Hacker News Reader

Comment by holstvoogd | Hacker News Reader

This kind of distro is exactly the point of FOSS & Linux imo. Diversity of ideas breeds innovation and competition, we need that. Otherwise linux will at some point go the way of browsers, with everything effectively owned by google/microsoft/whatever and a big fat artificial lock-in.

View on HN

In addition, this kind of project is emblematic of the hobbyist nature (and origin) of linux. When that's no longer possible, the fun and interest, for me at least, is dead. And when I get gently pushed into some kind of software standardization I can't opt out of, I'm going return to windows.

You are right ! diversity is the good move, that is how life decided to grow, by diversifications. Ok, it consumes loads of time, but the result is without point of thinking. M$ did the opposite in '80, and is not quite winning nowdays... Just a question of time and experimentations ;)

No, that's not the point of FOSS. Having a right doesn't mean that you have to exercise it for the sake of it. When I use/advocate Linux and other FOSS apps it's because ultimately I'll be able to fix any issue that they have, or that nobody will be able to take it the software away from me. But I'm not creating patches for every piece of software I use. We developers should grow past that point, the reason why so many ISVs don't support Linux is because of this madness which means there's no really standards in this ecosystem. (Yeah, now cry me a river about how standards are the equivalent of "authority" please...)

Really, there are de-facto standards. If you are a big corporate enterprise, like a bank, the standard is going to be RHEL. If you're conservative organization but don't want to pay for licenses or support, you're probably going to go with a RHEL clone like CentOS, or worse, Oracle Linux. If you're a trendy Web 2.1 startup you'll probably go with Ubuntu or containers of Alpine Linux etc.

EDIT: source - been doing Linux for corporates, big and small since 1999.

They fragment on trivial parts which is pointless for the evolution.

I think comparing software development to a barely understood natural phenomenon like evolution is a slippery slope, but assuming we take that position, evolution has produced many biological dead ends through mutation. So why should software be any different, it is produced through a biological process of monkeys hammering on keyboards after all.

Your comment is the best illustration of what fragmentation means.

Then choose Windows then. Or Solaris. Or any of the other major operating system players. It really doesn't matter, unless you consider value for money or being able to get things done as important.

Having multiple choices for different purposes is completely normal, even for Windows - or would you install Windows 10 Home on an enterprise server or an IoT device?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com