3 ms·

The comment I was replying to suggested that the diversity (the forks) of Linux were the reason Linux would never win the desktop. I made my comment to make two

The comment I was replying to suggested that the diversity (the forks) of Linux were the reason Linux would never win the desktop. I made my comment to make two assertions: First, that the desktop is irrelevant today because more people use phones and tablets, and the spread will continue to grow. Second, that the forkability of Linux made it possible for Android to exist...and, to practically destroy every other competitor for the phone and tablet (except Apple, but Android has a very comfortable, and growing, lead over Apple). And, when Google started down the Android path, they weren't the Google we know today. It was not a foregone conclusion, and had they chosen a tech which they couldn't control completely, I can't imagine how it could have worked out the way it has. Microsoft couldn't make Windows dominate on the phone/tablet, despite devoting plenty of resources to the task, I'm sure Google couldn't have (given that anybody that buys from Microsoft plays to Microsoft's tune or they don't play at all).

SwellJoe 12y ago
And, I feel like I should add: "Make it on the desktop" always meant "the consumer desktop". There is no consumer desktop in the future. The consumer desktop is a tablet or a phone or a TV device or all three. I don't understand it, I don't necessarily like it (I like desktops with big monitors, big hard drives, big mouse and keyboard, and a nice chair to sit in), but it's the way things are. Computing isn't something consumers do sitting at a desk any more. So, Linux won what is currently the way consumers use computers. And, that's hella fascinating, and hella cool.
the_why_of_y 12y ago
It's also interesting to notice that Android is developed in a fundamentally different way to the myriad of mutually incompatible GNU/Linux distributions: Android is developed in cathedral style by a single centralized organization that is able and willing to define categorically the APIs that ISVs can target and keep them stable. This is a huge factor for its success, considering all previous efforts of coordinating distros (e.g. LSB) pretty much failed.

SwellJoe 12y ago

And, I feel like I should add: "Make it on the desktop" always meant "the consumer desktop". There is no consumer desktop in the future. The consumer desktop is a tablet or a phone or a TV device or all three. I don't understand it, I don't necessarily like it (I like desktops with big monitors, big hard drives, big mouse and keyboard, and a nice chair to sit in), but it's the way things are. Computing isn't something consumers do sitting at a desk any more. So, Linux won what is currently the way consumers use computers. And, that's hella fascinating, and hella cool.

the_why_of_y 12y ago

It's also interesting to notice that Android is developed in a fundamentally different way to the myriad of mutually incompatible GNU/Linux distributions: Android is developed in cathedral style by a single centralized organization that is able and willing to define categorically the APIs that ISVs can target and keep them stable. This is a huge factor for its success, considering all previous efforts of coordinating distros (e.g. LSB) pretty much failed.