Life is like a bowl of candy
Don't pay $300 for your Windows operating system
WHY LINUX IS BETTER
Linux is completely free of charge
(And don't copy them illegally)
You're probably saying to yourself : "Oh, I didn't pay for Windows". Are you absolutely sure ? If your computer came with a copy of Windows, then you paid for it, even if the store didn't tell you about that. The price for a Windows license amounts to an average of one fourth of each new computer's price. So unless you obtained Windows illegally, you probably paid for it. Where do you think Microsoft gets its money from?
On the other hand, you can get Linux completely free of charge. That's right, all these guys all around the world worked very hard to make a neat, secure, efficient, good-looking system, and they are giving their work away for everybody to use freely (if you wonder why these guys do such things, drop me an email and I'll try to explain the best I can :) ). Of course, some companies are making good business by selling support, documentation, hotline, etc., for their own version of Linux, and this is certainly a good thing. But most of the time, you won't need to pay a cent.
Forget about viruses.
If your computer shuts itself down without asking you, if strange windows with text you don't understand and all kinds of advertisements appear when you don't ask for them, if emails get sent to all your contacts without your knowing it, then your computer probably has a virus. The main reason for this is because it runs Windows.
Linux hardly has any viruses. And that's not like "Oh well, not very often, you know". That's like "If you've ever heard of a real Linux virus, please tell me". Of course, a Linux virus is not impossible to get. However, Linux makes it very hard for this to happen, for several reasons:
- Most people use Microsoft Windows, and pirates want to do as much damage (or control) as possible: therefore, they target Windows. But that's not the only reason; the Apache web server (a web server is a program located on a remote computer that sends web pages to your browser when you ask for them), which is open source software, has the biggest market share (against Microsoft's IIS server), but it still suffers from much fewer attacks/flaws than the Microsoft one.
- Linux uses smart authorization management. In Windows you (and any program you install) usually have the right to do pretty much anything to the system. If you feel like punishing your PC because it just let your precious work disappear, you can go inside the system folder and delete whatever you want: Windows won't complain. Of course, the next time you reboot, trouble begins. But imagine that if you can delete this system stuff, other programs can, too, or just mess it up. Linux doesn't allow that. Every time you request to do something that has to do with the system, an administrator password is required (and if you're not an administrator on this system, you simply can't do it). Viruses can't just go around and delete or modify what they want in the system; they don't have the authorization for that.
- More eyes make fewer security flaws. Linux is Open source software, which means that any programmer in the world can have a look at the code (the "recipe" of any program), and help out, or just tell other developers "Hey, what if blah blah, isn't this a security flaw?".
Is your system unstable ?
Have you ever lost your precious work because Windows crashed? Do you always shut down your computer the proper way, or do you sometimes just switch it off because Windows has gone crazy and doesn't let you do anything anymore? Have you ever gotten the "blue screen of death" or error messages telling you that the computer needs to be shut down for obscure reasons?
The latest versions of Windows, especially the "Professional" ones are becoming more stable than before. Nevertheless this kind of problem still happens fairly often.
Of course, no operating system is perfect, and people who tell you that theirs can never ever crash are lying. However, some operating systems can be so stable that most users never see their systems crash, even after several years. This is true for Linux. Here's a good way to see this. When a system crashes, it needs to be shut down or restarted. Therefore, if your computer can stay up and running for a long time, no matter how much you use it, then you can say the system is stable. Well, Linux can run for yearswithout needing to be restarted (most internet servers run Linux, and they usually never restart). Of course, with heavy updates, it still needs to be restarted (the proper way). But if you install Linux, and then use your system as much as you want, leaving your computer on all the time, you can go on like that for years without having any trouble.
Most of the time, you won't leave your computer on for such a long time, but this shows how stable Linux is.
Linux protects your computer
Viruses, trojans, adwares, spywares... Windows lets all these enter your computer pretty easily. The average period of time before a Windows PC (connected to the Internet and with a default "Service Pack 2" installation) gets infected is 40 minutes (and it sometimes takes as little time as 30 seconds).
So you can either 1) install a firewall, 2) install an antivrus program, 3) install an anti-adware program, 4) get rid of Internet Explorer and Outlook (replacing them with Firefox and Thunderbird), and 5) pray that pirates aren't smart enough to overcome these protections and that, if a security flaw is discovered, Microsoft will take less than a month to make an update available (and this doesn't happen very often). Or you can install Linux and sleep soundly from now on.
As we have already said in the "virus" section, Open Source software (e.g. Linux) means more eyes to check the code. Every programmer on Planet Earth can download the code, have a look, and see whether it might have security flaws. On the other hand, the only people allowed to look at the Windows source code (its "recipe") are people working for Microsoft. That's hundreds of thousands of people (maybe millions) versus a few thousand. That makes a big difference.
But actually, it isn't exactly a matter of how many flaws a system has, compared to the others. If there are many flaws, but nobody has discovered them yet (including pirates), or they are minor (they don't compromise an important part of the system), pirates won't be able to do great damage. It is really a matter of how fast a security flaw can be solved once it has been discovered. If a security flaw is discovered in an open source program, anyone in the open source community can have a look and help solve it. The solution (and the update) usually appears within a few days, sometimes even a few hours. Microsoft doesn't have that much manpower, and usually releases security patches within about a month after the flaw has been discovered (and sometimes published): that's more than enough for pirates to do whatever they want with your computer.
