux Mandrake)
I think this is an important point. Not only do we have all this balkanization of Linux, but we even have distros like Stormix and Mandrake that are derivatives of other distributions, for reasons ranging from political disagrements (Mandrake and RH's refusal to include KDE) to no apparent reason (Stormix). Frankly, this is quite counter-productive and is, and will continue to hurt Linux.
PS: For the record, yes, I am a FreeBSD user, but I am also a former Linux user, and had this concern beforehand.
Re:sad... (Score:1)
1. I was mistaken, evidently RH did put KDE into the distribution later on. That aside doesn't really weaken my argument: RH made a distribution decision to adavance a corporate interest (the money and manpower poured into Gnome) and it caused a schism.
2. Yes, sometimes distributions combine, and this is a good thing, but alas, it's rare. Also, remember, (as mentioned in a previous article's comments section) LinuxToday (I believe) puts the number of Linux distributions at over 100..
3. The balkanization of Linux wouldn't be as much of a problem if something like the LSB had worked out. Here again, arguments ensued and the LSB collapsed. I believe I heard of attempts to restart it but they seem to not have had much success or support.
4. The idea that I am "jelious"(sp) of Linux's success is idiotic. I have used Linux for years, and still believe it to be a good operating system. I am making comments of what I think could make Linux even better and more sucessful. Also, Linux's success even bring benefits to the BSD user: more focus on the free software movement and Linux binaries run on all the BSDs through emulation.
Why bother? (Score:1)
Instead, they just blindely rip off all the hard work debian users have done (yes, I know they legally can, but that doesn't mean I like it any more) and slap a few utilities into it and call it storm linux.
Like we need any more derivitive distributions...
Hey, let's mirror debian, run a text search and replace and replace all occurances of the word 'debian' with 'slashdot' and distribute our own slashdot linux!
"Better close the windows, the storm's coming in" - a quote or something like that from the stormix site.
Re:That's the Whole Point of Free Software! (Score:1)
I have no problem with someone who lifts some gpl code to use as part of their project or as part of a bigger program, like say, using code from hmm, eject or something to use as a part of a removable disk management program. But if they just took the eject code, renamed the binary to ejector and re-released it, what's the point? That's basically what I'm seeing going on here. The only thing that I see them writing is a utility that lets applications be either Xwindowed or ncurses based. Then they are just taking all the packages and code that debian developers worked real hard to crank out - and there's a lot of packages.
I don't know, if there were more major differences, I would have a different opinion if stormix had more differences from debian...
But as it is, it's just a plain lift... Oh, I'm sure they'll have to write a script to go through all the packages to replace debian with storm...
There's a difference between using and extending (egad, do I sound like microsoft there?) and just using...
I don't even know why this peeves me so much. Usually I'm more than happy to share the fruits of my work (graphics and code stuff) . . .
both GUI X and console installation (Score:1)
I think that this is good. I hope that the nice GUI installation makes its way back to debian. The one thing that I found difficult about debian 2.0 was the install.
If debian gets easier to install, I may consider switching distros, or atleast running it too :-)
Someone asked why another distro? Why not? If the LSB does a good job, then we can have many thriving distros, and companies will not have to do anything to port from 1 distro to another. The program should work out of the box.
The only problems is the packageing deb, tgz and rpm for Slack, debian, and RH.
I think that this is good! IMHO and I am entitled to it!
Re:No need to be so coy, AC--I'm convinced! (Score:1)
Free Software, Free Willy, Free Windows
Re:sad... (Score:1)
I like mandrake. x11amp actually worked right out of the box.
-geekd
Linux fragmentation: no big deal (Score:1)
Right now, i don't see any of these so called damages done by fragmentation, and when I see some concrete problems, which i seriously doubt i ever will thanks to the above mentioned LSB, we will deal with that then. Probably with adjustments to LSB.
Hence, the fix is already on the way. So give it a rest.
(since everyone else is doing it =) I'm a Linux and OpenBSD user. I like both, even freebsd. I don't get it why the bsd ppl attack linux so much.)
Re:Exactly - Linux ultimately a doomed project (Score:1)
its got an aggressive title but the body text is perfectly well reasoned - disagreeing with somebody is not a good enough reason to moderate them down.
If you don't like what somebody says then disagree - post a response but just screaming troll does nobody any good.
What this gus is saying is no different to some +2/3 posts - basically that there is a danger of linux distros fragmenting and producing proprietry incompatabilities.
It could happen - particually with some of the software which is now being bundled (ie ViaVoice with RH 6.0).
