Binary incompatibility of Linux distributions

[Karl F. Larsen]

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Wed, 13 May 2009 21:55:41 +0200
> Odd <iodine at runbox.no> wrote:
>   
>> I see. So to you, if you were the last two persons using desktop
>> Linux, you'd still call it successful?
>>     
>
> Successful for me, sure, but that's a silly scenario as there are
> already millions of users of Linux.
>
>   
>> I guess the people running
>> AmigaOS in this day and age agrees with you. I also bet they wish more
>> people were using it.
>>     
>
> I don't follow the reasoning of using an OS and wishing others would use
> it, too.  Why does what they choose matter to me as long as the two
> (or several) OSs can communicate one with the other(s)?
>
> Perhaps you really mean you wish that the Linux market share was higher
> but Linux really has no market share.  RedHat does, and the several
> other commercial variants but Linux /as Linux/, no.
>
> Cybe R. Wizard
>   
    Desktop was big dollars a few years ago. Back when I was using DOS 
and had a 16KB RAM and a 360 KB floopy as the Hard Disk, the first 
Apples showed up and they were the first Windows. Very neat and very 
expensive.

    Bill Gates and Microsoft jumped around and offered Windows 3.1 which 
ran on top of DOS, and was pretty poor but cheaper and a lot of people 
bought 3.1 including me. This was before Linux. There was Unix but it 
was expensive and no windows.

    Today close to 100% of the computer users want a Desktop no matter 
who it's from. I love Gnome on Ubuntu.


Karl