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.
>Desktop Environments are barely tweaked
it's up to you to customize it
Because every dev larps as a special snowflake but in the end they all make bad copies of Windows or MacOS.
not so much as the devs, but who rice always shoot for the MacOS feel.
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
I don't understand your problem.
Basically you are saying that the same OS works the same across different distros. If you want different core functionality, change OS: you have bsd, wondows and macOS for normie use.
If you want it to look different rice it up differently. Or create your own.
>Only comparing two distros, one based off the other. Saying they look the same
Nice bait thread user.
Well, I'm using Void to show it's logo in neofetch when I'm posting in desktop threads.
--ascii_distro void
this doggo looks sick.
> Installs the same DE on 2 distros and is surprised they look the same.
> Compares Debian with a Debian-based distro and is surprised they are similar.
Package managers are different, systemd bloat is different...
But then they see that OS name is different and I'm not okay with it.
I'm a hipster also.
wtf is wrong with that cat?
Ha. Unfortunately, Linux is a monolithic kernel, so your argument is shit. If you are running Linux with, say, KDE (or any non-GNOME shell DE) and only use the desktop utilities and Firefox, no part of that is GNU (except the compiler, but by that logic, we might as well start calling Chrome LLVM/Chrome).
>what is glibc
A worse version of musl.
Unless you're an autist that actually goes out of your way to not use any GNU software, you're on glibc like 99% of non-android linux users.
>Unless you're an autist
boi
>Using Linux
>Not Autistic
lmao
Looking at this, thing..gives me freaking anxiety. It's weird, creepy, and falls into the uncanny valley for me.
...shudders...
The purpose of distros are different functionality, not looks. There are some distros that give a unique OOTB experience, such as Manjaro, but in a nutshell, the reason you use different distros are package managers, init systems, etc.
>It makes trying new distros boring.
There are obvious differences between Debian based distros, Fedora, Gentoo and Arch based distros besides the desktop environments.