Far Beyond the Edge of Reason

The colour scheme

2008-06-29T20:29:00.002+01:00

I've had some negative feedback on Digg and Reddit about the colour scheme of this blog, so I'm interested in knowing what people think. I've therefore added an opinion poll - please cast your vote, I don't want to be driving people away unnecessarily!

Ubuntu is easier to use than a Mac - discuss!

2008-06-29T12:20:00.006+01:00

Ever since I bought my MacBook nearly two weeks ago, I've found it a bit of a struggle to get used to. I've used Windows XP and Vista, as well as MANY Linux distros and a few other Unix-like OS's using many different desktops - Gnome, KDE, Xfce, Icewm, E17 and Fluxbox, among others, and the OS X desktop is the hardest one I've ever had to get used to.
Add to that the fact that I've found it a pain to get used to the method of installing things, and I've come to the following conclusion:
A modern beginner-oriented Linux distribution such as Ubuntu is considerably easier to use than a Mac.
Now, hear me out. These are the points I've found where Linux is easier to use:

The desktop. Ubuntu, for instance, has Applications, Places and Systems on the top panel by default, and the Application menu is broken down into categories so it's always easy to track down what you want, and other desktops such as KDE and Xfce are similarly easy to navigate. If you want a launcher, you can install Gnome Do as it's available in Hardy. By comparison, a Mac has no equivalent menu for launching applications. OK, the Dock is pretty prevalent, but it only shows a subset of applications, and if you aren't familiar with them then the only way that you can find out what does what is by trying it. And yes, you can open them in Finder, but that means opening one application to open another, which is a bit of a waste of time. Spotlight is OK, but it takes a bit of getting used to - it's not as good as either Katapult in KDE or Gnome Do in Gnome. Also, it's tiny and hidden away in a corner, while both Katapult and Gnome Do are big, friendly launchers that appear dead in the centre of the screen. To get something comparable on a Mac, you need Quicksilver.
Installing new software. In Ubuntu, you can open Add/Remove Applications, pick out what you want and install it, or you can use Synaptic to get a list of everything you can install, and again can just pick out what you want, and with a few clicks whatever you want will be installed. By comparison, on a Mac you have to go to the web page, download whatever it is you want, then mess around dragging it into a folder, then you have to delete the dmg file from your desktop.
Compiling from source. It's rare to have to compile from source these days, and with Ubuntu you're more likely to see new versions available in the repositories, so you probably have to do so less than on a Mac. And if you do, it's made easier to remove it later by installing the checkinstall package. By using checkinstall instead of make install, you create a deb package which can be easily removed using the package manager if necessary. As far as I can see, there's no equivalent to this on a Mac.
Out of the box functionality. A Mac does "just work" quite well. But so does Ubuntu. I've only EVER had two problems in using Ubuntu or Kubuntu - one was the fact that my wireless card had a driver which didn't support WPA, so I had to use Ndiswrapper to get it working with the Windows drivers. The other was a DNS problem which was to do with my router. I've never had to mess around with my X.org or recompile my kernel, or install any other drivers. And this is on an OS that didn't come preinstalled! To be a truly fair comparison you'd have to compare both preinstalled and installing it yourself on your own machine, as only a "like-to-like" comparison is really fair. A machine that comes with Ubuntu preinstalled "just works" as much as a Mac does, whereas building a hackintosh is MUCH harder than getting Ubuntu working on another machine, and not many non-Apple machines will work at all with OS X, whereas most will work with Ubuntu.
Greater range of preinstalled applications. OK, apps like iMovie, PhotoBooth and Garageband are fun to mess around with, but they are the ONLY ones that don't have equivalents preinstalled in Ubuntu. Ubuntu has more useful things, such as the OpenOffice suite, Evolution (which includes a calendar), the Pidgin IM client (which supports more different protocols than iChat does), The GIMP etc. And it's better supplied with games - there's about five or six, whereas a Mac has chess only!
Better support for third-party media players. iPods are pretty well supported out of the box in Ubuntu or Kubuntu, as are many other music players, as both Rhythmbox and Amarok have wide-ranging support for third party devices. By comparison, trying to get a third-party device working in OS X is likely to involve having to install new software, if it will work at all.

These are the ones I can think of - no doubt plenty of people will be able to suggest other reasons. What do you think? Am I right? As always, please keep it civil, and don't spout advertising slogans. Seriously, I've had enough of "A Mac just works!", it's not a convincing argument!
And if you're a Mac fan - this is not an attack on OS X, having used it I do think it's a good OS, and constructive criticsm benefits Apple because it shows them where they could improve.

