3 ms·
Some of your points are odd here. Virtual Desktops predate Linux, and were part of Parc systems. They’re a feature of X, but we’re featured on non X systems as
by dagmx 4y ago
Some of your points are odd here.
Virtual Desktops predate Linux, and were part of Parc systems. They’re a feature of X, but we’re featured on non X systems as well. Macs had a form of it in MultiFinder before Linux was around and much like many UI elements on the Mac (and everything else really), was more influenced by Xerox.
CLIs also predate the existence of Linux. In fact all the other OSs started out as CLI heavy/only and then moved to adding a UI. The main CLI systems are posix/Unix based not Linux based.
There’s a lot to thank Linux for, or more specifically Linus (for git), but I’d also just take some care in which examples you pick. A lot of these systems have shared influences
- jrm4 4y agoSure, but I'd argue that the most useful way to talk about this is, especially to the rest of the world is START WITH: "Linux is awesome and this is where all the good things in computers come from" Start with that carrot. Yes, it's reductive and an oversimplification. Do it anyway. Later on, you can get into the "actually's," -- actually Unix, actually GPL, actually GNU/Linux, actually Android isn't, blah blah.
- dagmx 4y agoI don’t think I understand your point. If I understand correctly, you’re advocating for dishonesty to push Linux as an agenda?
- jrm4 4y agoIt's in no way dishonesty anymore than any other nerd debate. I know we like the idea of things having precise definitions, but the reality is they often don't, even in our field.. Much like "Object Oriented Programming" or "Agile" or whatnot, people literally do have different definitions of what "Linux" is. I teach in IT, often to students unfamiliar with it. If I came in the class and the first thing I'm doing is stopping and correcting people with "you should really say GNU/Linux instead of Linux," we ain't gettin' nowhere. I do that part, just later.
- dagmx 4y agohonestly I have zero idea what point you’re trying to make. The person said those things originated in Linux or were inspired by it. They’re wrong and were corrected thusly. You seem to want to let them believe they’re correct and spread that incorrectness because it pushes the ideal of Linux?
- jrm4 4y agoAlmost? I'm arguing that "Linux" is ambiguous and that what a lot of people think of as "Linux" is shorthand for "open and not like what we're used to with Apple and Windows and also almost universally uses actual Linux code and tools as the software." Let's try this. If I said "I really like the Apple experience" -- what do you think of? I can tell you what you're not thinking of: You're NOT thinking of my experience with an Apple II and the freedom of owning a machine and programming in Basic and getting the computer to do what I want. So if I get all uppity and say "What all of you are saying is Apple really isn't THE REAL APPLE" -- sure, to me it's true. Also mostly doesn't matter.
- dagmx 4y agoBut…this is all irrelevant? Nothing you just said is related to what the thread was about. You somehow fabricated a random discussion point into the mix? Perhaps you mixed up threads with someone else who was talking about the differentiation of types of Linux, GNU etc?? Even then, I’m still not sure what you’re trying to say. It all seems so ephemeral and hand wavy to me, but I’m genuinely trying to understand what you’re getting at.