Now that I have been using Linux on a fairly regular basis for several years
I realize I have been making what probably is an incorrect mental
association regarding Linux stability. I have observed that a number of
applications are really not very stable at all, but tended to equate them
with Linux because of their corolaries in Windows. For example, in KDE I use
Konqueror much the same as I use Windows Explorer, which I suspect was the
intent of its developers. But I have fould that Konqueror tends to crash if
left open for more than a few hours, especially if file changes are
happening in the background requiring dynamic updates of the Konqueror
display window. There are lots of annoying little glitches like that in many
programs that have become associated with Linux by virtue of their inclusion
in major distributions.

Because Windows Explorer is part of Windows people tend to assume that KDE
or Gnome is part of Linux. In a sense that is true because they are
installed by default in most every major Linux distribution. But strictly
speaking, Linux is only the operating system kernel and a few ancient
command-line utilities, all of which are sublimely stable. It is unfortunate
that the reputation of Linux is being diluted by the stuff that gets packed
around it in an effort (a futile effort, I would say) to compete with
Windows. A Linux mode 3 system with Apache is still a far more stable and
secure web server (if configured properly) than any Windows/IIS setup, but I
still know people who would rather use IIS because it is easier to
configure. I know people who are capable of installing Windows but were
stumped by Linux.

In 1995 I worked on a project at Intel to develop some of the first cable
modem field trials. I was in charge of the software group, and our biggest
task was to develop the core protocols and firmware to make the system work.
(The head-end routers all ran on Sun/Solaris platforms.) But the managers,
cable company  executives and customers only appreciated what they could see
on the computer screen, so we got recognition for only a fraction of the
actual work we did. In expanding the user base of Linux I think you run into
the same problem. The more people you invite into the tent the fewer there
are who can appreciate the finer distinctions of what is and is not Linux. I
think it would be smarter to distribute the Linux core and GUI bundles
separately so the distinction between the kernel and the UI remains clear.
That way the people who make KDE and Gnome and their ilk would have to stand
on their own merits instead of getting a free ride on the reputation of
Linux. Maybe then there would be some real competition for Windows.

That's my $0.02.
-Phil M.

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss