Image shows a tweet with the header “and people STILL try to convince me Linux and Windows are better when the DATA clearly shows otherwise. SMH” with an image attached showing the following:

“Operating systems by current version” Mac OS: 14 Windows: 11 Linux: 6

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    The Linux Kernel version is at 6 point something, I think they’re working on version 7. That’s not the OS though, the current Ubuntu version under LTS is 22.04. That’s more than twice as much as Windows.

    Note I had to get this information from Wikipedia because Ubuntu’s website is currently unusable corporate garbagepuke.

    • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      You’re not wrong about their website, but it still only took 2 clicks to get that information. For reference, I can’t find it at all on Debian’s website without clicking download and looking at the version number in the filename. But you can get that in one click so I suppose they’re doing better.

      Edit: Sorry, I was wrong, you can see it under the Microsoft Azure section after one click:

    • notTheCat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      If my guesses are correct, the major version number of Ubuntu marks the release year

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Correct; the minor number is also the month. Which is why they’re almost always .04 or .10; the LTS version is always released in April, with non-LTS releases that serve a similar purpose to Debian Unstable (newer package base at the possible expense of more bugs) are released in October. They also have a convoluted codename system, as many point release distros do.

  • gerdesj@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    My phone is on 23. Nextcloud is on 27.

    I’m Arch and so is my wife (actually) and it doesn’t have a version. We just roll … and today my dongled, wireless mouse has stopped moving. The buttons still work and my laptop touchpad works fine.

    wtf!

  • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    non ironically, firefox did a jump in version numbers after firefox 4 because people were seeing the low number compared to other browsers, and would think they were behind technically.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      While true & I remember folks actually using this in arguments for ‘slow development’, there is some merit to versioning differently for something expected to get minor updates to perpetually follow latest specs such. I can’t imagine trying to discern what a “breaking change” would be in this context. Or would you make a new version for every visual redesign? Dates might have just made more sense, but maybe ESR is easier to follow with the current scheme.

  • Uncle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    but wouldnt lower numbers mean no one needed to fix & revamp a working OS?

    higher numbers mean more fuckups than needed to be fixed until it was so broken there was no longer a way to code you way out, had to start right from the start!

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      no it just means the OS is abandoned obviously, don’t you know that any library with no commits in the last 20 minutes is not worth using /s

    • lorty@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      It really depends on what versioning means for the project. If we are talking about semantic versioning then a lower number only means there haven’t been many breaking changes over time. Or that a lot of broken stuff has been kept that way because it would break compatibility.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Wait until they discover that Windows Server 2022 exists. Also, Windows 2000.