3 ms·

I tend to lean towards what you are saying. Think about this; the AndroidOS is getting a lot of traction. Phones and companies are trying to develop their har

I tend to lean towards what you are saying. Think about this; the AndroidOS is getting a lot of traction. Phones and companies are trying to develop their hardware around the operating system. There is the HTC Nexus One, the Motorola Droid and others. I hear regular discussions in the office about a Android phone. Google's Android took off from day one. This is how Desktop Linux should have taken off. As far as I know, that hasn't happened. (Yes, Anroid is based on the Linux kernel, but I wouldn't consider Android the typical Linux desktop OS).

jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
I agree, it's how linux should have taken off. The problem is, you have a bunch of smug idealists running the show who are out of touch with the mainstream public. Imagine if android was: take your current smart phone and just install this software somehow. No one in a million years except for geeks like ourselves would try it. Could you imagine the carrier incompatibilities, the hardware issues, potential bricking,etc.? Imagine if Android had zero hardware vendors making devices for it (I know linux has tons of device makers using it, i'm talking about PC Manufacturers). That's basically how Linux looks.
- berlinbrown 17y ago
  And this is what pisses me off. There were so many companies that showed "interest" in Linux like IBM, RedHat but nobody really did what Google did. There was a Google marketing campaign, they worked with proprietary companies (gasp, heaven forbid) to push a system that they were to make money off of.
  - stinkytaco 17y ago
    Red Hat has done pretty well by linux. So did IBM, at least I think they did. The problem is that it's not really "Linux on the Desktop" if its an enterprise roll out or a server or other specialty application (I'm a librarian and there are some good systems for public access internet based on Linux). Do you mean "Linux on the Home Desktop" or "Linux on anything that might otherwise run Windows"?
- krakensden 17y ago
  The show isn't really run by the smug idealists- they're just the loudest.

jasonlbaptiste 17y ago

I agree, it's how linux should have taken off. The problem is, you have a bunch of smug idealists running the show who are out of touch with the mainstream public. Imagine if android was: take your current smart phone and just install this software somehow. No one in a million years except for geeks like ourselves would try it. Could you imagine the carrier incompatibilities, the hardware issues, potential bricking,etc.? Imagine if Android had zero hardware vendors making devices for it (I know linux has tons of device makers using it, i'm talking about PC Manufacturers). That's basically how Linux looks.

berlinbrown 17y ago
And this is what pisses me off. There were so many companies that showed "interest" in Linux like IBM, RedHat but nobody really did what Google did. There was a Google marketing campaign, they worked with proprietary companies (gasp, heaven forbid) to push a system that they were to make money off of.
- stinkytaco 17y ago
  Red Hat has done pretty well by linux. So did IBM, at least I think they did. The problem is that it's not really "Linux on the Desktop" if its an enterprise roll out or a server or other specialty application (I'm a librarian and there are some good systems for public access internet based on Linux). Do you mean "Linux on the Home Desktop" or "Linux on anything that might otherwise run Windows"?
krakensden 17y ago
The show isn't really run by the smug idealists- they're just the loudest.