Subj : Re: Community
To   : boraxman
From : tenser
Date : Wed Oct 05 2022 01:52:41

On 04 Oct 2022 at 12:35a, boraxman pondered and said...
 
 bo>  te> This is anecdotal evidence, and is a common logical fallacy.
 bo>  te> 
 bo>  te> Just because _you_ haven't seen a thing doesn't mean that that
 bo>  te> thing isn't common.
 bo>  te> 
 bo>  te> In _my_ professional career, it's rare to see someone using,
 bo>  te> say, a Windows desktop.  That doesn't mean that Windows isn't
 bo>  te> wildly popular as a desktop OS.
 bo>  te> 
 bo>  te> And moreover, when we're talking about Linux, we're talking
 bo>  te> about Linux, which encompasses a lot more than just someone's
 bo>  te> idea of a desktop system.
 bo>  te> 
 bo> 
 bo> Are you a software developer of some description by any chance?  Most
 bo> people in the world are not actually software developers. 

I am, but that rather misses the point.  You asserted
that Linux is "niche" and that this is good because it
prevents large corporations from defining it's direction.

Perhaps you meant to say, "Linux on the desktop, as used
by me with my preferred distro, is uncommon in my line of
work and among my peers."  That statement may well be
true, but the original argument, that Linux is "niche"
as a prima facie statement is simply incorrect.  Again,
Linux is used everywhere, and again, most Linux development
is done at large corporations.  If someone wants to get
a major feature pushed, it almost has to be done with
corporate sponsorship.  This isn't really a debatable
statement, either; plenty of evidence is readily available,
including the history in the Linux git repository.  Sorted
by domain, the top twenty contributors come mostly from
commercial organizations.  Granted, the #1 _is_ "gmail",
but a) many Linux developers contribute using their personal
email address, and b) the next three entries combined are
nearly double the total number of gmail-using contributors.

So this idea that Linux is sort of the "people's OS" and a
quirky obscure niche thing is just not true.

 bo>  te>  bo> TECHNICALLY, people using Android are using
 bo>  te>  bo> the Linux kernel, but that is so vastly different to what we con
 bo>  te>  bo> be a Linux desktop that the term "Linux user" has little meaning
 bo>  te> 
 bo>  te> "We" who, precisely?
 bo> 
 bo> When people say they use Linux, they mean a computer.  When people use
 bo> Android, they say they use Android.  Very few Android users say they are
 bo> Linux users.

So, first of all, this is a strawman in the context of the original
discussion.  Second of all, lots of people _do_ understand that when
they run an Android device (which, by the way, can be installed on
a desktop; lots of ARM-based devices run Android in that configuration)
they're using Linux, and third of all, so what?  Whether someone
realizes that they're using Linux or not (like the millions of
school kids using chromebooks) that doesn't mean that Linux is niche.

 bo> We know this, because there are "Linux Phones" which are called such,
 bo> despite the fact that Android phones have a Linux kernel.  The language
 bo> people use says it all.  A "Linux system" is one which has not only a
 bo> Linux kernel, but userspace tools typical of a Linux install.

That is entirely subjective, but is also irrelevant to the original
point.  Let's focus on that; I'll say it again: Linux is not
"niche" by any reasonable definition (it runs everywhere; the
average person at this point _probably_ has multiple devices
running Linux in their home whether they realize it or not) and
it is mostly developed by large corporations.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.