Linux

48008 readers

815 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Will operating systems still be relevant? (self.linux)

submitted 1 year ago by mafbar to c/[email protected]

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

With lots of things being developed through web technologies, and many things being web-based so that it is cross-platform, will operating systems still be relevant?

We can differ philosophically by using Debian or Arch or Windows or Mac, but if nowadays applications are web-based or developed through something like Electron such that it can run on practically all modern operating systems. what is the relevance of operating systems galore?

Don't get me wrong I love FOSS and Linux and stuff, but it seems that the paradigm right now is creating web applications, with many things being web-based.

Am I off, or is this something you also think about?

P.S. I'm a total noob when it comes to IT, so the question might be weirdly phrased.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mafbar 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Of course, without an operating system, all you have is hardware and other devices. But I meant for the casual desktop user, this does not really matter for them I don't think. I'm sorry, I forgot to put it in the question. Obviously operating systems must exist, I get that, but I mean that for a desktop user, who treats their computers as bootloaders to the browser, so to speak, will different operating systems be relevant for them, i.e. the majority of users?

[–] QuazarOmega 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To put it simply, no.
It's really exemplified by Chrome OS users, that is pretty much a browser bootloader, sure there's more to it than that, but the majority of users isn't going to even find out about crostini and whatnot, because if they can get all the applications they need on the browser then they're good to go.
So, as long as the browser is able to tap into the hardware in a performant enough way to enable all the kinds of applications that were once thought to be native only, the potential for the browser to replace all other apps is there.

For those who care about the technicalities there will always be value in choosing an OS with specific features though

[–] mafbar 3 points 1 year ago

True that. I think because for me, as a casual user, yes I use Linux, but I only use it basically for browsing, media consumption (songs, movies), writing down notes, simple office suite, some light gaming, and that's pretty much it. Sure there's the direction that Linux applications are run in containers like Flatpaks, but I can also imagine the direction of almost everything running on a browser engine since it's cross-platform. Whether I choose Debian or Fedora or Arch or MacOS or HaikuOS or whatever - I don't think there's gonna be any significant difference between them.

Keep in mind, I'm talking from the perspective of a filthy casual. More technical/philosophical-minded people may have different approaches in their computing altogether.