My new purchase

2008-06-27T18:58:00.003+01:00

I'm a great fan of Unix-based OS's in general, not just Linux. I've tried OpenSolaris, Hurd and a couple of the BSD's in VirtualBox (when I could get them to work!) and liked most of them, but there's one I've not tried till recently. Here's a clue: you can't get it free.
Yes, it's OS X. But I decided to bite the bullet and bought a MacBook. At £799, it's my single most expensive purchase, ever. But, what the hell. I can afford it and it'll be fun.
Here's the list of reasons why I decided to get one:

I could be one of those people on Digg who, when a squabble over which OS is better starts, could say "I use all three and they're all cool, leave it alone".
More likely, I could say "I use all three and Linux is the best"!
I wanted a new computer and I decided a while ago I'm not going to pay for any more copies of Windows, which narrows it down to one with preinstalled Linux or a Mac. And I already have a Dell and an Eee PC.
Macs are supposed to be good for running Linux on (that was before I found out that this one uses the dreaded Broadcom wireless card...)
I might well wind up using Macs at work once I've finished my IT course, so it'd be a good idea to get used to them.

So, what is my impression of it? Well, it looks good from the outset, but I am REALLY finding the desktop to be a b**** to use compared to KDE. I'm beginning to be able to use it, but it's a struggle. I also find it a pain to install things - I keep wanting to open the terminal and type "sudo apt-get install firefox". And I must be one of the first people to buy a Mac and go running straight for the terminal! And so far as I can see if you wanted to install something like a new version of Perl or Python, the only way you could do so would be by compiling it from source.

The applications included are good (the likes of Garageband and PhotoBooth are fun to play with), but there are some things that seem odd. Why, for instance, is there not even a basic word processor, equivalent to MS Works? Do Apple think people will want to store their photos and create music, but then not even want to write a letter? Many of these people won't know about things like NeoOffice or OpenOffice.

From a development side it's very good - I'm really surprised at that. It comes with Apache and Rails preinstalled, and you even get the Xcode IDE on the install disc. But it's probably actually worse than Linux for gaming - most Linux distros include a few games, OS X has chess only, and Linux has plenty of native games free to download as well as things like Wine and Cedega to let you use Windows games.

So, overall I'm impressed in many ways - Apple do get a lot right. But I still think that Linux is the superior operating system - it's FAR more flexible as you can remaster distros, change the desktop and do whatever you want with it, whereas OS X is more restricted. But OS X is defining proof that a Unix-like OS can work for pretty much any user, which is good news for Linux too. After all, one hardware manufacturer will never be able to grab the whole of the market, and if Windows starts becoming a liability to OEMs (as it may already be, considering the rough ride Vista has had), then they will start looking for an alternative that can compete better with OS X, and that will almost certainly mean Linux. Better manufacturer support will almost eliminate the technical reasons that keep people from switching to Linux, and better software support will attract more users. So, in a way, any increase in market share for OS X may well also benefit Linux, and shake up the moribund OS market.

The return of Google Toolbar

2008-06-15T17:28:00.001+01:00

Yes! Google Toolbar is now available for Firefox 3! I've long used this as it's really handy, and I've really struggled without it. Now I've got easy access to my Google Bookmarks and I Feel Lucky again. Thanks for finally getting this done, Google!

Apple Haters (dot com)

2008-06-14T20:14:00.001+01:00

Very funny Apple-bashing pictures! If you're a Mac user and easily offended, look away now!

read more | digg story

Google Friend Connect

2008-06-08T10:34:00.002+01:00

Having had a few weeks to ponder Google's Friend Connect, I'm starting to really think about what it could mean. It's clearly part of Google's social networking strategy, along with OpenSocial, and it shows just how big Google really think - instead of creating a social network to compete with Facebook (which would be pointless as they already have Orkut), they're giving people the chance to make the rest of the Internet into social networks.

This could be very cool if, as I expect, they roll it out to their own services. For instance, if they made it easy to use it with a Blogger blog (which I suspect they will), then any blog will be able to become a social network. While any blog already has a community around it (unless no-one reads it), this could make it easy for people to get to know others in the community, and encourage participation and debate. For me, I think it would be especially handy for Easierbuntu, as it would mean people could connect to each other to share tips and advice on how to use Ubuntu more easily.

It's a shame that Facebook have decided to stop letting people sign in using their Facebook profile as it's one of the biggest social networks, but I do feel strongly that it isn't their decision to make and they shouldn't have done so. If I want to give Google that information, it should be up to me as it's my data. Facebook should not be able to stop me from doing so. In my case, I have other profiles I can use, but not everyone does. I appreciate that they have their own competing product that they want to push, but at the end of the day it's my data and I should be able to do with it what I wish.

