Linux on the Desktop

It's been some huge amount of years that Linux has looked like the next big desktop operating system. And all of the many, many Linux variants are still fulfilling their wonderful niche market of computer geeks and budget driven users. Unfortunately, the more you weigh down your ship the slower it cuts through the water.

And here's the true paradox of modern computer operating systems. The more features anyone tries to add, the slower the operating system goes. It probably comes down to system architecture. Start with good foundations, and the world is your oyster. The poorer the foundations, the less likely the operating system will be able to grow. After redhat, woody, gentoo, mandrake, suse and linspire I gave ubuntu a try. Not a very decent try, just a kick around. It's fat. There's nothing to say that big can't be beautiful but it's definitely not a lightweight.

Compared to the 'competition', Vista, it probably is lightweight... but is it competition? Does the average computer user really consider using Linux in place of Vista?

The truth is that the lightweight competition for Vista is Windows XP. And that's the market that's being created by bloatware. It looked like the next great Windows would be the next big thing... at least until the netbook market (finally) exploded.

And without any warning, we immediately see mainstream equipment being sold with Linux installed on it. And what's the competition for Linux on the netbook? It's a machine that's double the price running the 7 year old Windows XP. And here's the true test of Linux usability. People prefer to choose a less powerful, more bloated, less featurefilled operating environment at twice the price. It's the same stench as all other Linux on the desktop projects. It's cheap, but undesirable.

When you're running an Atom processor with light RAM, integrated graphics and low storage capacity... there aren't that many options. But unluckily Microsoft has made Windows XP still available, keeping control of that mindshare which Windows Vista is threatening to kill. Is Windows 7 going to solve anything? Absolutely not. Netbooks can't be sold at competitive prices with the hardware required to run an even more bloated operating environment. And don't go into denial hardware manufacturers! Netbooks are primarily selling as cheap laptop replacements. When they start to crack 80% of the price of base laptops, they'll stop selling.

The only question that remains is where do you want to go today?

Linux wants to go mainstream. There are distros that are good and others that are worthwhile. IMHO, the major massive stumbling block that Linux distros keep tripping over is shared libraries. Installing a Linux application (any new Linux application) is a nightmare because of dependencies. Create as many tools as you like, if a special tool is required to install an application there's a fundamental problem. The same can be said about installing 2 applications that have dependencies on different versions of the same library. Windows has had and still has the same problem with shared libraries and backwards compatibility, but why in god's name does even a netbook need to use shared libraries?

Computers, even netbooks, are VERY powerful. When a computer that fits in your pocket ships with half a gig of RAM, for gods sake... just statically link the libraries. Apple has pretty much overcome this fundamental problem with modern operating systems by treating an application as a bundle. One icon might mean 500 libraries, but really... who cares. Drag, drop & execute.

It's not really pleasant that the majority of computer users have the expectation that their systems will be simple to maintain and use, but it's a reality. And why not have that expectation? I don't care what version of JRE or C the application needs, in fact... I don't care that it needs it. Just make it work and stop complaining about what *needs* to be installed to make the application work. Otherwise the solution will just become another application... or operating system.