I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux,
is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.
Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component
of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell
utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day,
without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU
which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are
not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a
part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system
that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run.
The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself;
it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is
normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system
is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux"
distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
“I use Linux as my operating system,” I state proudly to the unkempt, bearded man. He swivels around in his desk chair with a devilish gleam in his eyes, ready to mansplain with extreme precision. “Actually,” he says with a grin, “Linux is just the kernel. You use GNU+Linux.” I don’t miss a beat and reply with a smirk, “I use Alpine, a distro that doesn’t include the GNU coreutils, or any other GNU code. It’s Linux, but it’s not GNU+Linux.”
The smile quickly drops from the man’s face. His body begins convulsing and he foams at the mouth as he drop to the floor with a sickly thud. As he writhes around he screams “I-IT WAS COMPILED WITH GCC! THAT MEANS IT’S STILL GNU!” Coolly, I reply: “If Windows was compiled with GCC, would that make it GNU?” I interrupt his response with “And work is being made on the kernel to make it more compiler-agnostic. Even if you were correct, you won’t be for long.”
With a sickly wheeze, the last of the man’s life is ejected from his body. He lies on the floor, cold and limp. I’ve womansplained him to death.
OK, I see you're having some trouble. No sweat. We're all friends here. Many of us don't get it on the first try. Let me help you. It's a symbolic representation of an actual physical object which you can buy here today. There's a nice description at the store page with the following pic along with it:
I've been using nothing but Linux at home and work for 20 years and it's news to me that these words are not equal synonyms.
The only people that get upset over it are those whose entire personality are based on superficial bullshit like this because they don't have a personality, or just want to feel superior to someone else, or both.
I've been using Linux professionally for a couple of decades, and using it period since it was hard to install and Slackware came in the mail on ~50 floppy disks. There is not enough "Get off my lawn" in the world for those people.
I'll call the path container whatever I damned well please.
It's like GUID vs. UUID, for most contexts they have the same meaning. Then if the difference matters either the audience already knows this or the speaker needs to be very clear that they are using one meaning over the other.
Same, my entire work uses it, with software that primarily targets Linux and coworkers that are as nerdy as it gets. Never heard anyone ever complain about calling folders a folder.
A folder is the visual representation of a directory. A reasonable desktop GUI exposes the underlying files & directories as file icons and directory windows. If your abstraction leaks, that's a bug in your code, not something to beat the other guy up with. It is quite possible to be both a Linux dork and a classic Mac dork.
First shalt thou take out the Holy Filter. Then shalt thou Internet four porn, no more, no less. Four shall be the number thou shalt porn, and the porn of the Internet shall be four. Five shalt thou not porn, neither Internet thou three porn, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Six is right out. Once the number four, being the relationship of porn to the Internet, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall wank off.
I started out in the 90's calling them directories and still do for the most part. However, if I'm speaking to the average person I get a strange look when I say directory.
I had a new employee ask me what I meant when I used the word directory. They had never heard 'directory' used in that context. It has only been known as a folder to some people.