Why wouldn't an Arch branch not be Linux?
Because it's Valve's own OS. They might consider being first-party sufficient reason to not to lump it in with its third-party cousins.
It's based upon the well established distro Arch, and thus still considered Linux. A distro is basically the Linux kernel with pre-installed packages. SteamOS only adds another layer of packages unto Arch afaik.
I know how Linux works.
The poster asked why steamOS might be considered separately to other Linux sisters, and I gave them a possible reason.
Yes, I know how Linux works.
The poster above asked for a reason why steamOS might be considered separately to other sisters, and I gave them a possible one.
The terminology is off then. Different distro's is not regarded as entirely new OS's, they're still Linux. E.g. SteamOS (if anything) is Steam's distro, not Steam's OS. I'm not trying to nitpick, only explain.
Yes, I know how Linux works.
The poster above asked for a reason why steamOS might be considered separately to other sisters, and I gave them a possible one.
Because itβs Valveβs own OS.
Still a regular GNU/Linux distribution. Even entertaining the idea it being anything else is ridiculous.
Even entertaining the idea it being anything else is ridiculous.
It's their own OS running on their own custom handheld. Treating it separately from other linux machines might be odd, but calling it "ridiculous" is being childish.
