Over the decades, my primary operating system of choice has changed a few times. As a wee child of six years old, we got out first PC through one of those employer buy-a-PC programs, where an employer would subsidize its employees buying PCs for use in the home. The goal here was simple: if people get comfortable with a computer in their private life, they’ll also get comfortable with it in their professional life. And so, through my mother’s employer, we got a brand new 286 desktop running MS-DOS and Windows 3.0. I still have the massive and detailed manuals and original installation floppies it came with.

So, my first operating system of ‘choice’ was MS-DOS, and to a far lesser extent Windows 3.0. As my childhood progressed, we got progressively better computers, and the new Windows versions that came with it – Windows 95, 98, and yes, even ME, which I remarkably liked just fine. Starting with Windows 95, DOS became an afterthought, and with my schools, too, being entirely Windows-only, my teenage years were all Windows, all the time. So, when I bought my first own, brand new computer – instead of old 386 machines my parents took home from work – right around when Windows XP came out, I bought a totally legal copy of Windows XP from some dude at school that somehow came on a CD-R with a handwritten label but was really totally legit you guys.

I didn’t like Windows XP at all, and immediately started looking for alternatives, trying out Mandrake Linux before discovering something called BeOS – and despite BeOS already being over by that point, I had found my operating system of choice. I tried to make it last as long as the BeOS community would let me, but that wasn’t very long. The next step was a move to the Mac, something that was quite rare in The Netherlands at that time. During that same time, Microsoft released Windows Server 2003, the actually good version of Windows XP, and a vibrant community of people, including myself, started using it as a desktop operating system instead.

I continued using this mix of Mac OS X and Windows – even Vista – for a long time, while having various iterations of Linux installed on the side. I eventually lost interest in Mac OS X because Apple lost interest in it (I think around the Snow Leopard era?), and years later, six or seven years ago or so, I moved to Linux exclusively, fully ditching Windows even for gaming like four or so years ago when Valve’s Proton started picking up steam. Nowadays all my machines run Fedora KDE, which I consider to be by far the best desktop operating system experience you can get today.

Over the last few years or so, I’ve noticed something fun and interesting in how I set up my machines: you can find hints of my operating system history all over my preferred setup and settings. I picked up all kinds of usage patterns and expectations from all those different operating systems, and I’d like to enable as many of those as possible in my computing environment. In a way, my setup is a reflection of the operating systems I used in the past, an archaeological record of my computing history, an evolutionary tree of good traits that survived, and bad traits bred out.

Taking a look at my bare desktop, you’ll instantly pick up on the fact I used to use Mac OS X for a long time. The Mac OS X-like dock at the bottom of the screen has been my preferred way of opening and managing running applications since I first got an iBook G4 more than 20 years ago, and to this day I find it far superior to any alternatives. KDE lets me easily recreate a proper dock, without having to resort to any third-party dock applications. I never liked the magnification trick Mac OS X wowed audiences with when it was new, so I don’t use it.

The next dead giveaway I used to be a Mac OS X user a long time ago is the top bar, which shares quite a few elements with the Mac OS X menubar, while also containing elements not found in Mac OS X. I keep the KDE equivalent of a start menu there, a button that brings up my home folder in a KDE folder view, a show desktop button that’s mostly there for aesthetic reasons, KDE’s global menubar widget for that Mac OS X feel, a system tray, the clock, and then a close button that opens up a custom system menu with shutdown/reboot/etc. commands and some shortcuts to system tools.

Another feature coming straight from my days using Mac OS X is KDE’s equivalent of Exposé, called Overview, without which I wouldn’t know how to find a window if my life depended on it. I bind it to the top-left hotcorner for easy access with my mouse, while the bottom-right hotcorner is set to show my desktop (and the reason why I technically don’t really need that show desktop button I mentioned earlier). I fiddled with the hot corner trigger timings so that they fire virtually instantly. Waiting on my computer is so ’90s.