Freedom!
Linux and "Open Source" software are "free". This means their license is a "free license", and the most common is the GPL (General Public License). This license states that anyone is allowed to copy the software, see the source code (the "recipe"), modify it, and redistribute it as long as it remains licensed with the GPL.
So what do you care about freedom? Imagine that Microsoft disappears tomorrow (okay, that's not very likely, but what about in 5 years, 10 years?). Or imagine it suddenly triples the price for a Windows or Office license. If you're tied to Windows, there's nothing you can do. You (or your business) relies on this one company, on its software, and you can't possibly make things work without it (what good is a computer without an operating system?). Isn't that a serious problem? You're depending on one single company and trusting it wholeheartedly to let something so important nowadays as your computers work the way they should. If Microsoft decides to charge $1000 for the next version of Windows, there's nothing you can do about it (except switch to Linux, of course). If Windows has a bug that bothers you very much and Microsoft won't fix it, there's nothing you can do (and submitting bugs to Microsoft isn't that easy, see the "Report bugs" section).
With Open Source, if a particular project or support company dies, all the code remains open to the community and people can keep improving it. If this project is especially useful to you, you can even do this yourself. If a particular bug annoys you, you can submit it, talk with the developers, but even better, you can fix it yourself (or hire someone to do so), and send the changes back to the upstream developers so that everyone gets the improvement as well. You're free to do (nearly) whatever you want with the software.
When the system has installed, why would you still need to install stuff ?
Installing Windows is just the beginning. Imagine you just installed your brand new copy of Windows XP and prepare to unleash your computer skills. A friend sends you an email with an attached PDF file : damn, you don't have a program to read it. You need to go online, search for a website that will let you download Adobe Reader (or another PDF viewer), download it, install it, maybe even reboot. Whew, all right, now you're all set. Attached to your friend's email you find a text document, file.doc. Your Windows can't read that either, right now: great. Either you go buy your copy of Microsoft Office, or you just download OpenOffice, but still, you need to find it, download it (let's hope you have a broadband connection), install it, etc. Your friend also sent you an image, but it has a bad contrast, bad luminosity, and needs a good crop. So you can now go and buy Photoshop (how many hundred bucks is that again ?), or download the GIMP (this is the name of the free program that can do nearly as much as Photoshop) : search, download, install, etc. That's enough : you get the idea, Windows is far from complete, and installing it is just the beginning of trouble.
When you get Linux (such as Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora, etc., these are different "flavors" of Linux), you also get, without installing anything more :
- Everything you need to write texts, edit spreadsheets, make neat presentations, draw, edit equations.
- A web browser (eg Firefox) and an email program (eg Thunderbird, or Evolution).
- An image editor (GIMP) nearly as powerful as Photoshop.
- An instant messenger.
- A movie player.
- A music player and organizer.
- A PDF reader.
- Everything you need to uncompress archives (ZIP, etc.).
- etc.
You can just start working right away.
Update all your software with a single click.
Windows has a pretty convenient tool called "Windows update", which allows you to update your system with the latest updates available.
But what about all your non-Microsoft software ? Adobe applications ? ZIP compresser ? Burning program ? Non-Microsoft web browsers and email clients, etc. ? You need to update all of them, one by one. And that takes time, since each one of them has its own (auto-)updating system.
Linux has a central place called the "Package manager", which takes care of everything installed on your system, but also every single piece of software your computer has. So if you want to keep everything up-to-date, the only thing you need to do is press the "Install Updates" button down there :
Why copy software illegally if you can get it for free?
So, you're perfectly clean, you have *cough* purchased a license for all the software you've ever used *cough*, and nobody can bother you about this? Well, if that's the case, congratulations :)
However, for most people, let's be honest, illegally copied software is very common. Copying Adobe Photoshop instead of buying it probably doesn't let you have nightmares. But are you really confident that you won't ever have trouble for that? Not so sure, huh... Software makers are progressing and finding more and more ways to track down illegal owners, and since more and more people tend to have broadband (permanent) connections, they might add an online functionality on the software that will control and verify your copy each time you launch it.