BT OpenZone

2008-06-04T17:40:00.003+01:00

Fed up with having nothing much to do in the evenings without broadband and having had little success with mobile broadband, I've just signed up for BT OpenZone. Now at least I can get online in a cafe, just means I'm no doubt going to spend a fortune on cups of tea!
For £10 a month, it's not too bad to get wi-fi on the go, but it's limited to 500 minutes per month. Not really enough for me, but I'm not planning to do a huge amount of browsing on it, just read a few feeds.

Finished part 2 of my course

2008-06-01T22:23:00.002+01:00

Just wanted to say that I've just done the online assessment for the second part of my IT course, and I got 26 out of 29! I'm really pleased with that as I found this part harder than the first and was a bit apprehensive about the test.
I'm studying for CIW Associate certification, and I'm thinking that once I've done this course I will then go down either the Enterprise Developer or Web Site Manager route
I'm really looking forward to the next part, Site Development Foundations, as this actually gets into building websites, which I find is a lot more interesting. Also, I can do it on my Asus Eee!

Wubi

2008-06-01T18:01:00.003+01:00

Today I decided to try out Wubi on my Windows Vista machine. For the uninitiated, it's a great new way of installing Ubuntu from within Windows. You just boot up as usual, then run umenu.exe from the disc and go through the menu options to install it. If you then reboot your system, you'll be able to choose between Windows and Ubuntu. If you select Ubuntu, it will be installed for you and you can then boot straight into it. While it's not quite the same as a normal install, it's a lot more convenient as you can later uninstall it from within Windows. I've tried dual-booting in the past but found it a pain - this is a lot more straightforward.

I installed Xubuntu, and I was impressed with how well it worked. Then, on a whim I decided to skin it to look like a Mac, using Mac4Lin. I had a lot of trouble with this, so I decided to switch it to Ubuntu instead by uninstalling the Xubuntu desktop and installing the Ubuntu desktop in its place. After a couple of hours work I had pretty much nailed it.

I'm very impressed with the end result. It's not exactly the same, but it is pretty close - see what you think:

I think I'm going to keep this Ubuntu install on here as I have in the past been using VirtualBox as a test bed for messing around with Linux, but that's somewhat limited. I think this will be better for tinkering, and also so I have a Gnome-based install to play with - KDE is great, but it will no doubt do me good to check out what Gnome offers as well. Also, that's the computer that my music is on so I've installed Amarok and set Ubuntu up to mount my Vista partition automatically so I can listen to music in Linux.

All in all, Wubi is very impressive. Only problem I've had is when I installed Gnome Do - it seems to be a real memory hog, worse than Firefox ever was. Anyone else had this problem?

Breaching the digital divide

2008-05-31T15:27:00.004+01:00

According to this link, there are approximately 1.4 billion people in the world who regularly use the Internet. That's a staggering number, but it represents less than a quarter of the world's population. As the population recently passed something like 6.6 billion, that leaves some 5.2 billion people who don't have regular access to the Internet. And while some of that number represents people who for their own reasons don't wish to go online, I'm sure that probably the vast majority would welcome Internet access.
Having access to the Internet can be a tremendous boon. Internet access allows you to access a great many learning resources - for instance, you can easily find a tutorial and teach yourself Ruby or Python if you wish. It allows people to set up websites that people from all over the world can access, regardless of geographical location. And there's tremendous potential for business use - for instance, a company that sells craft goods in Kenya can advertise their wares to people in the UK. All in all, access to computers and the Internet can be tremendously empowering, enabling people to develop computer skills that will be of value to employers, as well as get in touch with the wider world, and allowing them to work themselves out of poverty.
There's a number of initiatives that are working to provide people with access to computers, such as OLPC and the recent announcement that Brazillian schoolchildren will be sitting down to a KDE desktop in the near future. One notable point is how much these projects are reliant on free software.
So, I was thinking today: It's great that free software such as that used in Edubuntu or the OLPC is helping children to get online. But what about getting adults online? For one thing, the children benefiting from these projects will be grown up in a few years, and for another there are plenty of people a few years older who lack access to computers or the Internet now. When these people are looking for employment, how are their employers going to get computers? And if they elect to start their own businesses, how will they get a computer? For business purposes, a computer is an invaluable tool - and it's necessary to compete in some areas.
So why doesn't someone start selling some kind of cheap and cheerful desktop PC designed for the third world? Think about it - it doesn't cost much to build a fairly basic PC, you can use older product lines that manufacturers are winding down as these are very cheap, often £15-£20 for a processor, for example. I'm sure it would be easy to build a basic PC without a screen or keyboard for less than £150, probably considerably less. Install a lightweight Linux distribution on it (I'm thinking possibly Xubuntu, or maybe creating a variant using a window manager such as IceWM or Fluxbox for more speed), and you'll get an easy-to-use computer, and access to the free software in the distro's repositories, so people can easily set up web servers, install office software or whatever they need. You could manufacture these in large quantities and sell them in developing countries (or for that matter, there's plenty of people in the first world who would benefit from them). On a larger scale, these could help to bootstrap an entire IT industry into existence in a country within a very short space of time - perhaps we could see a whole host of web startups in the third world.
Such a project has a great deal of merit. The best way to sell them would probably be as a franchise, as it would allow people to set up their own businesses, creating jobs in the process. They'd be ideal for small or even mid-sized businesses. Internet cafes could also use them as they'd be good value for money, allowing them to afford more computers and make more money. And it wouldn't even need to be a charity - I feel this is something which has a sound business model.
I'd be very surprised if this is the first time someone has thought up this idea, but I can't find anything similar online. Probably the closest thing to this that I'm aware of is the gPC, as well as some other projects I've heard of to refurbish old computers and install Linux on them then sell them on. What do you think? Could this be a good way to help breach the digital divide?