It’s not really possible to see in screenshots, but my stint using BeOS as my main operating system back when that was a thing you could do also shines through, specifically in the way I manage windows. In BeOS, double-clicking a titlebar tab would minimise a window, and right-clicking the tab would send the window to the bottom of the Z-stack. I haven’t maximised a non-video window in several decades, so I find double-clicking a titlebar to maximise a window utterly baffling, and a ridiculous Windows-ism I want nothing to do with. Once again, KDE lets me set this up exactly the way I want, and I genuinely feel lost when I can’t manipulate my windows in this manner.

For the pedantic among us – including myself – I do have to mention that these BeOS window management quirks are, if I have my history straight, originally copied from the classic Mac OS. Be, Inc. was founded by former Apple engineers, after all, and once the AT&T Hobbit processor was cancelled, followed by the failure and cancellation of the BeBox, BeOS positioned itself as a PowerPC Mac OS replacement, before eventually also adding x86 support. However, I never used the classic Mac OS when it was current, so BeOS is where I found and adopted these quirks.

You can also see BeOS represented in a very unexpected place: my terminal colour scheme. BeOS’ terminal had black text on a white background, and while the modern KDE terminal application has additional niceties the BeOS terminal didn’t have – coloured text! – the basic black-on-white is still by far my preferred terminal colour scheme. I definitely unlearned that DOS white-on-black pretty quickly, and thankfully, pretty much any modern terminal emulator allows you to set your own preferred colour scheme.

And yes, there’s some holdovers from Windows in there too. I really like the original, basic Start menu from the Windows 9x days, and I keep that around in my modern KDE desktops; just a simple list of categories with cascading menus, and that’s it. Virtually everything else Microsoft added to the Start menu since has made it worse, and I firmly believe that original design all the way back from 1995 is still an excellent, unobtrusive, yet patently discoverable way of finding applications you don’t use very often. Add in modern tools like KRunner – the always accessible KDE system search tool that prioritises applications – and that’s all I personally need to launch applications that don’t deserve a spot in my dock.

You’ll notice that the red thread running through all of this is KDE Plasma. Out of all the major desktop environments today, KDE is the only one still catering to people who want their graphical user interface to be adaptable to their needs, instead of asking the user to adapt. Windows, macOS, GNOME – they all expect me to mold myself into their predefined shape, whereas I can freely mold KDE to fit my shape.

This goes far beyond just shaping the desktop environment – panels, desktop icons, etc. – itself. One of the most underrated features of KDE is the ability to turn off and edit toolbars, and this feature alone would be enough to draw me towards using KDE. I can’t stress how much I love that I can edit the toolbars of virtually every KDE application to fit my exact needs and wishes, so I don’t have buttons or toolbars I don’t ever use taking up space and distracting me. Add to that the ability to individually turn labels on and off per toolbar item, and you can really make the UI of your applications suit your specific needs and wishes.

Kwrite doesn’t need any toolbars or buttons at all, so all I have enabled are the default window chrome and line numbers. The same applies to my terminal, which just has its window chrome enabled, and nothing else. I changed Dolphin, KDE’s file manager, to move buttons around a bit to better fit my needs, and I added a button to show and hide hidden files, which I weirdly use a lot. Dolphin also allows me to add or remove whatever I want from its context menu, so I remove anything I don’t need to end up with a context menu specifically optimised for me. I extensively modify Kmail and its various sub-windows, since most of the more groupware-like stuff I simply don’t need at all. And so on.

It’s remarkable how KDE has managed to withstand the onslaught of rigid, mobile-inspired UI design with oversized buttons, endless seas of white space, toggles designed for touch instead of cursors, and so on. Whereas all of their competitors seem to be shoehorning touch-optimised UI elements into a cursor-driven environment, KDE still treats the mouse cursor as the primary input, and it shows. KDE still understands that on my desktop or laptop computer, where 99.9% of my input is done with a mouse and keyboard, the UI should reflect that. That means KDE tends to be more dense, show more information, and isn’t afraid to show buttons and other UI elements where it makes sense, as opposed to the trend of hiding everything from the user in favour of oversized buttons and immense amounts of whitespace to accomodate fat fingers that are, in reality, rarely used.