If you run Linux and install free software, you won't have to worry about this ever again! Most of free (as in free speech) software is free (as in free beer). You can find a free replacement for most of the commercial software out there. They might lack some of the advanced functionnality, but they'll be more than enough for most people. Here's a list of some commercial software, and their open source equivalents :
| Commercial | Open source (FREE) | Exists on Windows? |
|---|---|---|
| Adobe Illustrator (~$500) | Inkscape | Yes |
| Adobe InDesign (~$700) | Scribus | Yes |
| Adobe Photoshop (~$600) | The GIMP | Yes |
| Adobe Premiere (~$800) | Kino, Cinerella | No |
| Adobe Reader (free) | Evince, Kpdf, GV | No |
| Apple iTunes (free) | AmaroK, Rhythmbox, Banshee | No |
| Autodesk 3ds Max (~$3500) | Blender | Yes |
| Autodesk Maya (~$7000) | Blender | Yes |
| Kazaa (free) | aMule, eMule | Yes |
| Microsoft Excel (~$200) | OpenOffice Spreadsheet | Yes |
| Microsoft Internet Explorer (free) | Firefox, Konqueror | Yes |
| Microsoft Office (~$400) | OpenOffice | Yes |
| Microsoft Outlook (free) | Thunderbird, Evolution, KMail | Yes |
| Microsoft Powerpoint (~$200) | OpenOffice Presentation | Yes |
| Microsoft Windows Media Player (free) | Mplayer, VLC, Totem, Kaffeine, Xine | Yes |
| Microsoft Word (~$200) | OpenOffice Word Processor | Yes |
| MSN Messenger (free) | Pidgin, Kopete, aMSN | Yes |
| Nero (~$100) | K3b, Gnomebaker | No |
| Palm Desktop (free) | Gnome-Pilot, KPilot | No |
| Quark XPress (~$800) | Scribus | Yes |
| QuickTime Player (free) | Mplayer, VLC, Totem, Kaffeine, Xine | Yes |
| Winamp (free) | AmaroK, R |
Need new software? Don't bother searching the web, Linux gets it for you.
If you want to check out a new piece of software in Windows, you'll need to:
- Search the web to find which piece of software suits your needs.
- Find a web site that allows you to download it.
- Maybe pay for it.
- Actually download the software.
- Install it.
- Sometimes reboot your computer.
Whew, that's a lot of work to just try out something new!
With Linux, everything is much simpler. Linux has what is called a "package manager": each piece of software is contained in its own "package". If you need some new software, just open the package manager, type a few keywords, choose which software you want to install and press "Apply" or "OK". Or you can just browse existing software (that's a lot of choice!) in categories.
Here I just typed "mine game" to search for a mine sweeper (actually, I already had one coming with my Linux, but anyway). If I want to install a new program, I'll just tick the checkbox on the left, and click "Apply" ("Appliquer" in French - which is greyed out for now, since there is nothing to be installed yet):
One: no more surfing.
Two: no more downloading and installing software yourself.
Three: more time to actually try out the software.
Does your digital life seem fragmented ?
If you already know what fragmentation is, and are already used to defragmenting your disk every month or so, here is the short version : Linux doesn't need defragmenting.
Now imagine your hard disk is a huge file cabinet, with millions of drawers (thanks to Roberto Di Cosmo for this comparison). Each drawer can only contain a fixed amount of data. Therefore, files that are larger than what such a drawer can contain need to be split up. Some files are so large that they need thousands of drawers. And of course, accessing these files is much easier when the drawers they occupy are close to one another in the file cabinet.
Now imagine you're the owner of this file cabinet, but you don't have time to take care of it, and you want to hire someone to take care of it for you. Two people come for the job, a woman and a man.
- The man has the following strategy : he just empties the drawers when a file is removed, splits up any new file into smaller pieces the size of a drawer, and randomly stuffs each piece into the first available empty drawer. When you mention that this makes it rather difficult to find all the pieces of a particular file, the response is that a dozen boys must be hired every weekend to put the chest back in order.
- The woman has a different technique : she keeps track, on a piece of paper, of contiguous empty drawers. When a new file arrives, she searches this list for a sufficiently long row of empty drawers, and this is where the file is placed. In this way, provided there is enough activity, the file cabinet is always tidy.
Without a doubt, you should hire the woman (you should have known it, women are much better organized :) ). Well, Windows uses the first method ; Linux uses the second one. The more you use Windows, the slower it is to access files ; the more you use Linux, the faster it is. The choice is up to you!
Why does your Windows get slower day after day?
Windows has a number of design flaws, resulting in it becoming slower and slower and not lasting very long. You've probably heard more than once someone say "My computer is getting sluggish, I'm gonna reinstall". Reinstalling Windows solves the problem... until next time.
You may think this is just how computers work, they're very new technology, and still not really stable. Well, try Linux and you'll be surprised. Five years from now, your system will be just as fast and responsive as the day you installed it, not to mention that you won't have any viruses, adwares, trojans, worms, etc., that would force you reinstall anyway.
I have managed to convince many people to switch to Linux, while keeping Windows on their hard disk, because they needed to use some piece of software that Linux doesn't have (eg Autocad), so they use both systems. Since the day they switched, most of them have reinstalled Windows about once in a year or two; but Linux didn't let them down, and is still running perfectly well and snappy today.
Linux lets you spend more time working, less time reinstalling over and over again.
Reporting bugs
If you find a bug in Windows, you can basically wait and pray that Microsoft will fix it fast (and if it compromises your system's security, you would have to pray twice as hard). You might think that reporting that bug to Microsoft (so that they can fix it more quickly) must be easy. Well, think again. Here is an interesting article about this. What if Microsoft doesn't even notice the bug ? Well then, let's hope the next version of Windows will fix it (but you'll need to pay another few hundred bucks).
