Linux

48335 readers

477 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Have new distro releases become meaningless? (lemdro.id)

submitted 1 month ago by mfat@lemdro.id to c/linux@lemmy.ml

78 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When I read through the release announcements of most Linux distributions, the updates seem repetitive and uninspired—typically featuring little more than a newer kernel, a desktop environment upgrade, and the latest versions of popular applications (which have nothing to do with the distro itself). It feels like there’s a shortage of meaningful innovation, to the point that they tout updates to Firefox or LibreOffice as if they were significant contributions from the distribution itself.

It raises the question: are these distributions doing anything beyond repackaging the latest software? Are they adding any genuinely useful features or applications that differentiate them from one another? And more importantly, should they be?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] serenissi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unity was envisioned to become mir based eventually. So they invented a whole new display protocol when wayland was there, vastly immature though :)

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Wayland was entirely unusable and mired in politics. (Still is mired in politics tbh.) So Canonical took the things they wanted, added things they needed to get it working, and called it Mir.

When Wayland finally became functional, they also made mir a Wayland compositor.

Some of the Wayland Frog protocols stuff is stuff that originated with Canonical trying to make Wayland usable before they took their ball and went home because the giants of the industry didn't want to talk to a company of under 1000 people.

[–] serenissi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

My point was that unity was innovative, not just gnome with extras.

Back then I actually liked mir (also unity) personally more than wayland.