This was written about 8 years ago. Do you feel the Linux landscape has objectively improved? Why? Why not?

  • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why Isn't Linux Mainstream? 5 Flaws That Need Fixing

    With that, the author implies that it's of utmost importance to make Linux mainstream. Is it? I don't know and I'm not assuming.

    1. The Landscape Evolves Too Quickly

    Not a flaw.

    For example, look at the biggest name in desktop Linux: Ubuntu. They release a new version every six months where each version is named after the year and month of release (e.g. 14.10, 15.04, 15.10, etc). Contrast that with Windows (every 3-5 years) and OS X (every 1-2 years).

    LTS. Debian Stable.

    Stopped reading here because the author is clearly ignorant on what he's talking about.

    • pbjamm@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Windows (every 3-5 years)

      Apparently not familiar with Windows Service Packs or the multitude of Win10 OS Release versions.

    • unix_inix_wenix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup, as is also evidenced by this part: "What about all of the distros unrelated to Ubuntu? You've got the well-known names like Debian…"