• redcalcium@lemmy.institute
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    There are plenty of desktop os other than of linux, windows and mac. You can even try them right in your browser here:

    • Kata1yst@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah exactly. Toy OSs have only increased in scope, scale, and number. And the public is still completely unaware, because these toy OSs don’t solve day to day problems the way that Windows, Mac, and Linux did when they first came to market.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s a little disingenuous. Linux was a university project. But if a new Linux was made today? Why would you use that with the other mature options available?

        • Kata1yst@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Disingenuous how? You don’t think Linux solved a real day to day need of it’s first users?

          Sure, from Torvald’s perspective, it was a project specifically to solve a small problem he had. He wanted to develop for a nix platform, but Minix wouldn’t work on his hardware, and the other *Nixs were out of reach.

          And this was generally true in the market as well. Linux arrived just in time and was “good enough” to address a real gap, where Minix was limited in scope to basically just education, Hurd was in political development hell, and the other Nixs were targeted at massive servers and mainframes. Linux filled the “*Nix for the rest of us, inexpensively” niche, eventually growing in scope to displace its predecessors, despite their decades of additional professionalism and maturity.

          That niche is now filled, the gap no longer exists. A “New Linux” wouldn’t displace Linux, because the original already suits the needs we have well enough. This is precisely why the BSDs and Solaris were “too little, too late”. They were in many ways better than Linux, but the problems they solve compared to Linux are tiny and highly debatable. Linux addressed a huge, day to day need of people who were motivated to help.

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            I think we’re talking past each other. I suspect Linux wasn’t much better than some of the “toy” OSs produced today, but there was a niche to be filled, which it did. So, if something that was as full-featured as Linux was when it took off was to be made today, it would languish because the niche has been filled. They aren’t ignored because they aren’t as good as Linux was back then, but because they aren’t as good as Linux is today.

            • Kata1yst@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              these toy OSs don’t solve day to day problems the way that Windows, Mac, and Linux did when they first came to market.

              Yes, this is the exact point I made in my first post. And in depth in my response.