this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
-8 points (41.7% liked)

Linux

48705 readers
1079 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

Related Communities

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

like what if linux still was open source but had a lot of proprietary dependencies and packages and became more popular and therefore proprietary software came to it?? but it still would let you use any desktop environment and there would be a new proprietary desktop environment which was like gnome but easier

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 38 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think that's called a mac

[–] FrameXX@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

MacOS is open-source in its core?

[–] KryptonNerd@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah it's based off of Darwin

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Zak@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

Linux is a kernel which is often bundled with proprietary components. Android, for example uses the Linux kernel. The whole desktop operating system you seem to be thinking of is a Linux distribution.

There have been many Linux distributions with proprietary components over the years. SUSE's YaST configuration tool used to be proprietary, for example. There's probably something current along the same lines, but there's not much demand for semi-proprietary desktop Linux.

[–] NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago
[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] muhyb@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I prefer that over NT or Windows.

[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

ubuntu is a linux distro. nothing more, nothing less.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 11 points 2 weeks ago

like what if linux still was open source but had a lot of proprietary dependencies and packages...

At that point, it's not really open source anymore. Once it has proprietary dependencies, it's no longer open.

but it still would let you use any desktop environment and there would be a new proprietary desktop environment which was like gnome but easier

What you're describing is a closed-source version of Pop!_OS with a closed source version of Cosmic, their latest DE still in Alpha.

Businesses and software companies don't make software for operating systems based on their openness or proprietary-ness. They make it based on market share. Your idea would still have to compete with Linux, MacOS, and Windows, and it would have to get a better share of the market than at least Linux before businesses would even bother making software for your closed system.

The reason Linux is as successful as it is, is because it's open, and hobbyists can and do contribute to it for free. When you close that off, you then have to pay for development, and you'll have to overcome the gigantic barrier to entry set up by the likes of Microsoft and Apple.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 2 weeks ago

any distro except the ones listed here https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html technically already "took" that "route"

[–] Jestzer@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Quazatron@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It seems that you need to read up on Linux and how it is different from closed source systems.

You are getting downvoted by people that were once where you are, but have since forgotten what it is to be a newbie.

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's what I hated about the Reddit Linux communities. Everyone, or nearly, was super hostile towards nubs. Ask a question anywhere, sometimes even in the "newbie" r/ s, and it'd just be an echo chamber of "don't you know how to use Google?" Or similar stuff.
I've been dabbling with Linux for almost 2 decades at this point, and when I get stuck it's because I've already exhausted my web search abilities.
The most frustrating is when you hit a super niche issue, and the only relevant result is a single forum post with the exact same issue, and the only reply is OP saying "nevermind, figured it out myself."
And then to be told to fuck off and learn how to do a web search....

[–] Uiop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago

and web searching keeps getting worse and worse...

Have you tried turning it off and on again? You may have Cancer. Heres a different issue on Windows: rtfm ...

Get me my cat-hat, I'm going for a walk.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago

Then it wouldn't really be Linux, then, would it?

[–] Ramin_HAL9001@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well, Ubuntu or any company could certainly do something like that. But then this company would simply be competing with Android with an incompatible app platform built on top of Linux. App developers who have a hard enough time developing their apps for both Android and iOS would not want to write their app for yet another incompatible proprietary platform, even if the underlying OS kernel was Linux.

As others have said, the real advantage to Linux, the real reason to use it, with desktop environments like Gnome or KDE, in spite of their minor flaws, is that the software is owned by all of us. Unlike proprietary software which you are basically renting for a monthly fee, on Linux you actually own your software and your data.

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago

Linux does have proprietary blobs, Canonical has signed some NDAs, so not that far off from Android (which is linux-based and certainly has proprietary firmware).

[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

The interesting thing if I remember correctly is Linus whole thing was for priority software to be apart of the ecosystem. Really the low level stuff would be open and shared and any apps like user level software would be priority. There would be open source and freeware versions like on other operating systems but the foundation software would be supported by the app makers up the stack. It's a good idea but profit at all cost companies with short term thinking always fuck it up.

[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Unlike what people reply here out of ignorance, your thinking is correct, meaning, that Google has already done the hard work to create a TRULY modern OS, with proper usability, security, and yes, a way better compositor than wayland (in fact, android has the best compositor in the world, compared to ANY OS). A properly modified desktop OS based on it (better than Samsung's DeX for example), that is also able to run normal Linux apps, would be a huge winner.

[–] tekato@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

TRULY modern OS

What does this even mean? So iOS, MacOS, Windows11, Linux aren’t modern?

a way better compositor than wayland (in fact, android has the best compositor in the world, compared to ANY OS)

Wayland is not a compositor, it’s a protocol. SurfaceFlinger can totally be made in Wayland. Saying SurfaceFlinger is better than Wayland is like saying words are better than English.

A properly modified desktop OS based on it (better than Samsung's DeX for example), that is also able to run normal Linux apps, would be a huge winner.

Nobody will ever use this on Linux, unless it is implemented in Wayland. It is infinitely more likely for Android to rewrite its compositor for Wayland than SurfaceFlinger being adopted as Linux’s main compositor.

[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

Wayland is not as advanced as android's system, so i don't see why not use android's. The license for it is fine.

[–] lemmur@szmer.info 4 points 2 weeks ago

Why do you consider android compositor so good?

[–] dharmik@linuxusers.in 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

it’s called macos, and honestly, i’m glad it exists. seeing apple choose a unix-based system is a win. windows is just... not it. it’s nice that macos lets people work in a way that feels closer to linux without needing to dive into the deep end right away. sure, it’s not open like linux, but it’s a step in the right direction for those who want a mix of usability and power.

[–] adrianhooves@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

yep you are right then, actually technically mac os is open... just not all of it!!!

[–] LifeLemons@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Openness of linux would be lost

Although device drivers are proprietary, linux does its best to limit such proprietry stuff. But in case of android, Google pretty much has a monopoly because a standard build of android isnt enough for use.

I hate that the spirit of openness is shot on the foot just because of the need of commercialization. I would prefer linux than android.

[–] vhstape@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 weeks ago

macOS, ChromeOS, SteamOS, AWS, Samsung Tizen, literally any embedded device, …

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 weeks ago

Wrong neighborhood, buddy.

Now GTFOutahere.