Shared publicly  - 
112
22
John Murray's profile photoLucas Rocha's profile photoCorey Hammerton's profile photoDenis Doria's profile photo
47 comments
 
cd /usr/src/linux && make menuconfig ... it's full of choices!
 
He's assuming the existence of just one distro with an universal approach, I mean I'd never use Coyote Linux for a non-Router device for example in Samsung Galaxy Tab, and vice verse I'd nerver use Chakra for PS3 (The first ones)  or for a router, But I can choose between GNOME or KDE, or LXDE, etc. or I can choose between two light DE like XFCE or Razor-Qt, or even KlyDE (I know that Martin Gräblin, the KWin hacker has say about what is a light DE, let's assume that you can define exactly what it is a light DE ). If you don't want an all options distro you can get a single target, like Chakra, Pear Linux, Bodhi, Ubuntu Studio or some sort of specialize distro.

And I keep pushing up some another examples; but I think I made my point. So in the linux is not exactly about choice; but I can choose, if I want, even without go beyond of the frontier of a "complete" OS with a linux kernel.
 
Linux is differnt things for differnt people.

FWIW for me, Linux is about making and exploring.
 
Linux is about 17 million lines.  Freedom is about choice.
So if "17 million lines is about Freedom" and if "is about" is transitive, then "Yes", Linux is about Choice.  Otherwise, maybe not.
 
That's just a silly play on semantics. Obviously for many people Linux is indeed about choice.
 
Linux is a choice - an option to choose a free OS instead of buying Microsoft or apple. Don't try to be so parsing about the "quip quote". It's just an operating system- why get all worked up about it?
 
I just use linux because it works and works brilliantly, end of story, yes choice is nice but not the reason
 
I worked as a C++ developer under Linux for one year coming from 6 years of C++ development under Windows and I have to say that to me there is nothing uglier and more disgusting in computing than typing all those command line novels. What I want is a free, open source Windows clone, not an ugly OS built using architecture from the stone ages (i.e Unix etc.). With that being said, there is such an alternative, ReactOS. I'd rather see that being developed to maturity instead.
 
+Hadi-Ed Karesli novels? Really? There are plenty of fancy front ends you could put in front of your CLI however you'll be missing out on the power a modern CLI gives to get lots done quickly.
 
Linux is not about choice like a restaurant menu is not about. There's no choice. All you can order is food.

This is rather facetious.
 
If I click the link I have no choice. And these people talk about freedom?
 
its very vague question and it depends on a couple of factors

1 : if the choice is between kernels then YES 
2 : if the choice is between linux-based dist then NO .. 

linux has become a synonym to any linux kernel based distro . may be thats the reason why its confusing for many users . 
 
I wonder if it is worth reminding everyone that "choice" is different from "options".  You have options.  You make a choice.
"Linux" has many releases, many config values, many forks.  So there are many options.  So you can certainly make a "Choice about Linux".  Not how to make a "Linux about Choice" though...
 
The kernel is the heart of linux. Linux is about choice and there are many different distributions to choose from and unlike Mac OS and Microsoft the distros are free of charge. The only thing you cannot change about Linux is the kernel but you cannot change anything about any MS or a Mac operating system.
Count your blessings and quit bitching!
 
Linux is a kernel. It can't be the heart of itself!
 
Linux is not about a choice, Linux is about choices
 
+Greg Kroah-Hartman  Yes it is ..and I am very proud of that..I have been using it for long long time..without much hassale because of you few better people ..who took care of the all the pain..
 I do not see linux as kernel only...
 
Indeed Linux is the kernel, Ubuntu even avoid mentioning Linux completely!
The fact remains that while the number of different Linux based systems increase, the number available developers for each reduced, potentially impacting on end result, making 'the choice' more likely to be windows or Macintosh 
 
Funny how choices come from great dictator Linus Torvalds. Not in derogatory sense, of course, just saying :)
 
please address your questions to Richard Stall man and Linus Torvalds. I am just a satisfied user with a hacker and virus free personal network.
 
Choice, really, is an illusion.