Nearly all open source software (including Linux distributions) have a bug tracking system. You can not only file bug reports (and you're encouraged to do so !) explaining what the problem is, but you can see what happens next : everything is open and clear for everyone. Developers will answer, they also might ask a little extra information to help them fix the bug. You will know when the bug has been fixed, and you will know how to get the new version (still for free, needless to say). So here you have people taking care of your problems, keeping you informed about it, and all that for free ! If the problem is solved on your system, it will be on everyone else's : it's in everyone's interest to work together to make software better. This is how open source works.
Are your tired of restarting your computer all the time?
Have you just upgraded one or two little things on your Windows system with "Windows update"? Please reboot. Have you just installed some new software? Please reboot. Does your system seem unstable? Try to reboot, everything will probably work better after that.
Windows always asks you to restart your computer, and that can be annoying (maybe you happen to have a long download going on, and you don't want to interrupt it just because you updated a few pieces of your system). But even if you click "Restart later", Windows still keeps bothering you every ten minutes to let you know that you really should restart the computer. And if you happen to be away from your computer and you didn't see the question, it will happily reboot automatically. Bye bye long download.
Linux basically doesn't need to restart. Whether you install new software (even very big programs) or perform routine upgrades for your system, you will not be asked to restart the computer. It is only necessary when a part from the heart of the system has been updated, and that only happens once every several weeks.
Do you know Internet servers? They're the big computers that answer you when you ask for a web page, and send the information to your browser. Most of them run Linux, and since they need to always be available (a visitor could come anytime), they aren't restarted very often (services aren't available while the system is starting). Actually, many of them haven't restarted for several years. Linux is stable, it runs perfectly well without restarting all the time.
You'll probably not let your computer on for several weeks but the point is: the system won't bother you with restarting all the time.
Let your old computer have a second life
Windows requires more and more hardware power as its version number increases (95, 98, 2000, Me, XP, etc.). So if you want to keep running Windows, you need to constantly buy new hardware. But I can't see any good reason for so fast an evolution. Of course, many people need a lot of computer power and new hardware and technologies are really helping them. But for most users, who surf the web, read and write emails, write text files and slides, what's the point of buying a new computer every 2, 3 or 4 years, apart from letting computer vendors earn more money? What is exactly the profound reason why your computer can't do any more of what it did perfectly well 5 years ago?
Linux runs perfectly well on older hardware, on which Windows XP would probably even refuse to install, or let you wait 20 seconds after each click. Of course, Linux won't make a race-winner out of your 12-year old computer, but it will run very well on it and allow you to perform usual tasks (surfing the web, writing documents, etc.) just fine. The very computer that delivers this page to you is not very young and runs Linux: if you can read this, then it is up and running (and if the website loads slowly, blame my Internet connection only).
What is Linux?
Linux is a free operative system that has become more and more popular due to the fact that it's image is being polished from an operative system for freaks and hackers to an operating system that is graphical oriented and a possible contender to Microsoft Windows. Linux was developed by Linux Torvalds with some other programmers. It now has a huge community from all over the world working on the further development of Linux. Since Linux is free it can be obtained by any body without the need for a License, this is called the General Public License (GLP). It has all the features you would expect in a modern fully-fledged Unix, including true multitasking, virtual memory, shared libraries, demand loading, shared copy-on-write executables, proper memory management, and TCP/IP networking.
Linux is made up of the Kernel, which is the operating system, the Xfree86 X Windows system that provides the user interface and the graphical Desktop like GNOME and KDE that gives the Windows feel. The Kernel is the heart or the core component of the Linux operating system and it is is maintained by the thousands of corporate-supported and volunteer programmers all over the world. Linux is not owned by anybody so everyone can get a copy of the Linux operating system called (source code) modify it and distribute it further.
Another big word that you come across is the distributions. A Linux distribution is a Linux kernel that is surrounded with a lot of different applications that makes the installation of the operating system easy and provides a friendly interface for anybody familiar with a computer to use. Distributions are created by individuals and companies and is usually packed with different software for networking, communication and other software that combine with the operating system so that a normal user that use it. An example of a Linux distribution is Mandrake or Redhat.
Since the Kernel is the main thing you usually end up with kernel version that is different from the distribution version. The present Kernel version is 2.6 and while Redhat distribution is up to version 9.0 at this time. A typical distribution comes with office applications, desktops, Internet browsers, FTP clients and much more. The most interesting thing is that it's all free because nobody can claim Linux and make huge profit from it.
Why Linux?
Index
1
: Introduction
2
:
Problems with existing systems
2.1
: Slow release pattern
2.2
: High cost
2.3
: Tech Support?
