Pointless Linux OSs

[luxology]

I'm getting pretty fed up with the amount of endless remixes and custom Ubuntu distros that are only differentiated by the wallpapers and apps with which they come. I reckon it's making smaller but more unique OSs harder to find, and all of that developing power could be going into making a select few good OSs.

Is it just me? In your opinion, what is the most stupid, pointless, or most unnecessary Linux Distros/Flavours/Ports you've seen? Or do you think they're all worthwhile?

lux

 

[The Stealthinator]

They weren't made because no one had anything better to do. They would've been of use to at least one person out there - which was why they were made.

 

[dmroeder]

One of the main reasons Linux started was because proprietary software wasn't allowing it's users to do with it what they wanted to do, the OS manufacturers were telling them what they could do. This wasn't working so Linux (and open source) was born.

The idea was I'm building an OS to fit my need. I'm publishing it to the world because it may also serve a function for them. You are free to use it as is or change it to suite your needs, just publish it back to the world so that others can do the same.

I personally like all the varieties. Sure it can be confusing but it makes a better chance that there is the OS out there for you. Calling them stupid or pointless is pretty ignorant in my opinion because someone obviously found it useful for themselves (and probably others) take the time to make it. Just because it's not useful to you doesn't make it stupid.

Why do you care so much about it? If it doesn't serve a purpose for you, who cares? Ignore it. Should they go away because you don't like them? What about people that created it, or the others that used it?


Again the point of Linux was freedom to do what you want with an OS. Make it fit your needs. And now you are crapping on this whole philosophy. Telling people they should stop wasting their time making something that they need to instead make something that fits your needs. That these people are wasting their time by making something that they needed.

 

[sam_p_lay]

dmroeder - well said.

I was just gonna say that there's no need to get wound up about it - just ignore distros you consider pointless. Also that Linux is all about freedom, so you can't really tell people what they're allowed to do interms of creating software. They may have even started these distros as a learning experience/personal challenge. It's all been said though

 

[nss000]

It's mostly Debian blood-brothers populating the Linux environs. Since IBM is straighting-out Apache Open Office you can figure they will do the same with GNOME, shove RedHat byteboys aside and and bitch-slap GNOME/Cinnamon back to a business-like V_2.5X. Absorb Canonical of-course!

Not to worry; one cautionary, well-tempered paragraph from LT will be enough. As I see it Linux convergence is coming fast as Attila-the Hun lopped off heads.

I'm getting pretty fed up with the amount of endless remixes and custom Ubuntu distros that are only differentiated by the wallpapers and apps with which they come. I reckon it's making smaller but more unique OSs harder to find, and all of that developing power could be going into making a select few good OSs.

Is it just me? In your opinion, what is the most stupid, pointless, or most unnecessary Linux Distros/Flavours/Ports you've seen? Or do you think they're all worthwhile?

lux

 

[stillblue]

Is it just me?
lux

Yep.

Let's take Edubuntu for example. Nothing there you can't just install so why have it? Because for someone not real computer savvy it's real nice to have a system ready out of the box to do network booting allowing for use of thin clients. Or the need to search for all the programs tat would be handy in a classroom, I, for one, don't need a copy of the periodic table but a chem teacher sure would. Ubuntu server, again, nothing you can't install yourself on a standard version but some people are intimidated by setting up a LAMP system.

Just think if you went to a grocery store with one brand/variety of each item, you'd be happy until you see a store with 20 choices for each item.

 

[luxology]

One of the main reasons Linux started was because proprietary software wasn't allowing it's users to do with it what they wanted to do, the OS manufacturers were telling them what they could do. This wasn't working so Linux (and open source) was born.

The idea was I'm building an OS to fit my need. I'm publishing it to the world because it may also serve a function for them. You are free to use it as is or change it to suite your needs, just publish it back to the world so that others can do the same.

I personally like all the varieties. Sure it can be confusing but it makes a better chance that there is the OS out there for you. Calling them stupid or pointless is pretty ignorant in my opinion because someone obviously found it useful for themselves (and probably others) take the time to make it. Just because it's not useful to you doesn't make it stupid.

Why do you care so much about it? If it doesn't serve a purpose for you, who cares? Ignore it. Should they go away because you don't like them? What about people that created it, or the others that used it?


Again the point of Linux was freedom to do what you want with an OS. Make it fit your needs. And now you are crapping on this whole philosophy. Telling people they should stop wasting their time making something that they need to instead make something that fits your needs. That these people are wasting their time by making something that they needed.