I'm very temped to move to that distro purely to try voice rec under linux and thus far haven't taken the time to figure out how to make it work with another distro. Is that fragmentation?
We now have SuSE still running on the libc but most others are now on glibc - afaik this normally only needs a recompile to fix but it can be a problem.
But more to the point what will the LSB actually do? as I understand it, it will descibe a core of libraries/utilities which should be present. This should allow developers to code well behaved linux apps - but it doesn't force them to. Besides novice coders may not be fully aware of which libraries thier software links against - they may just link to everything and let the compiler sort out the mess.
We are already seeing software which is only certified for a particular distro (Oracle and RH5.2), mostly this software can be persuaded to run on other distros (we have Oracle running under SuSE 5.1 here at work) but the end user needs to spend some time chasing down the FAQ's and deciding if they are happy to change their set of libraries just to support one new package.
All of this said I am in favor of different distros - Open source development seems to be based entirely upon evolution. Without a set of distributions how can we be sure that the eventual dominant vendor is best of breed in any sense of the phrase.
just some thoughts - moderate as you will
Tom
Re:sad... (Score:2)
On the other hand the "difference" between Debbian, RedHat, Suse, Caldera etc generally relate to approx 3 minor things.
1. Install routine - and thats basically just what type of menu or graphical interface they present with the user and to check of their files in either
2. File locations - some distro's put config files in
3. System configuration - does the distro use Lisa, COAS, LinuxConf being user level programs this simply means what does the distro install as it's default. I've used Linuxconf with Caldera and COAS with Mandrake without any problems.
4. Package managment do they use RPM or Debian Package tool again user level and the inclusion of alien with most distro's lets you use files packaged with the non compatible package tool. Also note that all distro's are capable of compiling the original source code
Other than that the core of the system is the same kernel, filesystem, etc and the differences only show the versatility of Linux to manipulated the way the user wants it. You can take a Debian distro and make it look, act, and feel exactly like RedHat if you chose too. Doing so doesn't make a different Linux, it just makes Linux work the way you want it to. On the other hand you will never install IBM AIX's journaling filesystem onto Solaris as the two are completely different systems.
Re:That's the Whole Point of Free Software! (Score:1)
Isn't that the point of free software? So that other people can use it? If the developers desire other people to use their source code, then they'll release it as open source. If they didn't want people to modify anything without their explicit permission, they wouldn't have done so.
If you are a developer, and you get upset that other people can copy, distribute and modify your source code, then why would you do such a fscking stupid thing as releasing it under a free software license?
And if you aren't a developer, what business is it of yours if a developer allows other people to use his or her work?
What's going on here? (Score:1)
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Are RH refusing? I installed RH6 yesterday, and I'm sure I had the option to install KDE?
Re:sad... (Score:1)
Multiple distro's isn't a bad thing, but two and three of the same distro is a Bad Thing. The LSB, can make the different distro's compatible, but some people don't want to do any work
Oh, and also, can't we all agree on a package manager already? I vote for RPM.
Re:No, their by hired shills like yourself (Score:1)
MS understands marketing. Competing against a few well-known "brands" or distributions of Linux is one thing. Competing against thousands of ISP "branded" distributions is quite another thing.
This is no more fragmented than an MSN or CNET or ISP branded copy of Internet Explorer 5. This is not just another Linux distribution. When the bugs get worked out, ISPs will start giving out Linux intallation CDs. How does MS compete?
Why invent SAS when there is VisualTCL? (Score:1)
Re:sad... (Score:1)
After trying out Mandrake I liked it enough to switch. My old boxes are still Redhat 5.2..
Generalizations suck (Score:1)
It's boring me.
I'm thinking of trying out FreeBSD on my computer I try out OSes on (I'm downloading Storm as I write, though I wish they allowed NFS install in this release, so I could avoid those oh-so-slow CDROMs). I thought about doing it before but some vocal people turned me off. I decided to try out Solaris, which I borrowed from school, only to find out there was no support for my hardware (and my Millenium G200 and 10GB disk were not supported).
When I first got into Linux (1993) that kind of stuff was almost non-existant. That's no longer the case, but I've invested so much time and am completely dependant on it.
There are certain personality types that are everywhere. It has nothing to do with the fact that they are a Debian user, a GNOME user, a BSD user, a win user, a Mac user, a Ford driver, a VW driver. It's their personality, which isn't shaped by what OS they use, what car they drive or what country they're from (at least I hope not!).
