this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
252 points (86.4% liked)

Linux

50472 readers
1104 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

Related Communities

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 20 points 1 hour ago

Stop posting Lunduke stuff. This dude sucks and has a long history of sucking.

[–] penquin@lemm.ee 9 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Lmfao. My fucking lead was arguing with me the other day how Linux is Unix. I just said ok after I saw that it was going nowhere.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 hour ago

Been there, had that conversation.

[–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 26 points 4 hours ago

chocolate milk comes from brown cows type situation

[–] endofline@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

It's based on BSD like Mach kernel

[–] Bravebellows@sh.itjust.works 22 points 7 hours ago

If it's not POSIX, it's POS

[–] beeng@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 7 hours ago

Achemm....

GNU Linux

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 20 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I remember a podcast I used to listen to a long time ago that argued that MS should just make a fork of the Linux kernel and just make the gui work like Windows. Better security and stability, and huge increase in user base with all the normal Linux users seeing it as viable alternative. I thought it was a brilliant idea. Well except Microsoft would likely have figured a way to kill Linux from the inside.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Except for the part where decades' worth of software no longer runs on Windows.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Right, because Linux definitely can't run Windows software. Don't check.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

That is the literal opposite of what the world needs.

Windows isn't a bad OS from a purely technical perspective. If Windows were released as FOSS, I would switch to Windows without hesitation.

[–] towelie@lemm.ee 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

The full Microsoft XP source code was leaked and is available for anyone on GitHub; not the same, I know, but it's atleast NT based. I've just always wondered why a community never formed to fork it

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Because it's not legal and no one's going to develop software for XP. Someone could make and sell security patches for it, but the type of person who still runs XP either doesn't care enough to buy security patches or it's running some hardware that isn't connected to the internet.

There are exactly two games released in the past few years that have XP support, but that was more a flex on the part of the developer then catering to the market. HROT and Zortch are those games if you're curious.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago (5 children)

Are you sure it's not bad from a technical perspective? I saw a story from a former programmer talking about how changes would be made the to the interface in the new settings app that's trying to replace control panel and the shit was like a horror story.

[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

You could keep the kernel tho while changing the gui

[–] MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 minutes ago

The windows kernel isn't all that great, particularly in the realm of memory security or scheduling.

You know, to each their own. Question is really whether windows maintaining a closed source kernel even makes sense from a maintenance burden perspective when it really doesn't give them much money in return. (Most of their money in 2025 comes from cloud services, not operating systems)

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Mostly because Microsoft tries to maintain backwards compatibility to ridiculous extents, and their customers grew accustomed to it so they kinda rely on it, no ?

[–] towelie@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago

Surely it's less work to maintain security patches for a few prior versions of windows than it is to indefinitely maintain backwards compatibility

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 5 points 5 hours ago (2 children)
[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

yeah I know, far from production-ready though

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I had forgotten about this!! I’ll have to start up a VM this morning to check it out.

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 2 points 5 hours ago

https://youtu.be/u0nuEXxzsdI

For those who don’t have the spare time 🤭

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml 47 points 10 hours ago (6 children)

Oh it's infamous racist Bryan Lunduke. Is there no rule against posting that guy?

[–] Shayeta@feddit.org 8 points 7 hours ago

I see no racism in the video posted?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] DFX4509B_2@lemmy.org 50 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

No it's not, it's based on BSD, or more specifically Darwin, which is derived from BSD, so Unix-like, but not Linux.

Although, oddly, macOS is a certified UNIX OS so it can rightfully sit at the table with the SysV distros such as AIX, HP-UX, or Solaris, but it's nothing like those OSes in its nature.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›