On top of that, KDE doesn’t infantalise its users. It treats its users not as children that need to be protected from themselves, but as grown adults that can make their own informed choices to shape and mold their computers in a way that suits them best. Yes, this means there are a lot of settings panels in KDE, some of which might be quite complex, but KDE trusts its users to be able to handle this responsibility. When using, say, iOS, macOS, or GNOME, I feel like I’m being treated like a child who isn’t yet ready to make their own informed decisions in life, imposing a very “my way or the highway”-style of 1950s parenting. I’m sure this works just fine for millions of people, but I find it condescending, insulting even.

I was reading Carl Svensson’s in-depth critique of GNOME’s file manager recently – a great read – wherein he also linked to one of his earlier articles about the decline of usability in modern software. One part in particular in that article stood out to me; after showing a screenshot of Blender, a by necessity incredibly complex piece of software with a very complex user interface, Svensson nails the problem with, in this case, GNOME’s UI design so well I’m suspecting he’s a carpenter by trade (his emphasis at the end there, not mine):

I honestly can’t see how a program like Blender could possibly be created using Gnome’s guidelines – or indeed toolkit: certain time-tested UI elements aren’t even allowed in Gnome anymore, such as menu bars and hierarchical pull down menus. “Progressive disclosure” and the prevailing interpretation of “navigation structures” means completely replacing certain parts of the interface with others – instead of letting the user decide what’s relevant for them to see at any given moment. “Frequently used actions should be close at hand” – but in a program like Blender, frequently used actions vary profoundly with what kind of project is being worked on and what stage that project is in. I find it unlikely that a developer can make such judgement calls better than a user spending tens of thousands of hours in the program during the span of a career. Then again, “Focus on one situation, one type of experience.” is rather telling. Using software professionally isn’t about having a chic, boutique experience – it’s about getting the job done as quickly and efficiently as possible. Sometimes, that means working with irreducible complexity.

↫ Carl Svensson

And this hits right at the heart of the problem with the type of modern, minimalist, touch-first UI design embodied by GNOME, Windows, and now even macOS: it doesn’t allow for complexity, because the UI wrongfully assumes it’s running on a device with touch input owned by a child. The fact that your human interface guidelines, ostensibly developed for a mouse-first, desktop interface, do not allow for the kinds of complex applications people use to get work done – whether that be a spreadsheet, something like Blender, or even a word processor – should really make you pause and think about what your goals are, and if you might be heading down the wrong path.

This is why I use KDE. It’s the only major environment that respects me as a user, and fully embraces the input method it knows people are using. I’m genuinely baffled by how much animosity there seems to be among certain UI designers towards the mouse, and how desperately they are trying to embrace touch-first UI ideas that simply have no place on a desktop or laptop with a cursor. It feels like they want to be making a phone or tablet UI so bad that they lose all sight of what people are actually using out here in the real world.

This will sound harsh, but that doesn’t make it any less true: nobody uses GNOME or Windows applications on tablets or smartphones (the macOS situation is more complex, of course). I absolutely respect the hard work and love people are putting into making a GNOME or even Plasma-based smartphone, but the reality of the matter is that as it stands right now, I doubt there’s even more than 10000 people using GNOME or KDE Plasma on a smartphone. So why should the millions of people using GNOME or KDE Plasma be forced to use a UI primarily inspired by touch?

KDE seems to, for now at least, understand this, and that makes it the last popular mouse-first desktop environment that trusts its users with settings, complexity where inevitable, and configurability. Everyone else has either succumbed to the lure of infantilising touch interfaces, or is far too niche to serve as a proper alternative.

And that’s why I use KDE.

Addendum I: Obviously, KDE isn’t perfect

All of this being said, KDE is far, far from perfect, and the various KDE contributors I’ve interacted with will be the first to acknowledge this. I want to bring some balance into this article by discussing some of the things KDE definitely needs to work on, and some worrying trends I’m seeing lately that have me mildly worried about where KDE might be going in the future.