2.4
: Lack of source code availability
2.5
: Planned obsolescence of hardware
2.6
: Monopolistic attitude
2.7
: Crash-prone
3
: Technical merits of Linux
3.1
: Linux is Network-friendly
3.2
: Linux is Multi-user
3.3
: Linux is Open
3.4
: Linux is "Free"
3.5
: Linux is Reliable
3.6
: Linux is Backwards-Compatible
4
: Deficiencies
of Linux as of Jan. 1, 1998
4.1
: Inconsistent User Interface
4.2
: Replication of packages
4.3
: Wrong amount of info in install process
4.4
: Inadequate PnP support
4.5
: Most installations presume full-time network and ethernet
4.6
: Locations of help not obvious
4.7
: System administration difficult for non-UNIX users
4.8
: Lack of commercial applications
4.9
: Lack of hardware vendor support
4.10
: Lack of traditional customer support
5
: Advantages
of commercial systems
5.1
: System operation is easy to find info on
5.2
: Commercial systems have many commercial apps
5.3
: Commercial systems have better "out-of-box" support for home user
5.4
: Interface R & D
6
: Conclusion
Section 1: Introduction
This document started out as a justification for producing another Linux distribution. However, the Simple End-User Linux project (SEUL) has changed their goals from being a distribution project to working on the non-technical aspects of bringing Linux to end-users -- Linux in education , advocacy documents , managing and coordinating communications between projects, coordinating feedback from end-users, and hosting related development projects.
However, this document is still very useful as a description of the reasons for why Linux should be considered as an alternative to other (particularly proprietary) operating systems. In broadest terms, there are four categories under which this justification falls:
- Problems with existing systems
- Technical merits of Linux
- Deficiencies of current Linux distributions
- Advantages of commercial systems
Section 2: Problems with existing systems
There are certain problems which are common to all commercial-release operating systems - that is, any operating system which has all of the following attributes:
- It costs money, typically more than $50
- Source code for the system is not available
- There are strict limits as to how the system may be copied.
Consequently, Windows, MacOS, DEC Ultrix, Solaris, OS/2, and other similar platforms are commercial operating systems. Linux (including Red Hat Official Linux, though that is a borderline case) and FreeBSD are free operating systems. They are often available for the cost of media ($2 to $5), the source code is available, often included with the main distribution; and there are few limits to redistributing the system.
Since commercial systems are a source of revenue for the companies who make them, some situations develop which are not necessarily advantageous to computer users. Most of these are directly related to the need for trade secrets and the protection of source code. Some of these problems include:
Section 2.1: Slow release pattern
Major upgrades to operating systems come very slowly. Windows 95 came out three years after Windows 3.11; Windows 98 might be released this year. Other systems are similar. The major distributions of Linux, on the other hand, are releasing major updates every six months or so.
Minor upgrades also take longer to acknowledge and fix in commercial systems. Recent problems with Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer are good examples of this. In the case of the "denial of service" TCP/IP bug, a Linux patch was posted for it mere hours after the problem was isolated. Anyone who is technically capable can fix the bugs, too, merely by changing the code in question and recompiling.
Section 2.2: High cost
Commercial operating systems, especially server operating systems, like Windows NT Server and Novell IntraNetware, can can cost more than $400 for a single copy and limited number of user licenses. Even the more modest $100 for Windows 95 can be a problem for people in developing countries, as well as students and others. The price for commercial systems almost never includes development tools, which cost even more. Linux, on the other hand, includes free C, C++, FORTRAN, and other development tools.
Section 2.3: Tech Support?
Commercial systems require their customers to depend on their companies for technical support. If there is a problem, users must often wait on hold (while paying for a toll call). While decentralized, it is often easier to get help with problems in Linux.
Section 2.4: Lack of source code availability
The fact that the source code for Windows and other systems is a closely guarded secret keeps people from learning from it, tinkering with it, and (perhaps) improving it. It means that problems which are technically easy to fix (like the infamous teardrop Pentium bug) cannot be fixed by any user with the technical expertise, but everyone must wait until Microsoft publishes a patch. The availability of source code is a particularly useful thing for programmers and computer science students, which form a significant percentage of Linux users.
In addition to the general problems noted above, there are some others which seem to particularly affect Microsoft Windows in all its variations. (Our intent is not to pick on Microsoft specifically, but since it is the single largest OS vendor, and most people are familiar with DOS and/or Windows, it would serve as a useful example for our purposes. Note also that we recogniz certain advantages to commercial systems, which we will discuss in detail later on.
Problems particular to Windows include:
Section 2.5: Planned obsolescence of hardware
A growing computer industry requires that people periodically get faster and more capable hardware to keep up with the advances the industry makes. Microsoft does not make it a priority to maintain backward-compatibility with older systems when it releases new operating systems. While it is technically possible to run Windows 95 on a 386/25 (I have seen it done), it is not an experience any user would relish. Running Windows 95 on any hardware less than a 486/66 with 16MB of RAM is an exercise in masochism. Cost becomes an issue again: until quite recently a new system would cost close to $2000; many people do not have the money to upgrade every two or three years. (I have heard that Windows 98 will not support any processor below the level of the "classic" Pentium.) So that 486 becomes a very expensive paperweight unless there is a platform which can run on it acceptably. Linux is such a platform.
Section 2.6: Monopolistic attitude
Epitomized by recent legal troubles with the Department of Justice and Sun Microsystems, there is a general perception that Bill Gates just wants to rule the world. (The latest Bond film, "Tomorrow Never Dies," even has a brief allusion to this.) Whether true or not, many people are seeking alternatives to Microsoft systems just because they are uncomfortable with Microsoft having a monopoly in this area.