A demo of Google's Android

2008-05-30T21:17:00.002+01:00

Check out this brilliant demo of Android! I can't wait to get an Android phone!

Ubuntu Netbook Remix

2008-05-26T16:24:00.005+01:00

Have you read this? It appears that Ubuntu is going to be the first major Linux distribution to release a version designed specifically for the subnotebook market. Nothing concrete yet, but will be very interesting to see what comes of this. Although there are other Linux distributions aimed at ultraportables such as the Eee PC, they're all community ones like PuppEee or EeeXubuntu. Ubuntu Netbook Remix is the first one that's actually produced by a major Linux distributor.

I'm willing to bet good money that not only can Ubuntu produce a great OS for subnotebooks long before Microsoft can, but that other Linux vendors can too. Furthermore, Microsoft won't be able to match Linux on performance, not at least without tearing out huge chunks of Windows XP, probably crippling it in the process, and will really struggle to turn a profit in this field. While it's naive to believe that Windows won't gain some market share of these computers, it does look like Linux is going to be the dominant OS for these computers, and Apple are unlikely to get involved.

I've already seen plenty of people brandishing Eee PC's around Norwich, and Asus are churning them out as fast as they can and still can't keep up with demand. It's looking increasingly likely that instead of the fabled Year of the Linux Desktop, 2008 may be the Year of the Linux Ultraportable. We certainly live in exciting times!

jTwitter - a Twitter client for the mobile phone

2008-05-24T13:41:00.003+01:00

I've been looking for a decent Twitter client that will work on my Motorola RAZR, and just now I found jTwitter. I'm on pay as you talk as I don't use my mobile that much and I tweet as much as I can and also follow a respectable number of people so using SMS would be too expensive, and using Opera Mini or the default Vodafone browser to navigate to the Twitter mobile page is a pain, not to mention expensive as you have to pay to download all those images and things - using a dedicated client is the way to go. I already use the Google Mail client, so with this as well I should be able to keep in touch more easily.

List: 10 Unmanliest Drinks In The World

2008-05-18T20:14:00.001+01:00

Don't quite know what to make of this one! My personal view is this: it's perfectly acceptable for a man to drink anything he wants as long as it hasn't got a parasol in it. The only exception to this is when you're on holiday, when parasols are acceptable. What do you think?

read more | digg story

Asus to embed Linux into all motherboards

2008-05-18T18:59:00.001+01:00

Good idea this - while the more technically inclined among us often use Knoppix to troubleshoot a computer which won't boot, other people aren't aware of this option. With this on your motherboard, you can boot into a desktop with a web browser so you can Google your problem with ease!

read more | digg story

OS Community released first OpenSolaris stable version.

2008-05-05T16:40:00.001+01:00

I'm a fan of most free operating systems, not just Linux. So I was very pleased to hear that the first stable version of OpenSolaris has been released - why not check it out?

read more | digg story

5 Linux distributions that rival OS X for looks

2008-05-05T11:00:00.016+01:00

Mac OS X has a reputation as the most visually pleasing operating system around today. Fans often decry other operating systems as looking pathetic by comparison. Well, I beg to differ. Many of these people's only other experience of using computers is with Windows, which has never been strong in terms of appearance. Linux has come on in leaps and bounds in the last few years, and many distributions now offer an extremely visually pleasing desktop, one that (dare I say it) approaches and possibly even exceeds OS X in terms of looks.

Linux has also had several different desktops available, which I think helps as there's a degree of competition between them. Also, it's highly configurable - don't like something, you can change it! Even a distribution like Ubuntu, which has a relatively tame desktop by default, needs only a little configuration to transform it into a real looker.

So, to perhaps open a few people's eyes, I've done a round-up of five of the most impressive Linux desktops available today. I've deliberately stuck to distributions which can be booted in LiveCD mode, so that if you're curious, you can try them out without needing to be installed. I've also avoided all distributions that aren't free to download, which unfortunately does leave out some great ones like Elive.

