It does differ from Lego because of the complexity - multiple orders of magnitude, in fact; and another thing: everything made of Lego has a distinctive Lego-style. That's perhaps another driving factor: "that style looks ugly, we will build another, nicer and more fluid."
could this fragmentation be the cause for the lack of Linux presence on the Desktop?
Rather than uniting the forces, and building experiences on top of functionality, they each build their own experience their own way in hopes of attracting users...
Thanks
- disagreements/factions
- wanting the satisfaction and validation of building something yourself
- implementational conflict with existing systems
Sometimes the validation thing is due to ego, sometimes it's because the journey of building a new system is useful in itself.
In the case of the distro I want to create (:P) it's because the (very simple) ideas I have conflict with the way things are commonly done, so I'm going to have to set out on my own. It'll be fun though. Users in my case will be a headache because then it won't be a fun personal project. I just want to solve my own frustrations.
And "Linux on the desktop" has been a meme for years. It'll never happen until Linux achieves cohesiveness, aka never, full-stop. (Took Microsoft a while to figure that and build WSL...)
NB, I don't see an email or other contact details in your bio. I could let you know when I finally do get around to starting w/ that distro.
As for the group thing, you're basically describing distros there. Commercial vendors provide value-adds such as security patching and corporate-focused features around a community-derived base system.