First and foremost, especially newer KDE applications seem to not always respect the variety of choices KDE offers. A great example is the global menubar widget; newer applications like Tokodon, Weather, Spectacle, or even the Settings application, do not have a menubar to export, meaning the widget in the top bar remains eerily empty. I understand they want these applications to not have a menubar visible by default, but I think there’s still enough functionality to populate at least a basic menubar to be displayed for those of us using the global menubar widget or who just want a regular menubar attached to the window. This same group of applications also do not allow their toolbars to be hidden or edited, which is another massive regression from the norm.

This is a worrying trend I hope will be halted.

A second major issue is the messy state of KDE’s various theming options. KDE is well-known for its ability to be themed, but the options for it are confusingly spread out, including the oddity where applications and the Plasma desktop elements use different theming engines. You can end up in a situation where you find a good application theme, but then need to hunt to find the accompanying Plasma theme, assuming it exists at all. It all feels a bit disjointed and chaotic, and I know KDE developers agree, because they are working on greatly streamlining this process, including a unified theming engine called Union. Setting a wallpaper presents a similar issue if you want the same wallpaper applied at your SDDM login screen, desktop, and lock screen – you need to use three distinct settings panels to do this.

It also feels like the powerful Plasma widget engine has been collecting some cobwebs and dust bunnies lately. The first-party, included widgets often feel sparse and limited, quite contrary to the rest of KDE, and the third-party widget offerings are, well, varying in quality, to put it diplomatically, and outdated widgets that don’t even function anymore are still listed in the download new widgets dialog. The widgets activated in a default installation – the system tray, the taskbar, and so on – are often in a good state, but everything else definitely needs some love, and perhaps a development sprint or whatever is needed where experienced KDE contributors take stock of what new widgets people might want and then make them.

Finally, the KDE application ecosystem is not as healthy as it could be. Some KDE staples like Kmail can feel quite outdated, and KDE’s own browser, Falkon, which has the potential to be excellent, needs a lot of TLC to be brought up to speed with what users expect of a browser (something that might be important, for no particular reason at all). It also seems like while the GNOME/libadwaita world gets a steady stream of cool, new small applications, it’s a bit more silent on the KDE front in this regard.

There are smaller issues here and there, as there are with any major, complex software project, but these are some of the what I consider to be big ticket items that I personally would love to see some attention diverted towards. Of course, I’m just a user, and in the end, it’s up the KDE project to allocate what I’m sure are fewer resources than they’d like to have.

Addendum II: Actually, GNOME is great

While I’ve said some harsh words about GNOME in this article, I want to stress that this is just my personal opinion, and reflects nothing but my own preference in how I use my computer. While GNOME is simply not suited to my needs, it is an absolutely outstanding desktop environment, created by a team of people who know what they’re doing, who deeply care, and who more often than not receive an entirely undeserved, very nasty, almost personal kind of abuse that goes far beyond merely stating a dislike for GNOME.

GNOME may not be for me, but the Linux (and BSD) world should be deeply thankful for having such an excellent desktop environment as the face of the desktop segment of the market. GNOME is still kilometres ahead of whatever Windows and macOS are doing, and if KDE didn’t exist, I’d happily use GNOME without so much as a single hesitation. A piece of software not suiting your needs doesn’t mean it’s bad or that the people making it are bad people. It just means you shouldn’t be using it.

OpenBSD 7.6, the release in which every single line of the original code form the first release has been edited or removed, has been released. There’s a lot of changes, new features, bug fixes, and more in 7.6, but for desktop users, the biggest new feature is undoubtedly hardware-accelerated video decoding through VA-API. Or, as the changelog puts it:

Imported libva 2.22.0, an implementation for VA-API (video acceleration API). VA-API provides access to graphics hardware acceleration capabilities for video processing.

