Comment by embedding-shape
6 hours ago
Someone says:
> Here is a general purpose Linux distribution, give it a try!
Where does your mind go? That this is a server-only distribution meant for a specific provider? Or that it's something like Debian, that could be run on servers and desktops alike without much tinkering, or meant for any provider?
FWIW, Microsoft themselves don't seem to call this a "general purpose Linux distribution", I could probably guess why, what Microsoft themselves say is "Purpose-Built for Azure" which sounds much more accurate. https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/linuxandopensourceb...
I think the author might have confused (unintentionally or intentionally, who knows?) "general purpose" with "Purpose-Built for Azure", since Microsoft's own announcements get this right, while submission article is littered with this mistake.
Ubuntu server distributions are definitely general purpose.
So if I understand what you're saying, if someone asks you "Hey, could you recommend me a general purpose Linux distribution?", you'd recommend them Ubuntu Server rather than just straight up Ubuntu?
I'd agree both could be used in a general-purpose way, but I'd definitively call one of them more general-purpose than the other.
95% of my VM's run Ubuntu Server LTS, so yes, that is what I would recommend if I was a recommending person.
If they need a general purpose distro for a server, absolutely.
That would likely be a better recommendation than android.
2 replies →
Most Linux server distributions would be expected to be headless.
"General purpose" Linux distributions (not "server") typically would include a GUI desktop.
A GUI Linux distribution feels vastly more niche than a headless one.
1 reply →