Posted on 09/04/2014 12:17:37 PM PDT by ShadowAce
One of the most common expressions that you will hear in the Linux community is platform fragmentation, and it's also one of the contra arguments that people spout when citing reasons not to get a Linux OS. I'm here to tell you why platform fragmentation is actually a good thing.
First of all, let’s explain what people mean by platform fragmentation, which is also sometimes referred to as desktop fragmentation. The Linux ecosystem is populated by hundreds of active Linux distributions, some of them more popular than others. There are lots of different desktop environments and some of them might feel redundant.
As you well know, Linux is not the desktop of choice for many people. In fact, the most optimistic numbers place the Linux desktop at around 1.7% of the market share. It's a lot, if we consider the total number of PCs in the world, but in the grand scheme of things it is very little.
It's not like Linux OS can't compete with their main two opponents, Windows and Mac OS X. In fact, Linux is better in many aspects and some of those features, like security for example, should ensure its domination. Being the most secure operating system out there doesn't seem to do much, and platform fragmentation is invoked as one of the reasons.
Linux developers have a habit of starting parallel projects when there is a perfectly good software that does the same thing. Or, better yet, they fork the original application and create their own. Sometimes they have good reasons to do so, but most of the times they are wrong.
The end result is a perceived chaos of applications, operating systems, desktop environments, you name it. Developers are pulling in every direction and the lack of a concentrated effort is damaging the platform in its entirety.
Surprisingly enough, platform fragmentation is actually one of the strengths of Linux. The fact that Linux developers can fork and develop their own version of the software means they also have the freedom to do so. On many occasions, the two parallel applications start borrowing features from one another and that improves both of them.
Platform fragmentation is also the direct result of complete freedom, something that can't really be experienced with other type of OSes. Users can choose what they want, even if sometimes they might be confused because there are too many similar things on their plate. The good software will always rise to the surface and that's true either for applications or distributions.
It's also argued from time to time that developers should unite their efforts to put together a better product. People tend to forget that most of the Linux ecosystem is open source and free. This means that developers work on what they like and do things exactly how they like. "Forcing" them to work on a project just for the sake of unity is not really a good idea.
As long as we perceive fragmentation as a bad thing, it will be just that, but we also have to keep in mind that a lot of the innovations and interesting things that happen in open source are because someone had an idea that didn't fit into their current paradigm.
Linux is not weaker because of fragmentation, it's actually stronger. The entire Linux experience is greater than the sum of all the parts, and the main reason for that is that there are "too many" parts to begin with.
The free-market system for everyday products and services, is not the same kind of market that needs to exist for operating systems. Sure, we can probably support hundreds or thousands of OSes, but then, who’s going to support them on the consumer side, where most people would be seeking help on a daily basis because of the myriad of problems and utter confusion.
I use Fedora at home and Ubuntu at work. Aide from yum vs. apt-get and a bit of Unity strangeness with Ubuntu it’s basically all the same. A better analogy would be driving cars. If you drive a toyota at work how much trouble would it be to drive a jeep at home? Or vice versa? If you can drive a car you can drive a car. Doesn’t matter which side the gas tank is on. It really doesn’t.
I can imagine what kind of world would result from your beliefs and expectations.
No standards at all, and chaos.
However, people are still resisting the Linux way, and the geeks and more technically inclined, can continue using it and perhaps doing some great things with it, but, in the regular consumer marketplace, it’s failed for decades, and will continue to fail.
Save this discussion, and in twenty years time, come back and tell me I was wrong. (And no, we’re not talking about Android, because, it’s not a desktop or laptop OS).
Standards have been more lacking in closed source software all along due to opaque development. Standards are more common in open source development incuding standards for designs of useful products other than software, and the code for those standards is public for all to see. Granted, even standards are more quickly improved in open source development.
As for 20 years, I’ve been using Linux for nearly 20 years, although NetBSD is better for some purposes (extra security, transducers, industrial hardware, etc.). On closed source software, manufactured scarcity is one of the reasons for its decline.
Linux is the most common operating system in Internet servers for good reasons, but there are also Linux distributions that are easy to use, easy to install and include multimedia support by default. The following is a good one.
Linux Mint
http://linuxmint.com/
It’s really very nice to use a system with no concerns about viruses or spyware. Open source development isn’t stopping after software, though.
Machines for processing raw materials are being built now from open source development. Some of the machines for further processing are computer controlled, and there are also robotics in development. There are standards as well as guidelines. Such development is a natural result of the kind of economic situation that we’re in. It’s also a natural right.
“Chaos?” Perceptions of harmony or chaos will depend on one’s point of view. For most, there’s not so much harmony in the current situation (see contemporary hyperbolic political speech/propaganda, recirculating debt economy, all). Many would like to see more productive activities and harmony in their own locales. But yes, there have been a few infamous historical figures that would have viewed such activities as chaos.
I’ve used Linux in the past, and I’ve also installed Linux on several computers for my family. The user experience stunk to high heaven, and I had to admit to myself and my family members that, Linux just wasn’t right for prime time. It’s still not right for prime time, even if it’s a good or the best solution for servers.
Consumer-side computing cannot allow for experimentation, and Linux is a decades-long experiment (on the consumer side).
Standards are defined as what is the more accepted and easier to use and which people have the least number of complaints about. Linux will never be Windows or even OSX or Android or iOS. The Linux people (developers) are still trying to emulate the Windows experience with their OS, and if standards to them means being more “Windows-like”, then, they’re looking at Windows as the standard.
No matter how anyone wants to spin it or put in, Windows is the standard. Closed or not. The standard is also defined by what most machines use, and Windows is what most PCs use. So, standards for computing have been defined for at least 3 decades, and Linux ain’t it.
I see there is an assumption among some posts that Linux must compete with MS and Apple. Perhaps it's natural to assume such competition but in my experience it really isn't so.
Linux is an alternative to the other two systems. It gives you a choice. I think it benefits more consumers who shun it than those that use it! By that I mean there is a third alternative to the windows or apple experience. I believe having Linux in the background keeps the big two more in tune with what consumers want, not what benefits their bottom line.
I use Linux and wouldn't consider going to anything else. I do understand that the learning curve can intimidate most casual users.
Viva la Difference!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.