↫ OpenBSD 7.6 release announcement

This is a massive improvement for anyone using OpenBSD for desktop use, especially on power-constrained devices like laptops. Problematic video playback was one of the reasons I went back to Fedora KDE after running OpenBSD on my workstation, and it seems this would greatly improve that situation. I can’t wait until I find some time to reinstall OpenBSD and see how much difference this will make for me personally.

There’s more, of course. OpenBSD 7.6 starts the bring-up for Snapdragon X Elite devices, and in general comes with a whole slew of low-level improvements for the ARM64 architecture. AMD64 systems don’t have to feel left out, thanks to AVX-512 support, several power management improvements to make sleep function more optimally, and several other low-level improvements I don’t fully understand. RISC-V, PowerPC, MIPS, and other architectures also saw small numbers of improvements.

The changelog is vast, so be sure to dig through it to see if your pet bug has been addressed, or support for your hardware has been improved. OpenBSD users will know how to upgrade, and for new installations, head on over to the download page.

You have to wonder how meaningful this news is in 2024, but macOS 15.0 Sequoia running on either Apple Silicon or Intel processors is now UNIX 03-certified.

The UNIX 03 Product Standard is the mark for systems conforming to Version 3 of the Single UNIX Specification. It is a significantly enhanced version of the UNIX 98 Product Standard. The mandatory enhancements include alignment with ISO/IEC 9989:1999 C Programming Language, IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 and ISO/IEC 9945:2002. This Product Standard includes the following mandatory Product Standards: Internationalized System Calls and Libraries Extended V3,Commands and Utilities V4, C Language V2, and Internationalized Terminal Interfaces.

↫ UNIX 03 page

The questionable usefulness of this news stems from a variety of factors. The UNIX 03 specification hails from the before time of 2002, when UNIX-proper still had some footholds in the market and being a UNIX meant something to the industry. These days, Linux has pretty much taken over the traditional UNIX market, and UNIX certification seems to have all but lost its value. Only one operating system can boast to conform to the latest UNIX specification – AIX is UNIX V7 and 03-certified – while macOS and HP-UX are only UNIX 03-certified. OpenWare, UnixWare, and z/OS only conform to even older standards.

On top of all this, it seems being UNIX-certified by The Open Group feels a lot like a pay-to-play scheme, making it unlikely that community efforts like, say, FreeBSD, Debian, or similarly popular server operating systems could ever achieve UNIX-certification even if they wanted to. This makes the whole UNIX-certification world feel more like the dying vestiges of a job security program than something meaningful for an operating system to aspire to.

In any even, you can now write a program that compiles and runs on all two UNIX 03-certified operating systems, as long as it only uses POSIX APIs.

A YouTube channel has resurrected a programming language that hadn’t been seen since the 1980s — in a testament to both the enduring power of our technology, and of the communities that care about it.

[…]

But best of all, Simpson uploaded the language to the Internet Archive, along with all his support materials, inviting his viewers to write their own programs (and saying he hoped his upstairs neighbor would’ve approved). And in our email interview, Simpson said since then it’s already been downloaded over 1,000 times — “which is pretty amazing for something so old.”

↫ David Cassel

It’s great that this lost programming language, MicroText for the Commodore 64, was rediscovered, but I’m a bit confused as to how “lost” this language really was. I mean, it was “discovered” in a properly listed eBay listing, which feels like cheating to me. When I think of stories of discoveries of long-lost software, games, or media, it usually involves things like finding it in a shed after years of searching, or someone at a company going through that box of old hard drives discovering the game they worked on 32 years ago. I don’t know, something about this whole story feels off to me, and it’s ringing some alarm bells I can’t quite place.

Regardless, it’s cool to have MicroText readily available on the web now, so that people can rediscover it and create awesome new things with it. Perhaps there’s old ideas to be relearned here.

Remember earlier this year, when Android Authority discovered Google was experimenting with letting you run full Chrome OS on your Android device? In case you were wondering if that particular piece of spaghetti was sticking to the wall, I’m sorry to disappoint you it isn’t. Despite creating the Ferrochrome launcher app, which would’ve made the whole thing a one-click affair, Google has just removed the whole concept from the Android code base altogether.

