₿itcoin on Nostr: People have difficulty comprehending the amount of #Linux Distributions: they see ...
People have difficulty comprehending the amount of #Linux Distributions: they see 1000+1 versions advertising themselves as "xxx OS".
I think that the #Linux naming scheme should be better. A fork of #fedora gets its own name like "Ultramarine OS". This implies that it is a standalone #Linux distribution, from scratch. This is not the case, as it is just #fedora with little, little tweaks and pre-adjustments.
Some forks:
change desktop environment,
remove or include bloat,
add a few preinstalled apps,
use a different theme,
test it,
change wallpaper, calling it a day and almost branding it as their own.
You can litterally automate the abovementioned tasks (downloading apps and desktop environment, theming and remove bloat) and get the same result.
I don't think this "issuance" of brand identities should be that easy (yes, they've scarcity).
It is like the ship of Theseus. How much can you change while being the same?
I think Linux distributions should be classified using these factors:
- upstream or independed presence
(#linux distributions like "GrapheneOS" that really help create solutions)
- extensibilty (download manager etc)
(Biggest usability difference)
- why it stands out
(special features like 'yast' from #opensuse or homebrewed contributions)
- purpose
(servers, users, lightweight, bitcoin, supercomputers, mobile, stability, etc)
- philosophy
(to predict where the project is and will be going.)
I think that the name should always tell if it is using #linux kernel/#bsd.
then, the name of the independend distribution.
then, the other upstreams and its own name.
#Linux>independend distro>upstreams and own name
(could be in a different order.)
So Examples Given:
#Pop_OS! --> #Linux #debian #ubuntu pop
#Fedora --> #Fedora #Linux
#Linux #mint #debian edition --> #Linux #Debian #mint
#Android --> #Android #Linux
#Manjaro --> #Linux #Arch #Manjaro
#ChromeOS --> #Gentoo #Chrome #Linux
#Ubuntu --> #Linux #Debian #Ubuntu
#Void #Linux --> #Linux #Void
As you can see, some distro's will get a really absurd name, implying that it is a fork of a fork, which is in my eyes pointless.
or it could be something like
`Linux Mint.deb`, `Linux Bitkey.deb`
It would make it alot more understandable for new users and also limit the pointless forks so that it is easier to focus code review and audits.
I think that the #Linux naming scheme should be better. A fork of #fedora gets its own name like "Ultramarine OS". This implies that it is a standalone #Linux distribution, from scratch. This is not the case, as it is just #fedora with little, little tweaks and pre-adjustments.
Some forks:
change desktop environment,
remove or include bloat,
add a few preinstalled apps,
use a different theme,
test it,
change wallpaper, calling it a day and almost branding it as their own.
You can litterally automate the abovementioned tasks (downloading apps and desktop environment, theming and remove bloat) and get the same result.
I don't think this "issuance" of brand identities should be that easy (yes, they've scarcity).
It is like the ship of Theseus. How much can you change while being the same?
I think Linux distributions should be classified using these factors:
- upstream or independed presence
(#linux distributions like "GrapheneOS" that really help create solutions)
- extensibilty (download manager etc)
(Biggest usability difference)
- why it stands out
(special features like 'yast' from #opensuse or homebrewed contributions)
- purpose
(servers, users, lightweight, bitcoin, supercomputers, mobile, stability, etc)
- philosophy
(to predict where the project is and will be going.)
I think that the name should always tell if it is using #linux kernel/#bsd.
then, the name of the independend distribution.
then, the other upstreams and its own name.
#Linux>independend distro>upstreams and own name
(could be in a different order.)
So Examples Given:
#Pop_OS! --> #Linux #debian #ubuntu pop
#Fedora --> #Fedora #Linux
#Linux #mint #debian edition --> #Linux #Debian #mint
#Android --> #Android #Linux
#Manjaro --> #Linux #Arch #Manjaro
#ChromeOS --> #Gentoo #Chrome #Linux
#Ubuntu --> #Linux #Debian #Ubuntu
#Void #Linux --> #Linux #Void
As you can see, some distro's will get a really absurd name, implying that it is a fork of a fork, which is in my eyes pointless.
or it could be something like
`Linux Mint.deb`, `Linux Bitkey.deb`
It would make it alot more understandable for new users and also limit the pointless forks so that it is easier to focus code review and audits.