3 ms·

I'm curious what a Linux would look like that behaved more like windows or android in the sense that there isn't such a blurry line between the OS and its appli

I'm curious what a Linux would look like that behaved more like windows or android in the sense that there isn't such a blurry line between the OS and its applications. For example, installing a C# or Go compiler on Linux is great with a package manager. But doing the same with a C or Python is different? This is basically the Unix "I'm not just an OS, I'm a platform for building and running C programs" heritage that isn't properly hidden I think.

creshal 4y ago
We've reached the point where the C ecosystem has so given up on having a package manager that isn't Linux distributions that Microsoft added WSL and Docker(-compatible) Linux images are the most widespread distribution format. I don't think we can still figure out a way to decouple the two again, and without that, we can't really create a Linux environment that isn't a package manager with an email client. And to a degree, the line is blurry with Windows as well, what with how deep MSVC/win32 is integrated into the system. .NET took decades to dis-entangle itself from Windows and become a proper standalone platform, and Microsoft's attempts at getting people to use UWP instead of win32 is ongoing and not very successful so far.
JohnFen 4y ago
> in the sense that there isn't such a blurry line between the OS and its applications. Interesting. It never occurred to me that there's a blurry line between the two. It seems to me that there's a very hard line between the two. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. > For example, installing a C# or Go compiler on Linux is great with a package manager. But doing the same with a C or Python is different? I'm confused by this question, so forgive me if this answer isn't really addressing it. A package manager is a convenience, nothing more. Using one means makes your life easier in a number of ways. But not using one isn't really that much more difficult. Package managers are 100% optional.

creshal 4y ago

We've reached the point where the C ecosystem has so given up on having a package manager that isn't Linux distributions that Microsoft added WSL and Docker(-compatible) Linux images are the most widespread distribution format. I don't think we can still figure out a way to decouple the two again, and without that, we can't really create a Linux environment that isn't a package manager with an email client. And to a degree, the line is blurry with Windows as well, what with how deep MSVC/win32 is integrated into the system. .NET took decades to dis-entangle itself from Windows and become a proper standalone platform, and Microsoft's attempts at getting people to use UWP instead of win32 is ongoing and not very successful so far.

JohnFen 4y ago

> in the sense that there isn't such a blurry line between the OS and its applications. Interesting. It never occurred to me that there's a blurry line between the two. It seems to me that there's a very hard line between the two. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. > For example, installing a C# or Go compiler on Linux is great with a package manager. But doing the same with a C or Python is different? I'm confused by this question, so forgive me if this answer isn't really addressing it. A package manager is a convenience, nothing more. Using one means makes your life easier in a number of ways. But not using one isn't really that much more difficult. Package managers are 100% optional.