Unfortunately, though, Google has decided to kill its Ferrochrome launcher app. This was revealed to us by a code change recently submitted to the AOSP Gerrit. The code change, which hasn’t been merged yet, removes the entire Ferrochrome launcher app from AOSP. Google’s reason for removing this app is that it doesn’t plan to ship it or maintain its code. It seems that Google is shifting towards using the Linux-based Debian distro instead of Chrome OS as its testbed for AVF development.

↫ Mishaal Rahman at Android Authority

I’m not really sure if people were really asking for something like this, and to Google’s credit – for once – the company never even so much as hinted at releasing this to the general public. Still, the idea of carrying just your phone with you as your primary computer, and plugging into a display and input devices as the need arises, remains something a lot of people are fascinated with, and putting Chrome OS on your Android phone would’ve been one way to achieve this goal.

Despite decades of attempts, it seems not even the smartest people in Silicon Valley can crack this nut. Perhaps they should ask Gemini to solve it for them? It doesn’t involve pizza’s, glue, or rocks, so who knows – it might surprise them!

For nearly 15 years, FreeBSD has been at the core of my personal infrastructure, and my passion for it has only grown over time. As a die-hard fan, I’ve stuck with BSD-based systems because they continue to deliver exactly what I need—storage, networking, and security—without missing a beat. The features I initially fell in love with, like ZFS, jails, and pf, are still rock-solid and irreplaceable. There’s no need to overhaul them, and in many ways, that reliability is what keeps me hooked. My scripts from 20 years ago still work, and that’s a rare kind of stability that few platforms can boast.

It’s not just me, either—big names like Netflix, Microsoft, and NetApp, alongside companies like Tailscale and AMD, continue to support FreeBSD, further reinforcing my belief in its strength and longevity (you can find the donators and sponsors right here). Yet, while this familiarity is comforting, it’s becoming clear that FreeBSD must evolve to keep pace with the modern landscape of computing.

↫ gyptazy

It’s good to read so many articles and comments from long-time FreeBSD users and contributors who seem to recognise that there’s a real opportunity for FreeBSD to become more than ‘just’ a solid server operating system. This aligns neatly with FreeBSD itself recognising this, too, and investing in improving the operating system’s support for what are not considered basic laptop features like touchpad gestures and advanced sleep states, among other things.

I’ve long held the belief that the BSDs are far closer to attracting a wider, more general computing-focused audience than even they themselves sometimes seem to think. There’s a real, tangible benefit to the way BSDs are developed and structured – a base system developed by one team – compared to the Linux world, and there’s enough disgruntlement among especially longtime Linux users about things like Wayland and systemd that there’s a pool of potential users to attract that didn’t exist only a few years ago.

If you’re a little unsure about the future of Linux – give one of the BSDs a try. There’s a real chance you’ll love it.

Hot on the heels of releasing Redox 0.9.0, the team is back with yet another monthly update. Understandably, it’s not as massive of an update as other months, but there’s still more than enough here. There’s the usual bug fixes and small changes, but also more work on the port to RISC-V, the QEMU port (as in, running QEMU on Redox), a bunch of improvements to Relibc, and a lot more.

Windows 11 2024 Update, also known as version 24H2, is now publicly available. Microsoft announced the rollout alongside the new AI-powered features that are coming soon to Windows Insiders with Copilot+ PCs and Copilot upgrades.

Unlike recent Windows 11 updates, version 24H2 is a “full operating system swap,” so updating to it will take more time than usual. What is going as usual is the way the update is being offered to users. Microsoft is gradually rolling out the update to “seekers” with Windows 11 versions 22H2 and 23H2. That means you need to go to the Settings app and manually request the update.

↫ Taras Buria at Neowin

I’ve said it a few times before but I completely lost track of how Windows releases and updates work at this point. I thought this version and its features had been available for ages already, but apparently I was wrong, and it’s only being released now. For now, you can get it by opting in through Windows Update, while the update will be pushed to everyone later on. I really wish Microsoft would move to a simpler, more straightforward release model and cadence, but alas.

