Do we really need all these different Linux distributions?

If you have any inkling of the word Linux and know what it means then you most probably know that there are hundreds of Linux distributions floating around waiting for our attention. There are the big players such as Gentoo, Debian, RedHat, Arch and the currently popular Ubuntu. Out of these, shall we say root, distributions there are many spinoffs like CentOS, Mint, PCLinuxOS and Sabyon to name the most well known. To make matters even more confusing there are many, many specialists distributions like Backtrack, Helix, Knoppix and Clonezilla to name some of my favourites.

Over the course of my and probably your lifetime with Linux I have tried more than one Linux distribution. Those who are new to Linux and those who prefer different proprietary operating systems often ask the question of why so many different Linux distributions are needed. Some claim that it is dumb (I did think of a stronger word but prudence prevailed ) to have so many and the number should be reduced. Others claim that it is confusing to the unassimilated and they are likely to choose the wrong distribution and be forever turned away from the one true Linux path.

In reality there is no real functional difference between all of these Linux distributions. You can take any single Linux distribution and configure it to have the same funtionality as any other Linux distribution. The only real differences are the package management system as well as kernel and program version numbers. Some distributions tend to live more on the bleeding edge while some go for more stable versions. For an end user who just wants to use Linux it makes no difference at all.

To the end user who first comes across Linux things can be confusing indeed. They have different window managers or desktop environments. They have different distribution names and they look different. Even with the same desktop environment things are customised, moved around or just plain not included because the distribution developers didn't think they were needed. Configuration and hardware compatibility changes between different distributions, or even versions of the same distribution, add more to the confusing mix. So I can understand why there are calls for a single distribution model, much like proprietary operating systems.

Personally I think that we need all of those different distributions. The reasoning behind my thinking is like this. First ask yourself this question. Why do all of these people feel the need to create their own personalised distribution? A simple answer is because current Linux distribution offerings do not provide all of what they are looking for. So they go out and create or modify their own distribution.

This is all fine and dandy yet it still hasn't answered the question of whether we really need all of these different distributions. The short answer here is that yes we do need all of these different distributions for innovation and advancement of the Linux desktop.

For example. If Linux distributions were locked into a standard format like proprietary operating systems then there is no opportunity for experimentation and trying out of new ideas. One thing that humans are great for are idea's, good or bad. Idea's which are good eventually propagate to other distributions and bad ideas fall by the wayside. I believe that this is why Linux distributions aimed at the desktop market are the fastest advancing operating systems today.

One very good example which I can think of is Knoppix. Before Knoppix arrived on the scene hardware configuration of Linux hardware was a manual affair requiring intimate knowledge of your hardware details. With Knoppix came a great advancement in automatic hardware detection and configuration. Nowadays just about all Linux distributions have the same ease in hardware detection and configuration. Knoppix is a specialised distribution yet it's features and idea's have propagated to all other distributions.

Can you come up with any other examples? Do you believe that all of these different distributions are needed? If so, why? If not, why not?