4 ms·

"Ubuntu: The world's most popular free OS" http://www.ubuntu.com/ http://www.ubuntu.com/ "Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer." http://www

• acqq 13y ago
  It's like calling the specific desktop computer "a CPU." Some people do this too. It's just wrong. If I plug the pieces together in a workable machine it doesn't mean I've made a CPU, even if I've painted the box myself. Note the name is Ubuntu, not "Ubuntu OS." Debian and not "Debian OS." I wouldn't have problem if the product is just named "Elementary" and described as a Linux based OS distribution, once they have a release policy (before it's just a Linux based release). Having OS in the name means a new OS, and it simply and plainly isn't.
  • Kurtz79 13y ago
    I'm not sure I agree. I could be said that "Windows", "OSX", "GNU/Linux" are not really "Operating Systems", intended as software products that you can install on a machine. Windows XP, OSX Mountain Lion, Ubuntu 13.04 and yes, Elementary, are. You don't download a specific "GNU/Linux" OS, you download an OS (intended as a software product made up of kernel+file system+desktop environment) that is based on that technology. The word "distribution" is something that was created for Linux given its specific nature. Yes, if we stick to the classic CS definition of OS maybe you are right, but I believe that Ubuntu, Debian and Elementary can rightfully call themselves "OS"s without issue.
    • acqq 13y ago
      Windows XP, OSX Mountain Lion, Ubuntu 13.04 are all specific releases, not the new operating systems. Elementary isn't, too. It is not even a distro until it has clear release and update policies. Otherwise you'd consider any skinned ISO of any existing OS a new OS, and that's just wrong. "Hello all, I'm making one new OS in my basement every week!"
      • okwa 13y ago
        From Wikipedia[1]: > a distribution is most simply described as a particular assortment of applications installed on top of a set of libraries married with a version of the kernel, such that its "out-of-the-box" capabilities meet most of the needs of its particular end-user base. It seems you're just making up random criteria that elementary OS doesn't meet so you can dismiss it for what it is: an operating system. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution
  • gruseom 13y ago
    It's just wrong. This is the wrong thread to kick up a fuss about this. If these guys are using "OS" the same way that Ubuntu and Debian do, that's just fine for a new project. It also means that your complaint has nothing to do with this new project in particular and is thus off topic. This matters because threads about new projects are the heart of HN and deserve special care.
    • acqq 13y ago
      They aren't using it "the same way Debian and Ubuntu do." Debian is named Debian not "Debian OS." Ubuntu is named Ubuntu not "Ubuntu OS." The releases have own names. Elementary "OS" guys use it like OSX and iOS which both conform to the real view: Note "OSX Lion" or just Lion and definitely not "Lion OS." Clarity is important.
      • synchronise 13y ago
        I suppose that you had better go down and sort out those blatant liars CentOS, ClearOS, OS/4 OpenLinux, SolusOS, PureOS, Chrome OS, Joli OS, Peppermint OS, ZevenOS and PCLinuxOS. How dare they try to advertise themselves as operating systems.
      • SkyMarshal 13y ago
        They should keep 'OS' in the name if for no other reason than to piss off annoying pedants on the internet.
  • veeti 13y ago
    Who the fuck gives a shit? This sort of "elementary is not an OS but a desktop environment based on the Ubuntu distribution based on the GNU/Linux kernel..." nonsense that is so prevalent in the Linux community is probably part of the reason why elementary exists in the first place.