Anyway, this version brings all the AI/ML CoPilot stuff, WiFi 7 support, improvements to File Explorer and the system tray, the addition of the sudo command, and more. The changes to Explorer are kind of hilarious to me, as Microsoft seems to have finally figured out labels are a good thing – the weird copy/cut/paste buttons in the context menu have labels now – but this enhanced context menu still has its own context menu. Explorer now also comes with support for more compression formats, which is a welcome change in 2007. To gain access to the new sudo command, go to Settings > System > For developers and enable the option.

For the rest, this isn’t a very impactful release, and will do little to convince the much larger Windows 10 userbase to switch to Windows 11, something that’s going to be a real problem for Microsoft in the coming year.

FreeBSD is going to take its desktop use quite a bit more seriously going forward.

FreeBSD has long been a top choice for IT professionals and organizations focused on servers and networking, and it is known for its unmatched stability, performance, and security. However, as technology evolves, FreeBSD faces a significant challenge: supporting modern laptops. To address this, the FreeBSD Foundation and Quantum Leap Research has committed $750,000 to improve laptop support, a strategic investment that will be pivotal in FreeBSD’s future.

↫ FreeBSD Foundation blog

So, what are they going to spend this big bag of money on? Well, exactly the kind of things you expect. They want to improve and broaden support for various wireless chipsets, add support for modern powersaving processor states, and make sure laptop-specific features like touchpad gestures, specialty buttons, and so on, work properly. On top of that, they want to invest in better graphics driver support for Intel and AMD, as well as make it more seamless to switch between various audio devices, which is especially crucial on laptops where people might reasonably be expected to use headphones.

In addition, while not specifically related to laptops, FreeBSD also intends to invest in support for heterogeneous cores in its scheduler and improvements to the bhyve hypervisor. Virtualisation is, of course, not just something for large desktops and servers, but also laptop users might turn to for certain tasks and workloads.

The FreeBSD project will be working not just with Quantum Leap Research, but also various hardware makers to assist in bringing FreeBSD’s laptop support to a more modern, plug-and-play state. Additionally, the mentioned cash injection is not set in stone; additional contributions from both individuals and larger organisations are obviously welcome, and of course if you can contribute code, bug reports, documentation, and so on, you’re also more than welcome to jump in.

Recently I came across a minor mystery—the model numbers of the original IBM PC. For such a pivotal product, there is remarkably little detailed original information from the early days.

↫ Michal Necasek

Count me surprised. When I think IBM, I think meticulously documented and detailed bureaucracy, where every screw, nut, and bolt is numbered, documented, and tracked, so much so in fact this all-American company even managed to impress the Germans. You’d expect IBM, of all companies, to have overly detailed lists of every IBM PC it ever designed, manufactured, and sold, but as it turns out, it’s actually quite hard to assemble a complete list of the early IBM PCs the company sold.

The biggest problem are the models from before 1983, since before that year, the IBM PC does not appear in IBM’s detailed archive of announcements. As such, Michal Necasek had to dig into random bits of IBM documentation to assemble references to those earlier models, and while he certainly didn’t find every single one of them, it’s a great start, and others can surely pick up the search from here.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed a law (AB 2426) to combat “disappearing” purchases of digital games, movies, music, and ebooks. The legislation will force digital storefronts to tell customers they’re just getting a license to use the digital media, rather than suggesting they actually own it.

When the law comes into effect next year, it will ban digital storefronts from using terms like “buy” or “purchase,” unless they inform customers that they’re not getting unrestricted access to whatever they’re buying. Storefronts will have to tell customers they’re getting a license that can be revoked as well as provide a list of all the restrictions that come along with it. Companies that break the rule could be fined for false advertising.

↫ Emma Roth at The Verge

A step in the right direction, but a lot more is definitely needed. This law in particular seems to leave a lot of wiggle room for companies to keep using the “purchase” term while hiding the disclosure somewhere in the very, very small fine print. I would much rather a law like this just straight up ban the use of the term “purchase” and similar terms when all you’re getting is a license. Why allow them to keep lying about the nature of the transaction in exchange for some fine print somewhere?

