Friday, January 05, 2007
Linux Release Cycles Are Not Too Fast
I read "Another lost year for linux" last week. In the post, the author presents a list of some reasons he thinks Linux does not have a bigger market share. Although I agree to some extent with those reasons, I feel compelled to talk a bit about the last reason he suggests in his list: "Fast release cycles".
In the article the author points:
Most changes between different versions occurs under the hood: Bug fixes, enhanced hardware compatibility, faster drivers, etc. Some other changes are more noticeable like easier to use configuration tools.
Another advantage from using Linux distros: since they come with lots of applications bundled it's unlikely you notice if the new version is not backward compatible with the applications you're running now. New version of your applications will (most likely) be installed automatically!
Finally, you don't have to upgrade to a new version if you don't want to. Many distros have long time support so the bug fixes, security patches and even new applications will be available to relatively old versions.
Remember to backup important data before upgrading your system, no matter what OS you use.
BTW, happy new year everybody!! it's a bit late but this is my first post in this year.
Add to: del.cio.us | digg | blinklist | netvouz | Other
In the article the author points:
Do you know of any serious (technical or not) user who is willing to take the risk of upgrading a full system (which has also gone through heavy tweaking), every 6 months?It's true, few people enjoy upgrading a system every 6 months (a friend of mine likes to upgrade weekly, though). A system upgrade is potentially risky and there's no need to fix something that is working, after all. So, a 6-month release cycle may not be reasonable. And the author adds:
People at fedora, SUSE, and Ubuntu think there are lots, so they have a 6 month release cycle...
Windows XP were Microsoft's primary OS for 5 years. Users had the time to adapt and get used to the interface, learn the basics and be "at-home" with windows XP. The same goes for organizations. Do you think that fedora 4 ever had the chance of becoming a standard OS for anything?It sounds logical, isn't it? But that's partially true. Usually, the interface does not suffer radical changes from a distro release to another. For instance, if you upgrade Xubuntu from version 6.06 to the latest 6.10 you will find a new (better looking) theme but you'll certainly feel at home and, if you don't like the new theme, you can switch back to the old one.
Most changes between different versions occurs under the hood: Bug fixes, enhanced hardware compatibility, faster drivers, etc. Some other changes are more noticeable like easier to use configuration tools.
Another advantage from using Linux distros: since they come with lots of applications bundled it's unlikely you notice if the new version is not backward compatible with the applications you're running now. New version of your applications will (most likely) be installed automatically!
Finally, you don't have to upgrade to a new version if you don't want to. Many distros have long time support so the bug fixes, security patches and even new applications will be available to relatively old versions.
Remember to backup important data before upgrading your system, no matter what OS you use.
BTW, happy new year everybody!! it's a bit late but this is my first post in this year.
Add to: del.cio.us | digg | blinklist | netvouz | Other
<< Home
Post a Comment