Re:Not Another Linux Distro (Score 2, Interesting)

( I'll bite). always strikes me as funny when Linux people whine about the lack of a Linux distribution that works like OS X. Hmmm, maybe that's because Apple pays developers market wage to create their interface, rather than relying on community contributions by random, unaccountable people? Also, it seems that the Enlightenment WM is really supposed to mimmic OS X, (...) Have you ever used Enlightenment ( probably not )? It is nothing like OSX. The closest you could reasonably come to your statement is to point out the existence of a OSX skin. Also, Enlightenment predates OSX by quite a bit, so it would be hard for it to be designed as an OSX clone. Then again, that's the problem with the Linux community. Instead of contributing towards a common project and common goals, everyone goes off and totally duplicates the effort of everyone else. You end up with dozens of WMs, dozens of text editors, dozens of e-mail clients, a dozen web browsers, hundreds of OSs (that's what a distro is, after all) and not ONE of them approaches the quality of a commercial OS. There are ( surprise) dozens of email clients, text editors et al. for most OSes. I think you'll find a large number of these programs are not linux-exclusive. vi and emacs can be found on almost any nix system, for example. Including several commercial ones. Now counting a distro as a full OS is pushing it quite a bit, but even so, there are commercial distros - by your definition RedHat and SuSE don't approach their own quality.