Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Would You Refocus Linux Development?

Posted by kdawson on from the if-money-were-no-object-and-politics-didn't-matter dept.

buddyglass writes "The majority of Slashdot readers are no doubt appreciative of Linux in the general sense, but I suspect we all have some application or aspect of the platform that we wish were more stable, performant, feature-rich, etc. So my question is: if you were able to devote a 'significant' number of resources (read: high-quality developers) to a particular app or area of the kernel, and were able to set the focus for those resources (stability, performance, new features, etc.), what application or kernel area would you attempt to improve, and what would aspect you focus on improving?"

3 of 821 comments (clear)

  1. Fire the freetards. by sakusha · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The biggest encumbrance I see in linux is the radical freetard mission, which is expressed in the licensing. Licenses like GNU have eliminated the possibility of real commercial development where it most counts. Nobody can create proprietary improvements and capitalize on their investment.

    Let me give an example. Apple is the largest unix vendor today because they picked the BSD distro, which is under the MIT license. This allows them to create a proprietary GUI layer (Aqua) while still contributing freely to the underlying open source OS code. MacOS X works because a commercial enterprise has devoted significant development efforts into the weak spots of linux, specifically, consistency of operation and function.

    Change the license. Fire the freetards like RMS. Get real commercial development going, and get everyone paid for what they're coding. For linux to succeed, it has to be an ecosystem where everyone makes money.

  2. Re:Might I Suggest... by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    So... you've had to use the command line because you tried to install an OS on unsupported hardware. You get zero pity from me. You chose unsupported hardware when fully supported hardware has been readily available for years. You wouldn't complain about having to use the command line to install Mac OS X on the same system, or to install Windows on a PS3, why is Ubuntu any different?

    --
    -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  3. Re:Three things. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    What you said:

    If I could refocus Linux Development... I would try to pool all the development into 1 distro to reduce duplication of so much effort.

    Linux is about choice. If Linux distros were combined into a one size fits all environment, guess what would happen? It would fork, because there would be people that didn't like it. Combining the distros is an idea that would never get off the ground. The users just wouldn't stand for it.

    What I heard: blah blah duplicated effort. blah blah choice.

    Both sides of this tired old discussion have merit or else it wouldn't still be around after so many years. So please find something that's not a waste of time and energy to debate -- unless either of you honestly thinks you're going to change somebody's mind...

    I know, I know, I'm gonna take a flamebait hit for this. I just wonder if people didn't spend all this time having the same pointless circular arguments, maybe there really /could/ be a refocus on common ground. In the words of Somebody Famous, "Can't we all just get along?"