4 ms·
What the author somehow doesn't get is that you shouldn't see Linux as a whole. You should look at different distributions like you look at Windows vs OSX. Diff
by JelteF 12y ago
What the author somehow doesn't get is that you shouldn't see Linux as a whole. You should look at different distributions like you look at Windows vs OSX. Different distributions are totally different to end users, although they share a lot of the core system utilities. Ubuntu or Linux Mint could be picked by a large corporation and everybody in that corporation would have the exact same interface. Normal people don't choose Linux, they choose a distribution.
This way, the normal people have the hard choices made for them and the crazy hackers like myself can do it all themselves on their Gentoo machine.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- reidrac 12y agoI don't agree. Desktops matter. I use the same XFCE version in Ubuntu and Fedora, and they look/behave the same. You need to get to install software to find differences. I guess Unity is only available in Ubuntu, but that's just because not enough people want to use it in other distros. Just one anecdote: my sister used to run FreeBSD in her computer and she always thought/referred to it as Linux. She was using Gnome 2, and it was indeed the same experience (not completely true, compiled packages were faster, kind of Gentoo result).
- JelteF 12y agoOf course Desktop environments matter, that's why there are so many of them. I would be able to use Ubuntu almost like my own machine if I would install my window manger and utilities on it. What I meant however is that the defaults of a normal user friendly distro are good enough for those users. There is no need for them to tweak stuff because their LibreOffice and Chrome/Firefox just work with those defaults. The choices are only there if you look for them and at that point you are not a normal user any more.