Some of you may find that these desktops are a lot better than you might have thought. If you're a Mac user, you may want to give some of these a try to see how they stack up against OS X. While I'm not looking to necessarily convert anyone, there is a tendency for Mac users to dismiss anything else as looking rubbish by comparison, which is often just a knee-jerk reaction. By writing this post, I'm hoping that perhaps a few people will see their preconceptions challenged.

So, without further ado, here's my round up of five Linux desktops that give OS X a run for its money:

PCLinuxOS

PCLinuxOS has a well-deserved reputation as a good distribution for beginners, because it includes many of the multimedia codecs that other distributions can't for legal reasons. It has a great range of applications, with plenty more available from the repositories.

It's also got a strikingly beautiful desktop:

Also, like most modern Linux distributions, it includes Compiz:

There's many good reasons for PCLinuxOS's popularity with Linux newbies, and this desktop is clearly one of them! It also includes a great "Copy2ram" feature when booting from the disc that allows you to load the whole OS into memory if you have 1GB or more of RAM, providing an incredibly fast system.

gOS Space

This distribution is another good newbies distro, being based on the extremely newbie-friendly Ubuntu distro. Of all these desktops, gOS Space is the one that owes the most to OS X, but the philosophy behind it is different, with its emphasis on web apps instead of the desktop.

Again, Compiz is included for desktop effects.

gOS Space is a distribution that's easy to use and beautiful to look at. Its use in the MyMiniPC will no doubt expose it to people who wouldn't otherwise consider Linux as an option.

OpenGEU

One relatively obscure, but extremely beautiful Linux desktop is Enlightenment, version 17 of which has been in development for many years. While it's not yet been officially released, it's still complete enough that it's used in several distros. Probably the most striking of these is OpenGEU, formerly known as Geubuntu. Like gOS Space, it's based on Ubuntu, but it uses elements of the Gnome and Xfce desktops to fill in the gaps in Enlightenment. And it looks awesome, with animated wallpapers and bling aplenty. Check out the default theme, Sunshine:

It also comes with a second theme, which I prefer, namely Moonlight:

This desktop has to be seen to be believed - it's truly astounding!

Dreamlinux

Dreamlinux is a distribution that hails from Brazil. Like gOS, the layout takes a degree of inspiration from OS X, but the overall look is distinctively its own:

It has a choice of desktops available - either Gnome or the lightweight Xfce, yet maintains a consistent look between the two and manages to squeeze both onto one CD. It also includes a very handy utility to install it to a USB flash drive, so you can carry it anywhere!

It includes Compiz, and the Emerald theme manager, so it's very easy to customise it to get a distinctive look in a matter of minutes:

It also has Avant Window Navigator, an excellent dock bar. This includes the DCP Control Panel, where you can easily adjust the settings for Compiz, Emerald and AWN to get your desktop looking the way you want it.

Linux Mint

This distribution is based on Ubuntu, but is made even more user-friendly thanks to the fact that, like PCLinuxOS, it includes multimedia codecs by default. The desktop isn't glitzy like some of the other distros I've mentioned, but has an understated elegance of its own:

It also includes Compiz out of the box, so you can easily get the cube effect going in no time! Linux Mint is a tremendous distribution for those who don't want to get bogged down in the technical details but like an attractive desktop that's easy to use. It's always my first choice for a recommendation to Linux newbies.

I'm also going to make special mention of the KDE4 desktop. At the moment, only one distribution (Kubuntu Hardy) offers a KDE4 desktop, and it's not very mature at the moment, as many of the applications for KDE have not yet been ported to KDE4. But it shows a lot of promise:

All of these distributions are freely available, so if you like the look of one, then just click on the link to take you to the website, where you can download an ISO image and burn it to disc to try. I know that some Mac users hate having to use Windows if they're at a friend or relative's house, so if you like the look of one of these, you may want to keep a copy handy to use as an alternative under those circumstances. Also, Linux has the same kind of resistance to viruses and malware as OS X, so you have those advantages as well - always worth having if you're going to use a computer that could have all kinds of junk on it! Live CD's can also be handy if your computer won't boot due to problems and you need to use it in a hurry.

By reading this article and perhaps trying one or two of these, I hope you'll find that Linux has a lot more going for it on the desktop than perhaps you realised!

Linux Stickers

2008-05-01T22:03:00.002+01:00

I forgot to mention this earlier, but back at the end of February I sent the following email to Linux Format (a UK magazine for Linux users, and far and away the best of the lot if you ask me):

I've been using Kubuntu for nearly a year now, and Linux Format has been an invaluable resource to me for that time. Thanks for a great mag!
I recently took the "Designed for Windows XP" sticker off my Dell Inspiron, as it seemed silly to have it on there when I haven't had Windows on there for so long, and I found myself thinking about how nice it would be to have a Kubuntu or Ubuntu sticker instead, or even just a Linux one. I expect they are probably given away at conferences, but I've not been to one, nor I suspect have many Linux users. Have you thought about giving away a sheet of stickers for various distros free with one issue so we can show off our distro of choice to all and sundry?

