"Is it time to split Linux distros in two?"

[n_hologram]

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/14/09/0 ... ros-in-two

Desktop workloads and server workloads have different needs, and it's high time Linux consider a split to more adequately address them, writes Deep End's Paul Venezia. You can take a Linux installation of nearly any distribution and turn it into a server, then back into a workstation by installing and uninstalling various packages. The OS core remains the same, and the stability and performance will be roughly the same, assuming you tune they system along the way. Those two workloads are very different, however, and as computing power continues to increase, the workloads are diverging even more. Maybe it's time Linux is split in two. I suggested this possibility last week when discussing systemd (or that FreeBSD could see higher server adoption), but it's more than systemd coming into play here. It's from the bootloader all the way up. The more we see Linux distributions trying to offer chimera-like operating systems that can be a server or a desktop at a whim, the more we tend to see the dilution of both. You can run stock Debian Jessie on your laptop or on a 64-way server. Does it not make sense to concentrate all efforts on one or the other?"

> "You can easily gear your system towards your laptop's needs"
> "Why aren't developers doing this job for you?"

[Randicus]

That person is obviously expressing an opinion based on ignorance. Yes, the base system can be a personal/business computer or a server. He/she even mentioned how it is done:

You can take a Linux installation of nearly any distribution and turn it into a server, then back into a workstation by installing and uninstalling various packages.

I cannot see how the claim about different workloads is relevant.

Those two workloads are very different, however, and as computing power continues to increase, the workloads are diverging even more.

If computing power is increasing, computers are able to handle larger workloads, both server and desktop, so what is the problem? Unless someone can illuminate me to the contrary, my opinion is the conclusion is derived from a cookie cutter/Windowsish mentality.

[Bulkley]

Unless someone can illuminate me to the contrary, my opinion is the conclusion is derived from a cookie cutter/Windowsish mentality.

Agreed. It really is an amateurish comment.

[Randicus]

I just used the link to see who that joker is. I read about the first dozen replies and all of them tell the person how clueless he or she is. So even the inhabitants of Slashdot recognise the post as nonsense.

[kolker]

The truth of the matter is that there are distros that specialize in servers and there are a bunch that do on desktop and then you have distros with many flavors. I am talking about the developers/creators of the distos doing the work for you in a general manner. Then you have your absolute general distros that leave it to the user to decide I would include debian in that category for it has a versatile installer where you can have as much or as little in the form of pacages X, de/wm, etc. The configuration is changed from default but is good for a out of box and in imo good defaults and for most use cases and if not change them to your needs.

[Randicus]

Where crap like this becomes a problem is when such things are posted as "articles." Euro-American cultures have been trained to not evaluate news critically. Most people foolishly believe whatever is on the television news or in the newspaper is truth without bias and nothing important left out. They take that belief with them to the internet and naively believe everything on the internet is true, not realising that anyone can post anything. Many people new to Linux stumble upon nonsense such as this Slashdot post/article and believe it is true.

[edbarx]

Flexibility is a great strong point, why the hell remove it to appease those who do not want to make their due effort learning about GNU/Linux?!

As randicus is claiming the world has become a world of 'yes, sir!'. During historical times this was towards a monark or a religious figure like a bishop or a pope, these days, we have become 'enlightened'. As I see it, the market has become too powerful politically, as it is affecting everything, even GNU/Linux. As the market aims at the masses, and these are usually clueless, and I dare say, lazy, anything that requires effort is deemed ineffecient, obsolete and inaccessible.

It is very sad that many people have no idea what modularity really means. Modularity is what makes possible a great multitude of different configurations, but it requires some effort on the part of users. Is it that beyond human capabilities to do some research before setting up a system? apt, aptitude, synaptic, whatever, have the power to set up a system the way you dream it to be, for your needs.

[kedaha]

You can run stock Debian Jessie on your laptop or on a 64-way server.

Classic face palm.

[craigevil]

perhaps he meant a 69-way server. much more fun than 64.