post #11 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rothen View Post

Imagine Linux is ice cream. There are many flavors, but there are flavors that we consider to be more ice cream-like. For example, Mint can be like latte flavored ice cream. Namely, lets say that Windows is coffee. Although latte is a type of coffee, latte flavored ice cream is still ice cream. However, when we consider vanilla ice cream (Linux from scratch), it is far more "ice-creamy" than a latte flavored ice cream. Therefore, although Mint has some characteristics that diverge from what we know as Linux, it still is Linux and we should embrace it.
I can remember when Mint wasn't too big, but now that I see it, it has really grown. See how fast it grows? Jared2008 is already a new convert.

That is still rubbish because Linux is just a kernel so you're not comparing like for like.

If you want to talk about which more GNU, POSIX or even specific subset of Linux distributions (eg which is more "Redhat" out of CentOS and Fedora), then you'd have a point. But arguing that one distribution is more "Linux" than another when talking about the userland is just wrong in my opinion.