I find it a constance annoyance that the majority of people out there routinely classify "Linux" as an operating system. For the record: Linux is a kernel.
What they should really be talking about are Linux distributions, such as Redhat, SuSE, OpenLinux, etc.
The argument is often as follows; "BSD is so fragmented, they have three (free) different offerings!".
However, when one pauses to consider the Linux distributions, one could easily wonder whether it's actually the other way around.
The number of Linux distributions far outweigh the number of BSD distributions, and the amount of difference between them is only going to increase as time goes by (userland-wise).
So I urge Slashdot readers out there (if they get down to this comment), please don't pass on the bad habit of defining "Linux" as an operating system, instead focus on identifying such platforms as Linux distributions.
I had to vent that after seeing Linux called an OS about 5 times today.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I find it a constance annoyance that the majority
:)
of people out there routinely classify "Linux" as
an operating system. For the record: Linux is a kernel.
What they should really be talking about are Linux distributions, such as Redhat, SuSE, OpenLinux, etc.
The argument is often as follows; "BSD is so fragmented, they have three (free) different offerings!".
However, when one pauses to consider the Linux distributions, one could easily wonder whether it's actually the other way around.
The number of Linux distributions far outweigh the number of BSD distributions, and the amount of difference between them is only going to increase as time goes by (userland-wise).
So I urge Slashdot readers out there (if they get down to this comment), please don't pass on the bad habit of defining "Linux" as an operating system, instead focus on identifying such platforms as Linux distributions.
I had to vent that after seeing Linux called an OS about 5 times today.
-h4r1k1r1