If you want a kernel which can run on Super Computer that does zillion calculations @ speed of light or a Production Server  scales up, secure and does not hassle you with reboots or a Hand-held device whcih is low-cost, customizable and follows open standards - You really dont have a choice, my dear - Linux is the only option. :-)
 
Although Linux is about choice, I believe that something is lost during the process. Maybe the kernel and the low level stuff works but desktop is a mess and this is what matters for most users. Not everyone is a developer or a sys admin. I use Linux exclusively for all my tasks(web browsing, music, coding, everything) and the lack of leadership on the desktop is obvious. So close yet so far away
 
Disagree (see link). Choose what arch, choose what drivers, choose anything the config supports!
 
Yeah, I agree with +Michael Amadio - it is about choice.  You can't choose the Windows kernel, architecture, drivers, filesystem, etc.  Windows kernel on a RaspberryPi? Not gonna happen.
 
It is certainly not about choice. Thankfully there is an excellent, structured and disciplined team in charge of Linux development. Thanks for all the hard work by Greg Kroah-Hartman and the rest of the team. **Remember guys Linux is a kernel.**
 
I really don't care a lot if 'Linux' itself is about choice or not, the real point is that Linux allows for choice.
 
I understand the point that we shouldn't confuse choice of distributions with the choice of the kernel. It is a perfectly valid point.  However broadly stating that Linux is not about choice is equally as mis-leading as confusing distributions with the kernel.
 
You're all noobs. Greg has a chameleon on his shoulder, and for a very good reason.. except that none of you get it! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

P.S I have a little penguin on my shoulder :)
 
GNU is about freedom and Linux is about choice.  Distributions are about practicality.  I am about to eat a donut.
 
" I am about to eat a donut." And that, my friends, is another choice.  Mine is to drink coffee. :)
 
I didn't read all 42 comments ( Douglas Adams by chance?), but I'm hoping one of them pointed out that Linux is clearly about Penguins. 
 
The problem is that "Linux is about choice" has become a code word for "Linux developers should spend time supporting options that they neither use themselves nor get paid to support."
 
Linux is not about choice.its about the realisation that there is a God and his name is Linux.It works for me .amen
 
Instructions unclear, recompiled choice.
 
Who really cares whether it "is about choice"? The fact is that the freedom provides the choice automatically. Not necessarily that every possible choice is presented to you but that you can chose to do something about it. For example: Don't like gnome shell? Linux Mint had the choice to take its source code and make cinnamon.
 
Yeah but I guess that is Free Software in general, as the first sentence in that summary says, Linux is just a Kernel..
On the other hand over the years Linux has become the symbol of a successful open project with contributers from several huge companies and volunteers alike.
Tony Luck
+
1
4
5
4
 
Linux is about helping Linus with his hobby project to build a cool operating system. The fact that some industries have built multi-billion dollar businesses on top of it is irrelevant to the primary goal (though if we continue to do useful things in elegant and maintainable ways, those industries will keep using Linux).
 
+Tony Luck I would say that is a perfectly good explanation of what Linux means to some, and what their motivations are to work on Linux (It's my motivation too). But just reading this thread you can see that "Linux", as much as it refers specifically to the kernel, has come to mean a lot more than that to a lot of others. When entire industries are largely based on your "hobby", when stock exchanges are built on your "hobby", when your "hobby" touches a significant portion of the world's population daily, I think using the word "hobby" to describe it is understating things a whole lot. A hobby is defined as something one does in their leisure time for no remuneration (i.e. it isn't part of your profession). I agree that Linux work is fun, and I feel very lucky that I get paid to do something I love doing (I've even personally jokingly called it my "paid hobby"). However Linux stopped being merely somebody's hobby kernel a long time ago. I'm just really glad that so many smart, passionate, down-to-earth people work on it to make it better than it already is. I'm also glad that a lot of people do so as a part of their profession.
 
it's funny: people read the very small print of Linux being a kernel, but nobody looks at the big, fat, link under the humongous "NO" which explains why Linux is actually not about choice.
 
I think the fact that we're all arguing over what Linux is really about is indicative of a deeper issue. I don't know what that issue is, keep in mind, but I'm sure it's there.
Add a comment...