Linux on the bottom?

  • Thread starter CocoCreekFisherman
  • Start date

C

CocoCreekFisherman

Guest
I was wondering about the OS pecking order as of late.??

I know of Windows, Android,Apple, Palm [which failed miserably] and of course Linux. Palm OS was very widespread at one point with the PDA's.

Why has Linux not achieved the worldwide notoriety that the above mentioned OS's have? It seems to be on the bottom of the list.

Correct me if I am wrong but is there not a Symbian OS used for Nokia?..This OS also seems to be on the bottom of popularity.

Oh yes I almost forgot BlackBerry OS which is trying to compete as of late with it's OS 10.
 
Last edited:
the operating systems you mentioned are not equal to each other in terms of the functions, range of compatibility, userexperience etc. they offer.

thus it's not fair to compare them in a general fashion.

for example:


linux != linux

there's so many different flavours of linux. which one works best for you depends on how you intend to use it.

why is linux not as well known, or less standart, than windows?

well windows has a history of being deployed with new private computer systems and therefore is the first operating system experience for most computer users.

it is being managed and built by one company and thus features a unified and strictly managed user experience.

linux is only partially managed and offered in different versions. developers all over the world work on it and they are not bound to a strict set of user experience rules. so linux sometimes feels like a puzzle of separate programs, bundled together to one system. some users don't like that. in general linux requires a decent amount of "getting one's hands on" than windows. even tho modern systems like ubuntu oder linux mint or such try to offer a more desktop like user experience (somewhat similar to what ppl are used to from windows) it still is more work.

android, ios and blackberry os do make sense on mobile devices. dunno about blackberry, but android and ios are actually just mobile subsidiaries of linux.

their main functionalities and user experiences (touch focused) would be pretty much useless on desktop computers.

ios is actually derived from darwin, which came outa nextstep, which was a refinement of a bsd unix. but that doesnt make any difference, does it?
 
the operating systems you mentioned are not equal to each other in terms of the functions, range of compatibility, userexperience etc. they offer.

thus it's not fair to compare them in a general fashion.

for example:


linux != linux

there's so many different flavours of linux. which one works best for you depends on how you intend to use it.

why is linux not as well known, or less standart, than windows?

well windows has a history of being deployed with new private computer systems and therefore is the first operating system experience for most computer users.

it is being managed and built by one company and thus features a unified and strictly managed user experience.

linux is only partially managed and offered in different versions. developers all over the world work on it and they are not bound to a strict set of user experience rules. so linux sometimes feels like a puzzle of separate programs, bundled together to one system. some users don't like that. in general linux requires a decent amount of "getting one's hands on" than windows. even tho modern systems like ubuntu oder linux mint or such try to offer a more desktop like user experience (somewhat similar to what ppl are used to from windows) it still is more work.

android, ios and blackberry os do make sense on mobile devices. dunno about blackberry, but android and ios are actually just mobile subsidiaries of linux.

their main functionalities and user experiences (touch focused) would be pretty much useless on desktop computers.

ios is actually derived from darwin, which came outa nextstep, which was a refinement of a bsd unix. but that doesnt make any difference, does it?
It does and I thank you for that history.  ;) . I guess this is why Linux was chosen for the Pandora os ?
 
Last edited:
your welcome :)

well linux was chosen first and foremost because it's free. licensing proprietary software (as in ms windows, for example) is expensive and contradicts the open design of the pandora.

linux is open, versatile and compatible with the ARM platform which the pandora is built upon. ms windows is lacking all of these qualities :)

it is possible to run android on your pandora and it runs well. but it's just another linux based system.

the current os of the pandora is based on angström linux, a linux derivative crafted for ARM mobile devices. it offers more general and desktop like functionality than any android system (which makes sense because the pandora is capable of so much more compared to your standard android mobile phone).
 
your welcome :)

well linux was chosen first and foremost because it's free. licensing proprietary software (as in ms windows, for example) is expensive and contradicts the open design of the pandora.

linux is open, versatile and compatible with the ARM platform which the pandora is built upon. ms windows is lacking all of these qualities :)

it is possible to run android on your pandora and it runs well. but it's just another linux based system.

the current os of the pandora is based on angström linux, a linux derivative crafted for ARM mobile devices. it offers more general and desktop like functionality than any android system (which makes sense because the pandora is capable of so much more compared to your standard android mobile phone).
@KickAss...Would you say Linux is a popular os worldwide ? why yes or no?...what I am trying to ask is this :...if something is so good then would it not become automatically user popular?

For instance,,,a Linux smart phone with the penguin mascot. Do you follow what I am trying to convey? It seems to have been more widespread in Europe.
 
