Why is Linux so fragmented?

What do you mean?

that is a retarded and pointless question

Why are windows games so fragmented? all we need is WoW and Minecraft.

>>60835808
You dont need a different console to play each game.

>>60835837
i'm not sure how that compares to linux

>>60835725
Because of freedom.

"Linux" is not the correct keyword. The keyword you might be looking for is "GNU". This license is kinda like legos.With it. Anyone can create anything they want. And these legos are free, and not psychical (sure bits are physical but you get the point)

People create and use whatever they want. The people who create these systems typically do it because they feel like their (lego) build is the best. Constant competition between distros make them motivated

>>60835725
The only legitimate difference between different Linux distros is the package manager which is still mostly the same and even then, you can use Snaps. Linux is not meaningfully fragmented.

>>60835725
>package your libs right next to your binary, create a startscript and call the startscript from a .desktop file
it's pretty much what windows programs do, only difference being that in windows the current directory is LD_PRELOAD by default

>>60835725
Why can't we all just use the same computer? Not the same type of computer. Literally the same computer.

>>60835837
With some games you do though

Why is NTFS so fragmented?

>>60835725
It's not. Most distros are based on debian (like Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin...). This means if a program works on Ubuntu it should work on all debian based systems. Kinda like comparing windows home, pro, ultimate, enterprise and custom builds with additional or different pre-installed software (Tiny7, XP Black Edition, etc.). And since distros are all based on GNU and Linux you should be able to run most software even on other (non-debian) distros, given that you have the necessary dependencies. In worse case you'll have to compile from source.

It's not fragmentation. It's freedom of choice and specialization. Since some distros are specialized (desktop, gaming, privacy, recovery, networking/routers/servers) and most come with different software to suit your needs, especially the desktop environments. Windows also has this, since there exist windows servers, for example. Linux simply has more options.

This doesn't even hold Linux back, since majority of components are libre, distributions can learn from each other. There are only a few relevant base distributions; Debian, Fedora, SUSE, Arch, Gentoo, Android. This isn't very fragmented.

>>60836719
Dude it all sounds lovely when you put it that way. In reality we have bugs that last for eternity because devs just leave the team and create new distro

>>60836741
Fixing bugs isn't really the responsibility of distro maintainers though.

They should create issues upstream and try to work with upstream to fix stuff.

There's a difference in the aproach Arch takes over debian here.
On arch there are few patches, usually just to work with current versions of libraries, while debian has a bunch of "private" patches they use for their packages.

though I'm not sure if it's debians fault or upstream, that those patches have to be in the debian build system instead of upstream.

>>60836719
>Fedora
RHEL

>>60835725
It is not fragmented in any way that matters.

There is different ways to distribute software, but programmers only need to release the source for one distro and others can get it to work.
There is a lot of options for how the desktop should look and feel, but users can pick whatever they want and make it their home.
There is different versions of your software in use, but as long as you don't rewrite everything every day, you can easily split updates into security and feature updates.

If you are looking for a reason to why there is options at all, then it is because people are different and without a dictatorship to force people to do a specific thing, people will do what they like.
I think it is a good thing.