Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian
-
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Tim_G said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@wirestyle22 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@PenguinWrangler said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
This is like my friends that are in the South that refer to all Soda drinks as "Coke"
It's better than "pop"
Nope, not even close
I refer to carbonated beverages as "soda", and use the actual name of the drink when referring to a specific one such as Sprite or Pepsi.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to a soda as a coke... only when asking for a Coca Cola specifically.
In Texas they don't know what soda is most of the time. You say Coke for soda and Coke Coke for Coke, Pepsi Coke for Pepsi and so forth.
I have never seen this, but you're more traveled than I.
Even my family does this
-
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Tim_G said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@wirestyle22 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@PenguinWrangler said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
This is like my friends that are in the South that refer to all Soda drinks as "Coke"
It's better than "pop"
Nope, not even close
I refer to carbonated beverages as "soda", and use the actual name of the drink when referring to a specific one such as Sprite or Pepsi.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to a soda as a coke... only when asking for a Coca Cola specifically.
Everything is "Coke" unless I want "Sprite" or "Dr. Pepper"...
The waiter / waitress will usually say "is Pepsi ok?"
To which my reply is, "Yeah, that's fine."
That's where just saying soda is much handier.
The whole idea of dumbing down the request for a drink is mind goggling to me. Coke means everything, but a sprint or DP? what about 7UP?
Seriously though, do most southern restaurants only carry coke/diet coke and no other options? that just seems weird.
You can't just go into a McD's and ask for a hamburger - there are 10 different options.
Yup, it's totally nonsensical. It's so bad that I often wonder if southerners are confused about how people talk about drinks in books or on television.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Tim_G said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@wirestyle22 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@PenguinWrangler said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
This is like my friends that are in the South that refer to all Soda drinks as "Coke"
It's better than "pop"
Nope, not even close
I refer to carbonated beverages as "soda", and use the actual name of the drink when referring to a specific one such as Sprite or Pepsi.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to a soda as a coke... only when asking for a Coca Cola specifically.
Everything is "Coke" unless I want "Sprite" or "Dr. Pepper"...
The waiter / waitress will usually say "is Pepsi ok?"
To which my reply is, "Yeah, that's fine."
That's where just saying soda is much handier.
The whole idea of dumbing down the request for a drink is mind goggling to me. Coke means everything, but a sprint or DP? what about 7UP?
Seriously though, do most southern restaurants only carry coke/diet coke and no other options? that just seems weird.
You can't just go into a McD's and ask for a hamburger - there are 10 different options.
Yup, it's totally nonsensical. It's so bad that I often wonder if southerners are confused about how people talk about drinks in books or on television.
Not this one. I'm what you folks outside o-the-south might call culturally sensitive.
*cough*snicker, snicker*cough*
-
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
-
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
In Texas you is singular, y'all is plural but only directed and all y'all is "everyone."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
In Texas you is singular, y'all is plural but only directed and all y'all is "everyone."
So 'All y'all get off my lawn', gotcha.
-
@travisdh1 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
In Texas you is singular, y'all is plural but only directed and all y'all is "everyone."
So 'All y'all get off my lawn', gotcha.
That would include people you might have wanted to have kept there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@travisdh1 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
In Texas you is singular, y'all is plural but only directed and all y'all is "everyone."
So 'All y'all get off my lawn', gotcha.
That would include people you might have wanted to have kept there.
Oh no.. travis didn't want anyone to stay
-
@Dashrender said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@travisdh1 said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@dafyre said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
It's related to the you problem. Many southerns, Texas specifically, struggle with understanding the word "you". When speaking to Texas, you often have to adjust for their perceived meaning of the word. They use a non-English version of it, it's actually a form of Spanglish, where it means a singular you rather than the single or plural of English. English has no singular you, but the incredible Spanish influence in Texas has left the native Texans speaking Spanish but with English vocabulary in some weird spots, and this is one of them.
In the South East, it's Y'all for one or two people. More than three folks, and it's all y'all.
In Texas you is singular, y'all is plural but only directed and all y'all is "everyone."
So 'All y'all get off my lawn', gotcha.
That would include people you might have wanted to have kept there.
Oh no.. travis didn't want anyone to stay
Exactly, I'm terrible now that I've got a role in management and IT. People are crazy, computers are at least logical!
-
I'm not a Linux guy really, I only manage a handful of non-gui VMs and web servers using Ubuntu or CentOS.