Imagine my surprise when it was actually printed in the May issue! What's more, I got the June issue today and there are three other letters adding their vote to it! Not to mention a thread on their forums about it. Guess a lot of people would like to be able to get rid of the "Designed for Windows XP" stickers!

Linux From Scratch

2008-05-01T21:38:00.003+01:00

I first started experimenting with Linux in February 2007, and tried loads of distros before eventually settling on Kubuntu. Although I was using Kubuntu Edgy for about a month, I wasn't able to connect to the Internet, either wirelessly or by Ethernet until I switched to Feisty the day that was released, so I take the launch date of Feisty as the date I started using Linux as my main operating system.

So, now that I've switched to Hardy, I've been using Linux for a little over a year now. In that time, I've learned a lot. Thanks to my experimentation with VirtualBox, I've been able to try more distros than I care to name, and I'm confident that I could easily use a more complex distro such as Debian, having tried Etch in VirtualBox and liked it. I have tried Gentoo, but that won't boot in VirtualBox for some reason - anyone know why? Slackware was good as well, but I struggled a little with it.

But for a while I've had a hankering to try something else:Linux From Scratch. For the uninitiated, LFS is essentially a project that describes how to build your own custom GNU/Linux system from scratch. It can be done from an existing system, the Linux From Scratch live CD (which includes the software and manuals you need), or another live CD such as Knoppix. It sounds pretty cool, and I've heard that you can learn an awful lot from making your own custom install.

Has anyone else done this before? Was it hard? And do you think that after 1 year, it's likely that I've got enough Linux experience to do it? I'd love to hear from you if you have created your own custom system in this fashion.

The desktop - where do we go from here?

2008-04-29T12:24:00.003+01:00

Lately, I've been thinking a lot about the future of the desktop operating system. As a Linux user and a vocal advocate of Linux and free software in general, this is something I think about anyway. I find myself a little frustrated that people waste money on expensive proprietary software when they could be using free software instead (in both the free speech and free beer sense). In particular, I have something of a bee in my bonnet about schools using this - why should my taxes, or Tesco vouchers for schools, go to pay Microsoft when they could be using Edubuntu instead? OpenOffice is a more than adequate replacement for MS Office (and don't give me that about "they need to learn the industry standard", it's just a word processor, I used other ones when I was a kid and I can use MS Office just fine).

I do think there is a change coming. Having been using Linux for a year now, I know very well that distros like Ubuntu are more than ready for the average Joe. Anyone who thinks that Ubuntu is hard to install must have not installed Windows XP (which is a lot harder to install than Ubuntu). It's just the fact that you have to install it at all that fazes some people, and the fact there are differences between that and Windows. If you were buying your first computer and you got it with Ubuntu preinstalled, it wouldn't be any harder to learn to use it than Windows - in fact it's easier in many ways.

I know several people who don't consider themselves Linux users, but own an Eee PC, and use it without any problems at all. This device, in particular, has made it clear that a well thought out Linux distribution can work for non-technical users.

Add to the fact that Windows Vista is getting a reaction somewhere between lukewarm and outright hostile, depending on who you ask, and it makes me feel that a shakeup on the desktop is imminent. Microsoft are pressing ahead with plans to withdraw XP from sale, but vendors such as Dell and HP are exploiting loopholes to keep selling it.

I do keep hearing rumours that Windows 7 will see major changes to Windows, similar to what Apple did when they moved to a Unix base. There are suggestions that the whole OS might be rewritten from the ground up, getting rid of much of the bloatware. It's difficult to tell what impact this might have. On the one hand, these changes could save Windows, fixing major problems with the operating system and improving performance no end. On the other, changes of this magnitude would very likely break compatibility with previous versions of Windows, so people couldn't use their old software, although I can see how they could include some kind of virtualization software to get round this. Also, people don't generally like the changes in Windows Vista, so more radical changes might go down like a ton of bricks.

Apple, of course, will remain a part of the desktop computing scene, but the fact is OS X is not going to grab a majority market share any time soon. The only way this would happen is if Apple were to license OS X to other hardware manufacturers, which I can't see them doing any time soon. Also, if Apple did somehow wind up pushing every other hardware manufacturer out of the market it would be worse than Microsoft's current near-monopoly - they'd control both the hardware and software markets, which is worse than Microsoft controlling just the software. Sorry Mac fans, but never going to happen, not while there are industry regulators around! Apple's market share may well increase, but they aren't going to take over the world, fact.