I take your point (and the those made by others), but I still feel that work spent on improving an OS is better than work spent releasing customised versions of that OS. Personal preference, I guess. Anyway, I didn't mean to step on the whole philosophy itself - I appreciate both Linux and OSS in general. I got a bit ahead of myself there - pent up frustration from searching for a replacement distro!

lux

 

[dmroeder]

First off, good on you for posting back. I respect that.

Second, I still think it's kind of selfish for you to say that what people spent their time on to make for themselves and the rest of the world to use is pretty selfish. Nobody has any business telling me how I should spend my time.

Third, Sam had a good point, what if they were just making a distro for themselves as a learning process? Is that not a valid reason?

And fourth, if people do make them for themselves, then they are trying to make the perfect disto for their needs. You are in the search for the perfect distro for you and all the varieties are making that difficult. You either need to settle on one that works for you, or make your own as others have. The tools and resources are there. If you don't like that option, the go back to Microsoft or Mac OS.

And I really do say all that with the up-most respect. I'm not trying to attack, just trying to offer a different perspective.

I personally don't see how someone could possibly talk down on the fact that someone created something and shared it for free. It was free. If I were one of the creators of those distros that you don't like, I would be pretty offended. And trust me, I don't get offended easily. I mean think, someone created something that solved their problem. Then selflessly shared it with the world. And someone told them that it was a waste of time and they should spend their time making something for someone else and give it out for free so your life can be easier. Sounds kind of a-hole-ish to me.

It's free, quit complaining or pay M$ to tell you what they want you to do.

You should watch some interviews with Linus Torvalds. He explains Linux quite nicely. He will tell you that he created it for selfish reasons, but shared it with the world because that is the only way for it to improve. It's a strange combination of selfish and selfless. Selfish in that you are creating for you and selfless in that you are giving it away. Check out Revolution OS if want to understand the history of Linux.

 

[sam_p_lay]

I take your point (and the those made by others), but I still feel that work spent on improving an OS is better than work spent releasing customised versions of that OS. Personal preference, I guess. Anyway, I didn't mean to step on the whole philosophy itself - I appreciate both Linux and OSS in general. I got a bit ahead of myself there - pent up frustration from searching for a replacement distro!

lux

I'd just add a couple of points... firstly, that many distros that seem the same are actually giving more differentiation than you realise. There could be a bunch of functionality there that you simply don't use (which I think is gonna be true for almost anyone using a non-minimalist distro) and other functionality that could be added via the package manager, but is better-implemented by the distro's creator.

Take Bodhi Linux for example - you could install Enlightenment 17 yourself on most distros, but the result would be broken, buggy and not much use. With Bodhi, Jeff Hoogland took E17 and built an Ubuntu-based distro that's actually not a broken mess. Or KDE - I've tried easily a dozen KDE-based distros (absolutely love KDE!) but the only one I've ever known where all the KDE special effects work out-the-box is Kubuntu. So yeah you can install KDE yourself onto Debian or whatever, but results aren't as good.

Second thing is that I do completely agree that if all the effort going into desktop Linux in total was going into Ubuntu, the results could be incredible. Aside from anything else, it would make Linux a more attractive target for game devs and software devs since they're porting to one OS rather than many. You have to consider people's motivations for working on Linux though (or for working on any code). At Microsoft or Apple, coders are motivated by money. It pays the rent (or pays for their yacht depending on where they are on the corporate ladder!).

With Linux, other motivation is needed, and for many, that motivation will be the challenge, achievement and glory in creating a great distribution. Contributing to a distribution you're only a small part of may appear less of an achievement to devs, so they prefer to set out to do their own thing.

 

[luxology]

...I mean think, someone created something that solved their problem. Then selflessly shared it with the world. And someone told them that it was a waste of time and they should spend their time making something for someone else and give it out for free so your life can be easier. Sounds kind of a-hole-ish to me...

Well damn, I never stopped to think about it like that. I was frustrated at these very similar distros for not being perfectly suited to me, but what the heck was I thinking? All this time I have being seeing these distros as things for me to use, rather than as the personal projects, dreams, work etc they are. Anyway, lesson's learnt. I will dump on people's projects no more!

...he created it for selfish reasons, but shared it with the world because that is the only way for it to improve...

Sounds like a logical move to make. I will have a look at that documentary.

lux

 

[jeretman123]

First off, good on you for posting back. I respect that.

Second, I still think it's kind of selfish for you to say that what people spent their time on to make for themselves and the rest of the world to use is pretty selfish. Nobody has any business telling me how I should spend my time.

Doubt it. what if your brother wants you to go put or some of that 500 pounds you got going? It's just for the better of you.