Because of these people, generalizations are made about the products they use. STOP IT! Ignore them if you wish or do what I do: see what all of the fuss is about so that if you reply, you might actually have something insightful to say rather than making assumptions. You might even like what they blarbling about. I installed SuSE just to see what GNOME was all about (I used Slackware from '93 to a few months ago). I didn't like GNOME (gmc was severely disappoining, I'm a long time mc/nc user) but I ended up liking SuSE. Now I have SuSE on two machines (my notebook is still 100% Slack though, and it'll probably stay that way) and I have another box to try stuff out on.
So I have the FreeBSD page open in another window and I'm going to download those 2 floppies. Twice as many as SuSE
So I'll just shut up and continue downloading now
Re:Generalizations suck (Score:1)
partition or CDROM.
This is true. However, I rarely have a FAT partition and If I bought a CD for every OS I try, I could get very poor, quickly.
Congratulations, BSDers, I installed it, and I like it. The install reminds me of Slackware (that's a good thing). I was quite surprised at the number of available packages. OTOH, I'm really used to Linux
Meanwhile I'll have to try Storm tomorrow and probably throw FreeBSD back on to do some more exploring.
Isn't this the whole point? (Score:1)
As money cannot be made off the GPL's software itself, the most common means of revenue generation that I seem to see people pointing to here is support, or other value-added services.
This is the same thing that Red Hat, et al. do to raise funds, so why is there a great upcry about it here? If the distro sells, then there is more added to the community. Is SAS takes off, then eventually others will adopt it. If it is weak, then it will fail, as is supposed to happen in a competitive environment, where only what is good & useful is kept by the community.
I'm just at a loss as to why there is so much gnashing of teeth regarding the release of another distro. This is supposed to be a good thing, people.
--sugarman--
SAS? (Score:1)
Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
Re:List of distributions (Score:1)
Re:Linux Community:Try Adding Some Real Value (Score:1)
the *BSD all the time and which have benefited us
hugely?
The difference between Linux and FreeBSD is one of philosophy and style, not or religion or technical merit. Stop acting as if it's a children's gang or a football team.
Mind you, the Linux heads who bash FreeBSD are just as silly. No need to fall to their level.
Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
Colman
Re:BSD is dying (Score:1)
BSD is used in hundreds of commercial applications, from companies with special purpose video processing or security technology to consumer-ended companies such as Apple with their MacOS X. In fact, BSD more easily lends itself to this kind of thing in a non-trivial number of commercial environments than does Linux. You may not like this, but that's the way it is.
Repeating an untruth has no effect on its veracity.
Re:Worse than UNIX fragmentation (Score:2)
Re:No hacker uses vi (Score:4)
Here are some others: Chris Torek, Larry Wall, Eric Allman, Keith Bostic, Rob Kolstad, Margo Seltzer, Kirk McKusick.
Happy now? We are. :-)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
a positive note - at least we're not dealing with the "one OS or else" that mac and windows folks have to deal with.
Re:Why bother? (Score:1)
We have all read people in the past say things like, if Red Hat stumbles or gets bought out Debian will be there to pick up the pieces. Well, Debian isn't going to market their product, but Corel and Storm will.
Think of Linux like a tree. There is the kernel, which is the base of the tree. From there there are several branches, ie the main set of distros like Debian, Red Hat, Caldara
Soda (Score:1)
Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (Score:1)
Personally I don't think it really matters to most of us whether a distro has KDE of Gnome as the primary install because we can always not install it and go out and get the other. It only matters to those who either don't want to download, or aren't very computer literate. And for the computer illiterate, KDE is probably a better choice right now due to stability and its connection with CDE.
Re:That's the Whole Point of Free Software! (Score:1)
Re:Debian unstable.. I Second this idea!! (Score:1)
Of course I have been downloading the OS piece at a time since March due to the fact that I used the 7 disk install and apt on a 33.6 modem. The only thing that I have found painful is the speed of my modem.
TCI HURRY UP AND GET CABLE MODEMS IN BOULDER! September to October isn't fast enough!
The beauty of OSS (Score:1)
What is wrong with the ability to customize to suit taste? It just creates a broader range. I wouldn't worry about fragmentation, because nearly all distributions are based on the model of one of the major few. If a distribution can't keep up, it dies. It's that simple.
Who Dares Wins! (Score:1)
Lawyers, Guns and Money..... (Score:1)
It's healthy (Score:1)
The only downside may be the appearance of a fragmented OS, but as long as the vendors don't start slagging each other's distributions, that won't be so bad either.
Mind you, I may be biased because they're a Canadian company and it's nice to see a Canuck distribution
Re:GNOME on Storm (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
ISO-only? (Score:1)