If other OEM's start losing significant market share to Apple because Windows became a liability, you can bet your life that they will start looking around for an alternative, and Linux is the most likely choice (but not the only one - it's possible that other desktop operating systems such as FreeBSD might also benefit).

One thing to note is that if something like this happens, growth in Linux adoption is likely to be exponential. For instance, greater numbers of Linux users means that more hardware and software manufacturers will support it, reducing the problems people have when switching so that more use it, creating a reinforcing loop. While I don't think Linux is likely to wipe out Windows any time soon, if at all, it could easily become much more significant than it is now in a very short space of time.

I actually think that if it was better supported by games manufacturers, Linux would be a better choice of operating system for hardcore gamers. These are the people who will spend lots of time and money building a custom gaming rig that's designed to get the absolute best performance possible out of their computer. To me, it seems a bit of a waste to then have a bog-standard Windows install on it. I'm sure many of these people would really appreciate being able to use a distribution like Gentoo to compile the whole installation from scratch and customise it to get the very best from their computer. For people like this, the desktop of choice may be much less important, so they could use a window manager like IceWM or Fluxbox, meaning they can then save the processing power for where they really need it. Something like Aero is a waste of processing time if you're looking for gaming performance.

Whatever happens, I think the next few years are likely to be interesting. One thing to note, though, even if you're happy with Windows or OS X, is that any growth in Linux adoption benefits you as a consumer, even if you don't use it. I'm not just saying this as a proponent of Linux, but if Microsoft and Apple have more effective competition in the desktop operating system market, they will be forced to improve their own products to compete. The nature of Linux, with hundreds of distributions competing with each other, means that it has improved in leaps and bounds over the last few years, and will no doubt continue to do so. The entry of Linux into the mainstream desktop market would really shake up the scene.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts, and you may disagree - please feel free to comment!

Why Linux always wins!

2008-04-28T14:21:00.003+01:00

Maybe it's too soon to be doing the second instalment, but I had this idea buzzing around my head and I couldn't wait!

Something funny for a Monday morning

2008-04-28T10:28:00.005+01:00

A little XKCD-style cartoon I knocked up in five minutes, which I think some of you might enjoy!

If this goes down well, I might even do some more!

BBC News website

2008-04-27T23:09:00.001+01:00

Has anyone else noticed that the BBC News website has dumped Windows Media Player and Real Player, and started using Flash instead?

This is great news as I struggled for ages to get to play videos in Linux. I finally found a way using a Firefox extension and VLC, but now I don't need to do that, I just need to add flashplugin-nonfree and I'm away!

Upgrading to Hardy Heron

2008-04-27T22:21:00.002+01:00

I've upgraded to Kubuntu Hardy Heron, and so far I'm very impressed. I decided to stick with the KDE3 version in the end (mainly because Katapult isn't in the KDE4 version and I'm so used to it, and yes I know it's easy to download and install it), and it's working out well for me. Now that I've got /home on a separate partition, I didn't have to spend ages loading old e-mails or entering passwords for websites I used.

However, I'm using the Firefox 3 beta as my browser and I have one or two issues with it. First of all, a couple of extensions that I rely on aren't yet available (Google Toolbar, Google Browser Sync). Second, it's a real pain sometimes when I click on a link - sometimes it will open something random, like it will try to download something if I right click, rather than coming up with the right-click menu! Not sure why this is, but it's a shame as Firefox 3 solves many of the issues I'd had with Firefox 2 and is a LOT faster.

I'm also impressed with Xubuntu Hardy - great default wallpaper. I was actually seriously tempted by it this time, as despite my preference for KDE, I also really like Xfce (as well as IceWM and E17).

One very handy feature in Hardy is uFW, an easy-to-use command-line application which enables you to configure your firewall. Also, Kubuntu has better Compiz support.

All in all, while I'm sad to see Gutsy go, as it was so much more reliable than Feisty, Hardy is a worthy successor. It appears to no longer have the issue with DNS that I experienced with Gutsy, and the wireless works out of the box as it did in Gutsy.

What kind of experience have you had with Hardy so far? If you're using Kubuntu, have you gone for KDE3 or 4? Have you switched desktops? Or has Hardy given you problems?

My review of gOS Space

2008-04-13T15:53:00.008+01:00

You will all no doubt be aware that a few months back I reviewed the original gOS, and I was enthusiastic about it. In my opinion, the original gOS was a great Linux distribution for the average computer user - someone who used it to write up a few documents, send a few emails, and surf the Internet a bit. With its emphasis on web apps, it was not only an ideal operating system for casual users, but was an indication of where desktop computing appears to be headed, with the real work being done "in the cloud", with the desktop just the front end for that.