Section 2.7: Crash-prone
No one in the computer industry was surprised when Steve Ballmer, Microsoft Vice-President, admitted that in the rush to beat Netscape, Microsoft had cut corners in quality control. (So had Netscape -- we're not playing favorites here.) Based on anecdotal evidence, many people have problems with Windows crashing for no particularly good reason, often causing people to lose work. Sometimes it is just an annoyance, but other times it can be quite serious. While Windows 95 and in particular Windows NT are far more stable than Windows 3.1x, they still fail with alarming regularity. There are documented cases of Linux servers running for over a year at a time without a system-halting crash.
Section 3: Technical merits of Linux
"Everyone's a critic." Too true. So, you may ask, what do we suggest to improve the computing situation? If you have read this far, you probably think we are going to say "Linux!" And you would be right. Linux provides an excellent base to work from for several reasons, and although it is not perfect, we believe it is the best place to start.
Section 3.1: Linux is Network-friendly
Nowadays, people are becoming more and more enamored of the Internet and what it can do for them. It is by no means an uncommon thing to see major vendors advertise their World Wide Web addresses during football games and other events; many TV commercials have them, too. The American marketing machine sees the Internet as a phenomenon that is here to stay, and the public wants to take advantage of it. The best way to do that now is with a computer. Set top devices, like WebTV (which Microsoft owns, in case you were curious) have a long way to go before they offer the flexibility and power of a PC with a modem.
Although not a huge movement yet, there will be more networks set up in homes as costs for basic computer hardware and networking equipment continue to plummet. The small office/home office network can now be realized for about half the price it would have cost a year ago. Most industry news sources expect this trend to continue. This will probably be more of a factor when homes and small offices want to get their own high-speed internet connections and need dedicated hardware to manage it.
Thus, one of the major litmus tests of the quality and utility of a modern operating system is how well it networks. Since Linux was developed by a team of programmers over the Internet, its its networking features were given high priority. Linux is capable of acting as client and/or server to any of the popular operating systems in use today, and is quite capable of being used to run Internet Service Providers. In fact, in Southern Minnesota, all of the small local ISP's (I do not know anything definite about the phone companies) use Linux. It is also well-suited to serving as a dial-in network station.
Linux supports most of the major protocols, and quite a few of the minor ones. Support for Internet, Novell, Windows, and Appletalk networking have been part of the Linux kernel for some time now. With support for Simple Network Management Protocol and other services (such as Domain Name Service), Linux is also well suited to serving large networks.
Finally, all these networking options will run quite acceptably on minimal hardware configurations. It depends on what services are needed and in what quantity, but I know that for some time a small college in Southern Minnesota ran a 56k baud leased line (access for a student body of about 300) gateway with E-Mail, DNS, and FTP on a single 486/33 with 32MB RAM and a lot of big SCSI drives.
Section 3.2: Linux is Multi-user
Linux is an implementation of the UNIX design philosophy, which means that it is a multi-user system from the word "go." This has numerous advantages, even for a system where only one or two people will be using it. Security, which is necessary for protection of sensitive information, is built into Linux at selectable levels. More importantly, the system is designed to multi-task. Whether one user is running several programs or several users are running one program, Linux is capable of managing the traffic.
Section 3.3: Linux is Open
Perhaps most importantly for what we are trying to accomplish with SEUL, Linux is open. That means that for the entire base system, which includes the kernel, the GNU tools, and all the basic utilities, we as programmers and users have access to the source code as well as the right to modify it. Without that access and that right, this project would not be possible. Neither would many of the other Linux projects currently underway, including GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, a desktop interface; MNEMONIC, a free web browser under development; or many others. If users like SEUL, they will be able to modify it if they wish.
An important aspect of open software is the ability to write kernel extensions and drivers as needed. What if new hardware comes out that we want to take advantage of? We just write the driver -- if someone else doesn't do it first.
Another huge advantage of an open system is a large number of software authors and beta testers. This makes the software testing and refinement process faster and better. Because there is not a lot of commercial software for Linux (though that is an increasing market), most software written for Linux is written because the authors want to do it. Since there are no corporate deadlines, there need be no compromise of quality. Also, I think many programmers relish the idea of showing off some artistry, since others will actually see and appreciate their code.
This means many good things for the user. It means higher-quality software, which means less prone to crash, more efficient, what have you. Often, if you have a question, it is often possible to ask the author of the software him/herself via E-Mail or Usenet Newsgroups. It makes it easier for people to get involved in the development process, which means that even if someone is not a programmer, he or she can have a profound impact on a piece of software by suggesting how to improve it to the development team.
Section 3.4: Linux is "Free"
Linux is "Free" in two senses. In one sense, the Linux consumer is free to modify the system and do anything he or she wishes with it. In another sense, acquiring Linux does not necessarily require any cash outlay at all.
There are two very popular methods for acquiring and distributing Linux: FTP and CD-ROM. Most of the major Linux distributions (Red Hat, Debian, Slackware, Caldera) are available for free download from several popular sites. Though time consuming, it does not cost anything beyond connection charges.
