Linked by John Munsch on Mon 30th Dec 2002 19:05 UTC
Linux Why do it? I am asked this question more often than I expected, even by existing Linux users who I expected to know as well as I the reasons for building a next-generation desktop Linux for the home user. So here are some of my reasons for thinking that we must spend the effort to create a better desktop on Linux than any existing version now has. Editor's Note: Due to a technical glitch, the first segment of this article was ommitted for some readers. If you missed the "why" section, before, you can read it now.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Gripes with some of the "How?"
by Strike on Mon 30th Dec 2002 22:37 UTC

Part of the problem is that users expectations for software installation are, well ... skewed and rather naive. Back in DOS days, yeah all you needed was a .COM file with everything shellacked in there and it'd run. Great.

But, computing has gotten more powerful and advanced since then. Programs aren't self-contained. Code reuse is rampant ("omg no!" you say, misguided), and shared libraries are actually shared. Programs are often just clever front-ends to libraries these days. They aren't the old .COM files you may remember, they are better - allowing your system to run leaner and to make things less complicated by having a consistent set of functionalities.

The users shouldn't be continually lied to about what's going on in their system. They should know that every application is a SET of components, not some huge monolithic black box. And while perhaps the current Linux solutions aren't the most user-friendly, they treat applications in the most "correct" way, as far as I'm concerned. They see them as components that are related, and not independent blocks. So, while perhaps in terms of presentation and interface to the user DOES need to be worked on, I don't think that the packaging systems are at fault for being honest about what an application really is.