This continues an article I wrote nearly three years ago, Common Criticisms of Linux, parsed and analyzed.

In the three years since I wrote that original piece, Linux has grown — albeit slowly — in desktop usage. After nearly 2 years of no growth (2008-2010, lingering around 1% of market), in 2011 Linux saw a significant uptick in desktop adoption (+64% from May 2011 to January 2012). However, Linux’s desktop share still about 1/5 of the share of Apple OS X and 1/50 the share of Microsoft Windows. This despite the fact that Linux continues to dominate Microsoft in the server market.

The proprietary software industry may be filled with vaporware, mediocre software, and heavyweight kludges, but there is certainly also a lot of good stuff that keeps users coming back.

However, I believe the 2011/2012 up-tick in Linux desktop usage reflects a different trend: the increasingly commoditized role that desktop operating systems (and by extension, desktop software) play in an omni-connected world of cloud software.

Why doesn’t Linux run software application X or Y?

For end users, the above was a core complaint for many years (approx. 2000-2009) when evaluating Linux. However, this complaint has faded in the last two years. Let’s reflect on the most common and useful pieces of software on desktop operating systems these days:

Read the rest of this entry »

Take a look at these two posts from a ZDNet debate:

A poster under the name “jerryleecooper” says,

Vista is far more powerful than windows XP, and runs twice as fast. It is also much harder to pirate, and this point more than anything else has the Linux crowd in a panic.

and, in a follow-up post,

Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services?  That sounds preposterous to me.

Is this serious, or satire?  If it’s serious, it’s absurd.  If it’s satire, it’s genius.

I got fired up by the evidence coming out of Microsoft from yesterday, and decided to write a post to Miguel de Icaza’s blog.

Here’s what I wrote:

Hi Miguel,

It looks like a new set of “Halloween Documents” have come out, thanks to a case in Iowa, Comes et. al. v. Microsoft (http://iowaconsumercase.org/index.html). I’m wondering if you have any comments on this document in particular, which suggests that Microsoft management knew full well they were “stealing Java” to intentionally marginalize the cross-platform language issue.

A select quote from the document, “Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let’s move on and steal the Java language.”
Here’s the e-mail archives, which was submitted into evidence:

http://www.iowaconsumercase.org/011107/PX_2768.pdf

I’m wondering, given these thoughts from within Microsoft management, and given the recent news of Sun open sourcing the Java language under GPL terms, how is it that you can still push for the Mono project on Linux? Aren’t we always going to be fighting an uphill battle against a monopoly company protecting its biggest cash cow: the Windows platform?

Although my question was more “devil’s advocate” and meant to rile him up, Miguel provided some of the strongest and most cogent arguments for Mono that I’ve seen on record.

I just want to say great work to Miguel and the Mono team, and that if you ever doubted your raison d’etre, all it would take is reading this thread to be convinced! You’ve certainly convinced me!

Update: it’s really this kind of dependency on Windows I’m worried about in .NET. I think it’s just that the culture of the Java runtime is one of platform independence, whereas .NET from Microsoft is one of “platform dominance,” and Mono is some sort of stepping stone between Microsoft’s single-platform vision and those of us who want to write cross-platform apps using .NET.

Well, I’ve always suspected that C# was nothing but a Java rip without cross-platform support, meant to marginalize Java so that cross-platform languages don’t become as pervasive as Microsoft’s single-platform, Windows-only languages. Now, evidence has come out of Microsoft e-mail archives that proves not only that they just “stole Java” in those pivotal years, but that managers knew full well they would never make an effort to keep the language cross-platform.  A classic “embrace and extend” situation.
A select quote from the document, “Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let’s move on and steal the Java language.”

You can read the entire thing in a scanned copy from the Iowa case Comes et. al. v. Microsoft Corp.

Update: my discussion with Miguel de Icaza makes this seem “less official,” but I still think the mentality from this document also pervaded the mentality of .NET development, specifically that cross-platform would never be a goal of Microsoft .NET.

The following post has been sitting in my “drafts” section of WordPress for a good while. I don’t know why I never posted it — it’s been there for more than a year. I think I just thought the article deserved such careful attention that I never sat down to really edit it and prepare it for publication.

The topic is on the common criticisms of Linux, and I think it’s time for me to finally post my thoughts, given the upcoming release of Windows Vista and related products.

Awhile back, /. posted an article entitled “Is It Wrong to Love Microsoft?” The article is horribly written, but does have one point to make: why is it that on /. and other technology news sites like OSNews and Kuro5hin, everyone loves Linux almost unconditionally, and hates Windows unequivocally? I personally am unfond of blind faith as much as I am offended by blind hatred. I’ve thought long and hard about the pros and cons of Linux and Windows, and think I can come up with a pretty balanced evaluation of the two.