Last edited:
as i tried to show before: it depends on your point of view.

android (as a linux derivative) has a mobile phone market share of approx. 75%. that's a lot. most ppl don't know, that their phone os actually is a linux system, though.

the same applies for ios. its second on the market, but ppl don't know its a linux based system.

desktop wise i'd say linux is still being used (on a professional day by day basis) by a minority of users.

none the less "linux" has developed into a frequently used or googled term in the last couple of years.

to answer your question:

the name "linux" is probably well known world wide. but it's not popular (seeing that the majority of ppl might have heard of it, but doesn't know anything about it).
 
as i tried to show before: it depends on your point of view.

android (as a linux derivative) has a mobile phone market share of approx. 75%. that's a lot. most ppl don't know, that their phone os actually is a linux system, though.

the same applies for ios. its second on the market, but ppl don't know its a linux based system.

desktop wise i'd say linux is still being used (on a professional day by day basis) by a minority of users.

none the less "linux" has developed into a frequently used or googled term in the last couple of years.

to answer your question:

the name "linux" is probably well known world wide. but it's not popular (seeing that the majority of ppl might have heard of it, but doesn't know anything about it).
I for one had no clue about what you said and this has been informative for me. I did not realize the Android/Linux relationship at all.

Thanks again for the history and information. ;)
 
Linux also has the server market cornered. When you connect to a website odds are very good that the server that website is hosted on is running some form of Linux.

the same applies for ios. its second on the market, but ppl don't know its a linux based system
It's BSD based which is a Unix-like, not Linux: two branches of the same evolutionary tree. It's similar to Linux because they were both based on the same design but are different in their own ways. And really it's "based on BSD" in the same way that a cake is based on flour: it's in there, may even make up a large part of it, but there's so much more that went into it that referring to a cake as "flour" is likely to get you some very weird looks by bakers. :p Android is more or less Linux: it's a cake that has been flavoured and cut and shaped and refrosted but it's still the same cake as Linux.
 
It's BSD based which is a Unix-like, not Linux
i had covered that in an earlier post.

i was refering to the linux/unix-ish inheritance of ios (alongside with android) in general to convey my point. but yeh, we are both right :)
 
After reading what has been said I also wonder now about how the licensing / or infringement of...has been carried out or permitted?

In other words..did Linux grant permission for Android? I never read of any legalities where I am from. I mean if they are so closely knit then how did this occur legally? Or financially for that matter?
 
Last edited:
Linux is free, free of money and free to share. The license is fully open. You don't need permission to use it, that's why it's used everywhere. The only requirement is that if you use it you have to make the sources (including things you've changed) available for other people to use as well. It's all about sharing: "use our stuff, but then you have to let other people use your stuff as well". That is also why you can download the Android source and compile it yourself if you have the knowledge.

Tivo runs Linux! How did I forget Tivo?
 
Hence the OpenPandora.

I never saw the whole spectrum here. 

I wonder if Linux ever kicked themselves in the wallet/purse for being so giving ?  I commend them and have to say that there are still plenty good hearts in the techno world now that I realize this.

I do remember years ago when Linux OS software/cd for PC was being sold at my local electronic market. It was boxed with the Penguin. I guess one could partition with Windows back then?

It was already said the the PC is of a different nature.
 
Last edited:
Who is themselves? Who is Linux?

The Linux Kernel was developed by Linus Torvalds.. but he was not looking for profit.  No one person owns it. 
Also what makes Linux as we know it has more to do with the GNU project... If the Linux Kernel wasn't used we'd most likely be using Minix or Hurd or some other thing.


The Linux boxes you remember were from companies like Red Hat, Mandrake trying to make something availible to people without good internet connections and if they made a little profit from it so be it.. otherwise it could be downloaded from the internet just the same.. Remember Dial-up was still the norm back then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Who is themselves? Who is Linux?


The Linux Kernel was developed by Linus Torvalds.. but he was not looking for profit.  No one person owns it. 


Also what makes Linux as we know it has more to do with the GNU project... If the Linux Kernel wasn't used we'd most likely be using Minix or Hurd or some other thing.

The Linux boxes you remember were from companies like Red Hat, Mandrake trying to make something availible to people without good internet connections and if they made a little profit from it so be it.. otherwise it could be downloaded from the internet just the same.. Remember Dial-up was still the norm back then.
Yes I specifically remember Red Hat. 

Ahhhh yes dial-up 28kps. :D . I remember 56kps as being a big step!!

BTW..thanks for the brief history lesson,,also very informative. ;)
 
Last edited:
packaged linux boxes for sale actually had a huge impact. thats a definitely a point there. ive been experimenting (or should i say struggling) with bsd and unix systems a while before i seriously started linux with suse 6.4. internet wasnt what it is nowadays and full linux systems on disks were a convenience. suse 8 sucked so hard it was a shame. never touched it again. in the modern age you prolly shouldnt pay for linux. anyways viba ljnix. sirry im kinda drunk
 
I feel like if I posted these exact same questions then @ekianjo would blast me till the cows came home. I wish he was nicer to me... :'( But ya, I used to not know anything about Linux, but I learned. One of the reasons I like this board is people are really nice to me. All the sudden tho, Ekianjo started making me really depressed, so I stopped posting. But to the OP, I have learned that while its totally cool to not know something, its best to just google it. You were lucky to have nice people reply to you, but you may not be so lucky next time....
 
EssoAir, because you dont ask questions in a sensible way. Most of your prior questions could be answered by a simple google search if you were willing to spend 10 seconds on it. :)


By the way while what kickass says is generally not wrong, many statements are inaccurate and deserve some additional comments. I am away right now but will come back on ths later.
 
Back
Top