|
|
|
Why is Ubuntu not Linux and Mint is?
|
|
5 points
by iambibhas
4836 days ago
|
|
I came across this blog post where the author suggests that if someone wants to start using Linux, s/he should go for Linux Mint, and not Ubuntu. Because Ubuntu is not Linux. Ok. I hear that a lot. But I want to know exactly why it isn't and why Mint is. Need a good explanation. |
|
Ubuntu is an operating system. Linux Mint is an operating system. Fedora is an operating system. The fact that we call them distros, as though they were really all the same thing, is a collective delusion that has made the fragmentation of the 'Linux community' seem like a strength when in reality it is also a severe, pernicious and chronic weakness.
Note my use of the term 'also'. That fragmentation has allowed a thousand flowers to bloom, but it also means anyone wanting to support 'Linux' has 1000 very slightly different and subtly incompatible targets to hit. This is what allowed Apple to establish a stable and lucrative unix based desktop business back in the late 90s/early 2000s, at the height of the 'Year of the Linux Desktop' era.
I think Canonical finally realised this a few years ago. They recognised that staying with the pack would mean staying a 'me too' distro. I can only imagine what has been going through Mark Shuttleworth's mind while Apple walked away with the unix desktop market over the last, what, 15 years? I think he finally figured out why they were able to do that, and doing everything the same way as everyone else wasn't it.