Oftentimes the criticisms thrown at Linux are hard to parse, mainly because the authors of these criticisms don’t know much about system design themselves. Having studied it at University, and having been a 10-year user of Windows and Linux (and a 6-year user of Mac OS since version 9), I figured I should chime in.

First, as often happens when evaluating arguments of any kind, one needs to identify the different kinds of critique, and break them down into the smallest possible groups so that they can be evaluated fairly. Broad statements like “Linux is broken” or “Linux is impossible to use” do not identify specific problems, but merely express sentiments, probably acquired through firsthand experience with a particular set of conditions.

Futhermore, attacks mounted at Linux aren’t mounted at Linux “the kernel” but at the whole set of Free (and sometimes, commercial) Software that runs on Linux, which is quite broad and diverse (and not accountable to any one development team, not even distributors). As a result of this, the attacks often seem focused on the whole system, when in fact concern only a small part of the system, and quite often that small part is already in the process of being “fixed”. So, in order to evaluate these arguments, I will begin by pointing out the general complaint lunged at Linux, and then break it down into the proper categories and evaluate each of those in turn, placing whatever context I can to help understand the situation better.

Read the rest of this entry »

I read this response to an article at eWeek on Bill Gates’ views about Computer Science research, graduates, spending, and company strategies.

I think it’s pretty clear that despite the disagreements I have with Mr. Gates over a subject known as “business ethics” (if such a subject truly exists!), he does seem to be a genuinely patriotic guy who loves technology. I mean, what good is it for more Americans to get into CS, if other countries are diving in and filling whatever knowledge gap may exist? Can’t Bill just hire those workers, and what’s more, for less money per hour?

Well, I think Mr. Gates really wants innovation in computer software to remain “America’s Great Industry.”

I was very intrigued by this response to the article:

Everyone knows that Open Source is taking over the software development industry. And according to the Open Source philosophy; developers should be enslaved, source code should be free. No, no, that’s not politically correct, let me try again. Developers should give their work away because code needs to be free (as in speech) and the needs of the code is more important than the needs of the people who create it. Well, that doesn’t sound quite right either but in any case, it doesn’t really matter to me because my kids won’t be studying computer science.

This is a very interesting post. True, it will be seen as a troll by some, since open source philosophy definitely doesn’t say anything about programmer enslavement. But his point is real and felt in the industry. That is, if you aren’t selling software, how are software developers to make money from it?

I think the response to this was best-articulated by Eric Raymond, when he pointed out that of programmers, only about 1-2% make their cash from off-the-shelf software sales. Instead, most make their money from “in-house” or “custom” software solutions. In other words, the majority of developers aren’t working on the Adobe Photoshop team, they’re working on Acme Inc.’s payroll or issue tracking system.

I kind of love this sort of propaganda, though. Because it is all good news for me.

When I first decided to do CS, I considered the possible effect of outsourcing and other factors on my employment possibilities. I thought, what if there are no jobs when I get out of college? But I stuck with it.

Well, it turns out, everyone had a hunch similar to mine, but they were more wooed by it than I was. So everyone fled CS. And now I’m the only one left. (An exaggeration, but you get what I mean — my computer science classes are nearly empty, whereas they were packed during registration only a few years ago).

It turns out, firms are hiring more than ever before. Why? Because the dotcom bubble is over, and green-eyed imposters are getting flushed out of the industry. But the demand is still there. Software is pervasive. Everyone needs software development done. There simply isn’t anything under the sun that can’t benefit from a little software developer finesse.

You can’t have all this work done in India and China because, it turns out, people want software developers to work with customers (big surprise). They want applications which meet their sensibilities, and they want them changes when the environment changes.

I liked that Mr. Gates said the #1 thing he’s looking for is project management IT types. Funny, it’s the #1 thing I’m looking for, too. Software developers are a dime a dozen. Find me a software developer who doesn’t get nervous when you ask him a tough question, or ask him to write, in plain English, a high-level overview of the system you’re asking him to create, and you’ve got yourself someone who’s valuable.

It’s really weird. Lately, I’ve been doing so much development in a *nix environment, that doing the development in Windows is really painful for me. I don’t have any of my good old UNIX tools, I don’t have hotkey-optimized user interfaces, I don’t have speed and control. But more than anything else, I don’t feel like I know what’s going on under the hood.

Today, to take a break from reading Philosophy, I decided to work a bit on this little Java Servlet project I’ve been hacking on. (Will be “released” later.) At some point this past summer, I decided to remove Linux from my main desktop machine and just consolidate all my Linux data onto one machine–this made my life easier so I didn’t have three total (one Windows, two Linuxes) places where my shit could be. But the sacrifice is that my laptop screen is small, so sometimes I want to develop with a big screen and thus want to use my desktop.

Web development, especially, makes sense for me under Windows, since I’m comfortable with the major graphic and web design tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator) and don’t think the Linux “equivalents” (GIMP, Bluefish, Inkscape) are good enough.