I've played with some distros with GUIs, especially Mint, but some others too like say Elementary. I've tried out KDE, Cinnamon, xfce, Mate, Gnome, Plasma just for kicks. I could never find anything that really felt good enough to use as a primary OS. And I don't play games, rarely.But regarding language, it can sometimes still be difficult knowing when to say "this is a Linux thing" versus something that is more about the distro, the GUI, the window manager, the graphics subsystem, whatever implementation.
Today I found myself installing a tool on Window. But the folders it created reminded me of a Linux file system, i.e. "usr", "etc", "bin", and so on. And I thought to myself, "their folder structure looks like Linux".
Then I stopped myself. Do the folders really look like "Linux", or do they look like what is common of many "distros"? Many "OSes"? Is the folder system a function of the kernel or just a convention? If the kernel were swapped with a different kernel, wouldn't it still use the same folder structure?
I'm not sure it's accurate to say the folders "looked like Linux". But at the same time, it sounds pedantic to use almost any other phraseology than the simple phrase "looks like Linux".
I don't know why the file system is the way it is, maybe it's convention, maybe not. But nothing sounded better than the simple observation "looks like Linux".If that was inaccurate terminology, I don't know what would be better.
-
@guyinpv said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
I'm not sure it's accurate to say the folders "looked like Linux". But at the same time, it sounds pedantic to use almost any other phraseology than the simple phrase "looks like Linux".
I don't know why the file system is the way it is, maybe it's convention, maybe not. But nothing sounded better than the simple observation "looks like Linux".
If that was inaccurate terminology, I don't know what would be better.I just say Unix-like
-
@guyinpv said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
I'm not a Linux guy really, I only manage a handful of non-gui VMs and web servers using Ubuntu or CentOS.
I've played with some distros with GUIs, especially Mint, but some others too like say Elementary. I've tried out KDE, Cinnamon, xfce, Mate, Gnome, Plasma just for kicks. I could never find anything that really felt good enough to use as a primary OS. And I don't play games, rarely.But regarding language, it can sometimes still be difficult knowing when to say "this is a Linux thing" versus something that is more about the distro, the GUI, the window manager, the graphics subsystem, whatever implementation.
Today I found myself installing a tool on Window. But the folders it created reminded me of a Linux file system, i.e. "usr", "etc", "bin", and so on. And I thought to myself, "their folder structure looks like Linux".
Then I stopped myself. Do the folders really look like "Linux", or do they look like what is common of many "distros"? Many "OSes"? Is the folder system a function of the kernel or just a convention? If the kernel were swapped with a different kernel, wouldn't it still use the same folder structure?
I'm not sure it's accurate to say the folders "looked like Linux". But at the same time, it sounds pedantic to use almost any other phraseology than the simple phrase "looks like Linux".
I don't know why the file system is the way it is, maybe it's convention, maybe not. But nothing sounded better than the simple observation "looks like Linux".If that was inaccurate terminology, I don't know what would be better.
Wire is correct. It's a conventional UNIX file structure that you are talking about. Nothing "looks like" a kernel, kernels have no external artifacts. There is no command, interface, filesystem or such tells you anything about the kernel. Only people writing code directly to the OS API can tell what it looks like and as Linux is a clone it doesn't look like itself even.
In the 1970s a convention in file structures was introduced for early UNIX systems. Lots of things use it today. Most Linux do, but not all.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
Wire is correct.
Feelsgoodman.jpg
-
The point being this is not common knowledge or vernacular.
To all but the most learned, something is either "Linux-y" or "Windows-y" or "Mac-y".
I'm not sure we'll ever get away from the idea that the word "Linux" has simply become "those other OSes that aren't Windows or Mac".
-
@guyinpv said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
"Mac-y"
Windows is bad Mmmkay
-
@guyinpv Common knowledge tells people tomatoes are vegetables when they are actually fruit
-
@guyinpv said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
To all but the most learned, something is either "Linux-y" or "Windows-y" or "Mac-y".
How does something appear to be Linux or Mac since they share almost everything?
What do you call it when Windows looks Linuxy and Linux does not?
Ubuntu on Windows is pure Windows, no Linux, but looks like what you think of as Linux.
-
@guyinpv said in Simple Proofs that Linux Is Not an Operating System with Ubuntu and Debian:
I'm not sure we'll ever get away from the idea that the word "Linux" has simply.....
What is important is that people in tech, IT and business should use Linux to mean Linux. People who use Linux to mean "thing I made up known only to me" will always exist and must be ignored. This exists in every field.
-
Who are we having issues with using the word Linux incorrectly, End Users or IT Pros?
