Comments on: Rant: Linux Wars http://www.jonmasters.org/blog/2010/11/14/rant-linux-wars/ World Organi[sz]ation Of Broken Dreams Thu, 01 Dec 2011 20:35:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Brotherred http://www.jonmasters.org/blog/2010/11/14/rant-linux-wars/comment-page-1/#comment-132801 Brotherred Mon, 15 Nov 2010 23:56:48 +0000 http://www.jonmasters.org/blog/?p=892#comment-132801 Great thought provoking post Jon, I have been a GNU Linux user for some time but still tend to play in the higher level areas. Currently I run Mandriva and maybe soon Magia. You speak of Fragmentation and the two major issues I have seen in that arena are Beryl vs. Compiz and now Xorg vs. Wayland. Clearly there are other possibly more well known or of bigger issue topics out there but those are the ones that I think of. Sure Android has its own self made fragmentation issues but for me that is a different topic. Also we may have GNU Linux fragmentation between the Android(s) vs. Meego vs. Ubuntu Unity vs. Chrome OS vs. Whatever Embedded Linux. Here I will stake my live free or die hopes on Meego. More to what seems to be your point is that the LSB has been said to be a failure but I do not know all of the reasons why. With or with out it I think it has been a good few years for Desktop Linux in general. If only for some name recondition and more common support from hardware manufactures. More good stuff along those lines is that there are a growing number of Linux only hardware vendors. Which because as it is separate from elusive branding and is open source can be great for all OSes. Though Microsoft would never admit such a thing. Anyway all of that is to restate my Xorg vs. Wayland questions. Wayland looks great for the desktop given time to mature. If given that same time to mature it might be equally great as Xorg is now for the everything that is not a desktop or other graphics heavy environment. Who knows. So those are my thoughts as scattered as they are thanx for the post. Great thought provoking post Jon,

I have been a GNU Linux user for some time but still tend to play in the higher level areas. Currently I run Mandriva and maybe soon Magia.

You speak of Fragmentation and the two major issues I have seen in that arena are Beryl vs. Compiz and now Xorg vs. Wayland. Clearly there are other possibly more well known or of bigger issue topics out there but those are the ones that I think of.

Sure Android has its own self made fragmentation issues but for me that is a different topic. Also we may have GNU Linux fragmentation between the Android(s) vs. Meego vs. Ubuntu Unity vs. Chrome OS vs. Whatever Embedded Linux. Here I will stake my live free or die hopes on Meego.

More to what seems to be your point is that the LSB has been said to be a failure but I do not know all of the reasons why. With or with out it I think it has been a good few years for Desktop Linux in general. If only for some name recondition and more common support from hardware manufactures. More good stuff along those lines is that there are a growing number of Linux only hardware vendors. Which because as it is separate from elusive branding and is open source can be great for all OSes. Though Microsoft would never admit such a thing.

Anyway all of that is to restate my Xorg vs. Wayland questions. Wayland looks great for the desktop given time to mature. If given that same time to mature it might be equally great as Xorg is now for the everything that is not a desktop or other graphics heavy environment. Who knows.

So those are my thoughts as scattered as they are thanx for the post.

]]> By: James Antill http://www.jonmasters.org/blog/2010/11/14/rant-linux-wars/comment-page-1/#comment-132794 James Antill Mon, 15 Nov 2010 17:45:20 +0000 http://www.jonmasters.org/blog/?p=892#comment-132794 I think at least some of this is explained by the necessity of doing things one way N years ago, and the lack of the same today. For instance when I first started to use Linux I _needed_ my code to run on Solaris (most of the servers were Sun boxes), and there were a significant number of *BSD servers too. But for a long time now the only real question has been "What kind of Linux box is it?" -- and even more recently, with VPSs, even that's not a question as it's always the arch. (of i686 or x86_64) you want running the OS you want. So, to put it another way, there was a huge incentive to "be compatible" and now there is almost no incentive to do so. I think at least some of this is explained by the necessity of doing things one way N years ago, and the lack of the same today. For instance when I first started to use Linux I _needed_ my code to run on Solaris (most of the servers were Sun boxes), and there were a significant number of *BSD servers too.
But for a long time now the only real question has been “What kind of Linux box is it?” — and even more recently, with VPSs, even that’s not a question as it’s always the arch. (of i686 or x86_64) you want running the OS you want.

So, to put it another way, there was a huge incentive to “be compatible” and now there is almost no incentive to do so.

]]>