Getting Linux by CD-ROM seems to make more sense in many cases. For a few dollars (essentially the cost of the physical disc itself and shipping and handling), anyone can get the major Linux distributions. Many vendors even offer several-CD sets with prices averaging less than $2 per disc.
This would be a bargain if Linux were a run of the mill system with few frills and no truly compelling features. As a matter of fact, Linux comes with full networking capabilities, a mind-boggling array of programs, utilities, and development tools.
The development tools in particular make Linux a great platform for learning how to write software. In addition to the tools, you often get a full CD of source code to browse and study and tinker with. Another advantage is that, as a multi-user system, it is much more likely to keep you from shooting yourself in the foot as you learn to program -- I have seen Windows 95 and how it handles errors in Borland's C++ compiler, and I am very glad I use Linux. Of course, if you are not inclined to write software, these things do not need to be installed.
Of course one of the greatest advantages of Linux is that it is the freedom to modify the existing code makes it a very easily extensible platform. That is exactly what we are trying to do with EUL - modify and extend the base system to make it easier for people who do not have years of Unix experience to work with the system.
Section 3.5: Linux is Reliable
Linux is one of the more stable operating systems available today. This is due in large part to the fact that Linux was written by programmers who were writing for other programmers and not for the corporate system. The only people who made the decisions on what went into the system were programmers. Also, the deadline pressure is not as strong when one is developing as a hobby.
What does this mean in practical terms? In a recent issue of Linux Journal, a feature was run on how long a Linux system has continuously run. Several uptimes of over 1 year were reported. This is because the system is designed to be upgraded and modified "on the fly" -- the only reason one would need to turn off a Linux system would be to add hardware or boot from a different kernel. That means that the end-user can count on Linux to work consistently, day in and day out.
Another factor which touches on reliability is that there are currently two mature program packaging standards in the Linux world. Debian and Red Hat each have their own packaging systems; both will check dependencies (package A needs to have package B installed before it will run, so the installer will install package B), both can upgrade an entire running system without a reboot. this makes it easy to upgrade parts or all of a system, as well as add new software, or remove unwanted software.
Section 3.6: Linux is Backwards-Compatible
Linux has superb support for older hardware. In fact, it is often easier to find hardware support for 486-era hardware than the latest gizmos to hit the market. This is because the driver authors need time to write and test the drivers, and some vendors are not exactly forthcoming with the information required to write a driver.
What this means for the user is that they can protect their investment in hardware. When old hardware is rendered obsolete by the latest version of Windows (or MacOS...we try to be fair), it can most likely still run enough of Linux to be perfectly useful. There is no reason for Linux users to try to make hardware obsolete - and every reason for them to provide support for older hardware.
Section 4: Deficiencies of Linux as of Jan. 1, 1998
Despite the tremendous advantages of Linux as it stands right now, it is not without its problems. Several in particular which we are trying to provide solutions for include the following:
Section 4.1: Inconsistent User Interface
One of the by-products of the development of GNU/Linux is that it is a patchwork quilt of sorts, reflecting different interfaces, design goals, etc. It is not easy learning to use the vi editor, for example, or learning the command line syntax of find. Nor is there any consistency enforced among the various programs and utilities included in a standard Linux distribution. This leads to user confusion and frustration.
Current projects are underway to provide consistent graphical interfaces through the X Window system. These include KDE (the K Desktop Environment), GNOME (GNU Object Model Environment), and Teak (a GNU project which as far as I know exists only on paper). What we think would be ideal would be a consistent interface to configure various services, as well as user tools such as a calendar, word processor, emailer, and so on.
Section 4.2: Replication of packages
There is a lot of replication among the various packages in a Linux distribution. Some of the Mail Transfer Agents available (and this is not an exhaustive list) include sendmail, smail, qmail, and exim. Granted, the diversity is generally because there are differing design goals, but the choice is confusing to many users, who may not know how to use any one of them.
Section 4.3: Wrong amount of info in install process
The major Linux distributions give either too much or too little information to the new user when installing. Red Hat gives too little -- you can choose packages individually but there is no information about the packages you are selecting beyond what category they fall under. Debian, with dselect, gives too much -- there are a number of status items on the display that are difficult to read and are not easily deciphered without the manual.
While many Linux users argue that any Linux user should Read The Fine Manual before installing, it can be pointed out that the Windows installation routing (which has problems of its own) does not require a lot of reading before someone can perform it adequately.
Section 4.4: Inadequate PnP support
For whatever reason, the Plug and Play (PnP) specification has not been a particularly critical item for the Linux world to take care of. Many PnP cards do not work at all (though this is not always the fault of Linux - it is often due to the manufacturer keeping vital aspects of the technology secret so that a driver cannot be written), and the only current interface to PnP cards is through a program called isapnp. More work should be done in this area.
Section 4.5: Most installations presume full-time network and ethernet
Debian and Red Hat both seem to spend most of their network installation time assuming that the machine being installed on will be connected to a network. Not enough potential problems with dial-up networking (Modem setup, IRQ tuning, PPP setup) are dealt with at installation. This process needs to be easier.
