Why is every linux distro nearly identical?
>Install GUI is the same
>Desktop Environments are barely tweaked
>All use a combination of the same software
There is no originality. Debian with GNOME is the same as Ubuntu with GNOME, which is the same as everything else.
It makes trying new distros boring.
"What does it look like?" shouldn't even be a consideration when picking a distro.
>Take Debian
>Fill it with shit
>Install 50 forms of analytics, backdooring/"technical support" capabilities, botnets, adware, and keylogger
>Install browser with a custom startpage which you fill with ads, and a custom search URL which is full of ads too
>Release it as Winbuntu Mint Le Tigre
>Normies eat it up
>You make about $0.23USD per user
>You get donations too from turbo-normies
I wonder, OP.
>Debian with GNOME is the same as Ubuntu with GNOME
Ubuntu tweaked GNOME a lot
Also, there are many distros without GNOME
Yeah, but the same core functionality is always the same.
They always use package managers, require extensive use of the terminal, boot off of GRUB, etc.
There's starting to be a little bit of consistency on the linux ecosystem.
In the future all the mayor distros are going to be using Gnome or KDE as DE and flatpak or snap as a package manager as default. The less "normie" parts of linux are still going to be there to install in case you want your riced i3 tilig whatever.
That's the future we're headed, I don't say I like it, but that's how it's going to be.
Because they're not supposed to be that different. They're not 'user experience' faggotry to make you feel special. Each distro has different technical specs that may be considered preferable by a set of users, who then choose that one over the others. The 'look & feel' thing comes from user customization if you want anything special, otherwise you just pick your distro because of how practical it will be to build the system you want on top of that.
Coming to FOSS software wanting to rely on premade shit when it concerns the user environment is missing the point desu.
>Debian with GNOME is the same as Ubuntu with GNOME, which is the same as everything else.
t. never seen ubuntu after their switch from unity
>They always use package managers
How is this a bad thing? It's a fast and easy way to install programs without the hassle of tracking them down online. Different package managers don't all have the same packages either.
>require extensive use of the terminal
Not all distros require this either. You can install and maintain something like mint or ubuntu with no knowledge of the terminal.
>boot off of GRUB
Don't see why this is an issue either.
> Install GUI is the same
I've only installed these distros and they were all different. Then again if you're talking about look and feel yeah they all use the same text-based dialog box library whose name I forget
> Desktop Environments are barely tweaked
Literally not the point of a distro. You can install any DE or WM on any distro and rice it to taste.
> All use a combination of the same software
Surprise, surprise, people tend to use similar software. Another surprise, complex software that takes a lot of effort to develop often has few or no alternatives that are as good as it (like Blender). And simpler software that does have alternatives (like gui file managers) does vary by DE and distro.