3 ms·

The things that really broke Desktop linux' back was that there was never a cross-distro way of installing things (rpm vs apt, package managers changing all the

by f33l 17y ago

The things that really broke Desktop linux' back was that there was never a cross-distro way of installing things (rpm vs apt, package managers changing all the time). If Fedora, Ubuntu and openSuse had worked together when the world was watching Vista fail, linux could have grabbed a significant market share. It's sad to say this, but I think it's too late now. Linux might succeed on severs, smartphones and cloud os devices, but it has lost the war for the desktop to Windows and Mac Os X.

mattezell 17y ago
I think that you are 100% correct about the importance of a universal packaging system and its importance to Linux's wide spread adoption for desktop PCs. I think that you are wrong on the being "too late now" part, but perhaps this is only wishful thinking on my behalf. I do also think that you are likely correct in part on your 'too late' aregument, as the Linux community did miss a big opportunity while Vista was flopping... But just remember: there will be another Millennium Edition or Vista... Plus, there is always hope that innovation alone can serve as a big enough to draw for that next big Linux conversion-inspiring movement - think Beryl/Compiz as I do recall a huge surge of interest in Linux during its initial release into the wild!
FooBarWidget 17y ago
I am a developer who had been working on such a cross-distro installation system. www.autopackage.org. You wouldn't believe the issues we had encountered. There were technical challenges but they pale in comparison to the resistance we got from distro makers and veteran users. The resistance arguments boil down to (from what I can remember): - Cross-distro installation is only useful for closed source software. - apt/yum/$DISTRO_SPECIFIC_PACKAGING_TOOL is the ultimate packaging tool, everything else is evil and can break the system. - Different distros should be regarded as entirely different operating systems and hence shouldn't need to be compatible. Until the community accepts the notion of a cross-distro installation system, things look very bleak indeed.
- sandGorgon 17y ago
  the autopackage site has no (easily) locatable links that compare it with new installation systems like 0-install, Nix. Can you comment on what advantages does autopackage have over other package managers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but all package managers are essentially cross distro - I can run rpm/yum on my Ubuntu machine. And a google search turns up .... umm.. this - http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/autopackage_designed_by_monkeys/ http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/autopackage_designed_by_...

by f33l 17y ago

mattezell 17y ago

I think that you are 100% correct about the importance of a universal packaging system and its importance to Linux's wide spread adoption for desktop PCs. I think that you are wrong on the being "too late now" part, but perhaps this is only wishful thinking on my behalf. I do also think that you are likely correct in part on your 'too late' aregument, as the Linux community did miss a big opportunity while Vista was flopping... But just remember: there will be another Millennium Edition or Vista... Plus, there is always hope that innovation alone can serve as a big enough to draw for that next big Linux conversion-inspiring movement - think Beryl/Compiz as I do recall a huge surge of interest in Linux during its initial release into the wild!

FooBarWidget 17y ago

I am a developer who had been working on such a cross-distro installation system. www.autopackage.org. You wouldn't believe the issues we had encountered. There were technical challenges but they pale in comparison to the resistance we got from distro makers and veteran users. The resistance arguments boil down to (from what I can remember): - Cross-distro installation is only useful for closed source software. - apt/yum/$DISTRO_SPECIFIC_PACKAGING_TOOL is the ultimate packaging tool, everything else is evil and can break the system. - Different distros should be regarded as entirely different operating systems and hence shouldn't need to be compatible. Until the community accepts the notion of a cross-distro installation system, things look very bleak indeed.

sandGorgon 17y ago
the autopackage site has no (easily) locatable links that compare it with new installation systems like 0-install, Nix. Can you comment on what advantages does autopackage have over other package managers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but all package managers are essentially cross distro - I can run rpm/yum on my Ubuntu machine. And a google search turns up .... umm.. this - http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/autopackage_designed_by_monkeys/ http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/autopackage_designed_by_...