Subsequently, gOS Rocket was released, but I never got round to reviewing this, mainly due to hardware issues (I couldn't get it working with my wireless connection). I tried it, and there was very little improvement over the original - a slight difference to the iBar, and a few extra applications.

But now, gOS Space is here, and it's a radical departure from the original. So, once again I downloaded a copy and gave it a try.

One thing I noticed straight off is the size. gOS Space is around 768MB, too big to fit on a CD-ROM, so you'll need to burn it to a DVD-R instead. Like it's predecessors, gOS Space is based on Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon, so you know right from the start that it's going to be easy to use.

The biggest change to gOS is the desktop: they've dumped Enlightenment (although apparently code from Enlightenment is still being used), switching instead to Gnome (as used in Ubuntu). I was a bit sceptical about this, not being a great fan of Gnome, but having seen it, they've done a fantastic job with it. Check out the awesome desktop:

It's radically different to the previous gOS desktop, but retains the same ethos behind it, with the concentration on web apps, accessible through the dock, in addition to the usual applications as used by Ubuntu, which are available from the menu in the top left corner:

This picture really doesn't do justice to the wonderful little animation you get when you mouse over an icon on the dock - they glow blue and rotate. Great little touch, and makes it look really user-friendly.

In place of the existing dock, they've used the excellent Avant Window Navigator, and have included a feature similar to OS X Leopard's Stacks to enable many links to be activated from one icon:

The theme used for the application windows is simple but stylish:

Now, it would be fair to say that the desktop still owes much of its inspiration to OS X, but it's not just copying the Mac graphic interface. The switch to Gnome means they can include Compiz, always one of the great advertisements for Linux:

And, of course, under the hood it's Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon, so it's among the easiest of Linux distributions to use.

The inclusion of the Stacks-style feature means that they can fit a lot more links in than previous versions of gOS, so for each item there are several choices. For instance, look under Music and you'll see, among others, Jango, Imeem, Last.fm, and Pandora. Equally, look under Videos and you'll find YouTube, Google Video and MySpace TV. The apps are generally well chosen, and there are more available from the menu, including all the old favourites from previous versions of gOS such as GMail and Google Reader.

The name, of course, is no accident: gOS Space is aimed at people who use MySpace. There's an entire stack devoted to MySpace, as well as links to add the new applications to MySpace (shame that MySpace still persists in not allowing you to edit your profile in anything other than IE). The News stack is not something you'd use for serious news: the links are for MTV News, MySpace News, and Perez Hilton - basically they're concentrated on celebrity gossip rather than news:

Cosmetically, gOS can't be faulted. It's a truly stunning desktop - if anyone ever tells you that Linux doesn't have a nice desktop, just show them this and watch them eat their words!

Space is more like Ubuntu than any previous version of gOS - the file manager is Nautilus, the terminal is the same one Ubuntu uses, in fact I could only find one application in Ubuntu that isn't in gOS (namely Ekiga Softphone, but then it has Skype instead, which is more widely used, so that's not a great loss). So there's certainly no problem in terms of functionality. You could just as easily use gOS Space to do serious coding or compile a new kernel as with Ubuntu - the sources list for APT includes all the Ubuntu repositories, so anything in Ubuntu is also available for gOS.

In all honesty, I can't find a single thing to dislike about Space. The only drawback is the larger size, meaning you need a DVD instead of a CD, but that's not a big deal, as it doesn't seem to be any slower than Ubuntu. It will appeal to people far outside the usual group of Linux enthusiasts, and will help to get people using free software, even if they don't give two hoots about open source. Personally, I won't be using it as my main OS, being very much a KDE man, but I would be more than willing to recommend it to a less computer-literate friend or relative. If the Everex MyMiniPC were to become available in the UK with this installed, I'd be straight down to buy one, as it's a fantastic deal regardless of what OS you wind up using on it, so the fact that gOS Space is such a great distro is even better.

I do have a few suggestions, though. I still think that Flock might be a good fit for gOS instead of Firefox, due to its integration with social networks. I also think that it could do with a good application launcher similar to Quicksilver - fortunately there's an excellent candidate for this in Gnome Do, which is not yet in Ubuntu, but I believe is available from Hardy Heron onwards. Finally, I'd suggest the creators add a link for a social bookmarking service such as del.icio.us or Ma.gnolia, as these are extremely useful web apps that would prove very useful for many casual Internet users.

If you're a casual computer user who doesn't want to use Vista, this may be a great OS for you. If you like the Mac desktop, but aren't willing to shell out the exorbitant price for one, this also may be ideal for you. It's a great choice as a first Linux distro, and if you want to use Linux but the rest of your family don't, this may well be the distro to make them change their minds. If you want to try it, here's the link to the homepage. gOS Space could well be a distro that changes a lot of people's minds about just how easy to use Linux can be.