But I decided–may as well have the code open on Windows too, since it’s not C hacking I’m doing, but Java. So I installed Eclipse, and the J2EE, and got cracking.

But under Windows, there are all sorts of gotchas. When my UNIX tool craving gets really bad, I need to drop into cygwin, which isn’t so bad. But without good workspace switching (I have VirtuaWin, but it kinda sucks), and without a customizable window manager, I am really much slower. But here’s the other weird thing I ran into. After awhile of coding, I realized that Eclipse wasn’t reading my JavaDoc information for the JDK (no cool descriptions in my autocomplete tooltips). So I go snooping around the preferences file and can’t find anything, I enable a billion options but no luck. But then, eventually, I realize that it’s very possible Eclipse is using a different JDK. In fact, I look in the dialog, and Eclipse is using some J2SE environment that some other application installed, not the J2EE I installed right before Eclipse. And that J2SE is missing the Java API source code and JavaDoc comments.

The reason this seemed so non-obvious to me is because I’m not used to systems which are completely fucking disorganized. Say what you will about Linux not being user friendly, but, by God, you won’t find it likely to find two different JDKs installed on my machine, and even if you do, only one will be getting used (thanks to Debian’s “alternatives” system). Every application on Windows statically compiles, includes its own libraries, and spews its shit all over the file system and registry. No database tracks it, so your system is a fucking nightmare.

I couldn’t even do a reasonable search to find the JDK I needed, either. It turns out it was in C:\Program Files\Sun\j2sdk1.4_02, which may not sound so bad, but considering on Linux I just think, “Where are libraries stored? /usr/lib” and then in there I think, “What is what I’m looking for called? j2sdk” I quickly find any Java environments in /usr/lib/j2sdk1.x-sun.

On my Linux system, which has not that much installed, I just ran a du -hs /usr/lib/ and got 1.7GB. That means on my relatively lightly-loaded Linux system, 1.7GB of raw 0s and 1s are sitting there waiting to be used as SHARED libraries. Meanwhile, on Windows, there could be any amount of duplication of the equivalent libraries, floating around in various Program Files directories.

I can’t believe there are acutally some Linux critics that believe we should be going in this direction, eliminating things like emerge, apt, and rpm and instead just have statically-compiled binaries that come with their own binary libraries and have users duplicating this stuff across their system. Not only is it insane from the point of view of giving control to the user, but it’s also just plain wasteful.

I think the most evil thing about modern desktop computers is drive letters. Why didn’t Microsoft rid itself of this horrible concept earlier?

I’m working at a client’s house, trying to upgrade laptops from Windows 2000 to Windows XP. So, the last time I was here, I allocated 10GB of space at the front of the drive for the new system drive for XP. Now when I use the Windows installer to format it as NTFS, it marks it as “F:” Partition3. Which means, when I install XP, the system drive will be F:, and then when I eventually rid myself of the existing two drives, the system will break (probably with the infamous INACCESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE stop error).

So, the trick I’m going to use to get around this is prior to installing Windows, I’ll boot off a boot CD, hide both existing NTFS partitions, reboot, install Windows on the now-drive-C:, and then unhide those partitions later so that they show up as D: and E: (I hope).

Argh. The least the installer could have done is allowed me to hide the drives from within here. It takes for-ever to load up the Windows installer again.

Just an interesting post I made to OSNews in response to someone saying that IE “starts quickly” while Firefox “takes forever.”

Just to clear up, the only reason IE starts faster in Windows is because IE is technically “always running.” The only thing that has to “start” is creating a Window with an “IE control” in it.

I get the same behavior on Linux by running galeon -s when my X session starts. This runs galeon in “server mode,” which means it’s always in memory, and when I run Galeon (on my laptop, I press ALT+F1 to run my browser), it starts in < a half-second. If Firefox had a similar mode, it could offer you the same thing.

As for OpenOffice.org, it's true that the start time is relatively slow. I'm sure they'll get around to optimizing it.

Personally, I think the obsession people have with start times on Linux and Windows machines is due to a basic design flaw with most Window managers. Applications should really only start up once; if you start an application multiple times in a day, you're essentially performing redundant computation. The program can sit in memory and if it really is not used in awhile, it will get paged out anyway due to our modern Virtual Memory implementations.

In OS X, for example, you can get the same effect as "galeon -s" or IE's "preloading" simply by not quitting an application after all its windows are closed. This leaves the application running, and when you open a new window it will be nearly instantaneous. (Strangely enough, many old Windows/Linux freaks are sometimes "annoyed" by this aspect of OS X, since in the Linux/Windows world up to now, closing all windows of an application is equivalent to closing the application itself).

It turns out GNU ddrescue did just the trick, and I was able to get 98% of the data off that dead hard drive. Now to set up a new Windows system for these poor bastards (why, oh why, can’t everyone run *nix?). I need a cup of coffee first.