Section 4.6: Locations of help not obvious
It can be very difficult to find help, especially for those not accustomed to a Unix system. New users may see a command line and try to get a directory by typing "dir," unaware that it will not work. Once a user learns "man" and "locate," she can do quite a bit, but the individual program documentation still needs to be manipulated with gzip. What would be ideal would be a natural language help facility which, when asked, "How do I check for disk problems?" responds with a reference to docs for fsck. A project like this is under development.
Section 4.7: System administration difficult for non-UNIX users
Learning Unix system administration from the ground up can be a nightmare. Most users are not concerned with issues such as hard vs. symbolic links, filesystem-specific issues (fat or vfat or fat32?), file permissions, user rights, group rights, and all the other trivia that make Unix administration what it is. Ideally, the user would be shielded from as much of this as possible.
Section 4.8: Lack of commercial applications
Linux still suffers from a frustrating lack of applications in some areas. These are mostly the big-ticket commercial type apps, such as word-processors, spreadsheets, databases, and web browsers. The Linux software market is growing, but what we need are some free items like this for a freely-distributable system.
Section 4.9: Lack of hardware vendor support
Some hardware vendors simply refuse to release the information on their products necessary to write a driver. A recent (and fairly public) example of this was Adaptec's response to Linux user complaints about not making information on new versions of the AHA-2940 BIOS available, meaning that the card behaves erratically under Linux (and since such a card usually has the main system storage hooked to it, that is not a Good Thing). Fortunately, Adaptec publicly posted that it was willing to work with the Linux community for a mutually beneficial solution. We can only hope episodes like this become more common.
Meanwhile, some vendors are actually giving instructions on their tech support pages on how to set their hardware up under Linux. A notable example of this is Linksys, the network hardware vendor. This too is a positive sign we can only hope will increase.
Section 4.10: Lack of traditional customer support
Earlier, we cited Linux' lack of traditional support as an advantage. That only part of the story, though. Most business IS departments want and need some tangible entity to stand behind a product which performs mission-critical services for the business, so that 24 hour support is needed. There is currently no central organization in the Linux community for this, and this is a major barrier to widespread acceptance of Linux in the workplace. Since it is such an obvious shortcoming, there are some things underway which should alleviate this problem:
- Red Hat
has now instituted phone support
Just for installation and for 30 days, but it is a start. - Some
consultancies provide support
Red Hat is working to coordinate this with local resources. - Caldera
is working aggressively in this market
Caldera's products are specifically aimed at this issue. They are also priced comparably to similar offerings from Microsoft and Novell, which has irked some Linux people. - Mailing lists and
newsgroups
These are still the best places to get Linux tech support, and will be for some time. There should be more information given to beginning Linux users, though, to ease their transition.
Section 5: Advantages of commercial systems
Earlier, we promised that we would discuss in detail the advantages of commercial systems over Linux as it is now. We believe this is especially important because of the perceived (OK, real) ease of use gap between Linux and commercial offerings. While all the major distributions have made great strides in bridging the usability gap, Linux is "not there" yet. Some things in particular we notice about commercial systems that make them easier to use:
Section 5.1: System operation is easy to find info on
IDG books has made a pile of money with their "For Dummies" books. They can be bought at any bookstore, too -- "Running Linux" by Matt Welsh is a little harder to come by -- and it is not "For Dummies."
It is typically easier to find a friend who knows how to install a Windows device driver than it is to find someone who can do it in Linux. This is simply a function of the ubiquity of Windows, but is certainly part of the "ease of use" gap.
Section 5.2: Commercial systems have many commercial apps
This is really the bread and butter of the commercial software world. Microsoft's biggest revenue generator, for example, is Office. As a result, a lot of time, effort, and research and development goes into these programs. They can do a lot (too much, perhaps), and are relatively easy to use. Nothing like MS Word 97 yet exists for Linux, nor is it likely to in the near future. This is partly because a project like that is enormous, requiring lots of time from lots of people, but also because it already exists, so why re-do it?
Applix makes a decent office suite for Linux. There is also StarOffice, so the market is not empty. But there is no doubt that Linux would help itself immensely by getting more of these apps.
Section 5.3: Commercial systems have better "out-of-box" support for home user
Since commercial systems are tailored to the home user, they tend to be easier to set up and use by the home user. Under the best of circumstances, it can be quite easy to set Windows 95 up as an Internet dial-up networking station. (If PnP fails, it can be a nightmare, granted.) Nevertheless, quite a few people get on the Internet with Win95 so Microsoft must be doing something right in that regard. Linux can gain by offering some of the visual interfaces with interactive questions ("Wizards") for new users.
Section 5.4: Interface R & D
Large companies have budgets for developing newer and better User Interface technology, a luxury Linux does not have. But Linux can use this information to its advantage by learning from the success of some interfaces and the failures of others.
Section 6: Conclusion
Can a world-class free end-user operating system be put together right now? We at SEUL believe it can, and it is our mission to make it happen. As is the case with many Linux projects, we are volunteers. We are pursuing this not for monetary gain or profit, but because we want to. If you also believe we are doing something worthwhile, please consider volunteering your time to the SEUL Project. Email omega@seul.org for details.