The software industry in particular has been enjoying a free ride when it comes to consumer protection laws, and the kind of malpractice, lack of accountability, and laughable quality control would have any other industry shut down in weeks for severe negligence. We’re taking baby steps, but it seems we’re finally arriving at a point where basic consumer protection laws and rights are being applied to software, too.

Several decades too late, but at least it’s something.

System76, the premiere Linux computer manufacturer and creator of the COSMIC desktop environment, has updated COSMIC’s Alpha release to Alpha 2. The latest release includes more Settings pages, the bulk of functionality for COSMIC Files, highly requested window management features, and considerable infrastructure work for screen reader support, as well as some notable bug fixes.

↫ system76’s blog

The pace of development for COSMIC remains solid, even after the first alpha release. This second alpha keeps adding a lot of things considered basic for any desktop environment, such as settings panels for power and battery, sounds, displays, and many more. It also brings window management support for focus follows cursor and cursor follows focus, which will surely please the very specific, small slice of people who swear by those. Also, you can now disable the super key.

A major new feature that I’m personally very happy about is the “adjust density” feature. COSMIC will allow you to adjust the spacing between the various user interface elements so you can choose to squeeze more information on your screen, which is one of the major complaints I have about modern UI design in macOS, Windows, and GNOME. Being able to adjust this to your liking is incredibly welcome, especially combined with COSMIC’s ability to change from ’rounded’ UI elements to ‘square’ UI elements.

The file manager has also been vastly, vastly improved, tons of bugs were fixed, and much, much more. It seems COSMIC is on the right path, and I can’t wait to try out the first final result once it lands.

Just want to let y’all know that my family and I have been hit hard with bronchitis these past two weeks, and especially my recovery is going quite slowly (our kids are healthy again, and my wife is recovering quite well!). As such, I haven’t been able to do much OSNews work.

I hope things will finally clear up a bit over the weekend so that I can resume normal service come Monday. Enjoy your weekend, y’all!

The push towards memory safe programming languages is strong, and for good reason. However, especially for bigger projects with a lot of code that potentially needs to be rewritten or replaced, you might question if all the effort is even worth it, particularly if all the main contributors would also need to be retrained. Well, it turns out that merely just focusing on writing new code in a memory safe language will drastically reduce the number of memory safety issues in a project as a whole.

Memory safety vulnerabilities remain a pervasive threat to software security. At Google, we believe the path to eliminating this class of vulnerabilities at scale and building high-assurance software lies in Safe Coding, a secure-by-design approach that prioritizes transitioning to memory-safe languages.

This post demonstrates why focusing on Safe Coding for new code quickly and counterintuitively reduces the overall security risk of a codebase, finally breaking through the stubbornly high plateau of memory safety vulnerabilities and starting an exponential decline, all while being scalable and cost-effective.

↫ Jeff Vander Stoep and Alex Rebert at the Google Security Blog

In this blog post, Google highlights that even if you only write new code in a memory-safe language, while only applying bug fixes to old code, the number of memory safety issues will decreases rapidly, even when the total amount of code written in unsafe languages increases. This is because vulnerabilities decay exponentially – in other words, the older the code, the fewer vulnerabilities it’ll have.

In Android, for instance, using this approach, the percentage of memory safety vulnerabilities dropped from 76% to 24% over 6 years, which is a great result and something quite tangible.

Despite the majority of code still being unsafe (but, crucially, getting progressively older), we’re seeing a large and continued decline in memory safety vulnerabilities. The results align with what we simulated above, and are even better, potentially as a result of our parallel efforts to improve the safety of our memory unsafe code. We first reported this decline in 2022, and we continue to see the total number of memory safety vulnerabilities dropping.

↫ Jeff Vander Stoep and Alex Rebert at the Google Security Blog

What this shows is that a large project, like, say, the Linux kernel, for no particular reason whatsoever, doesn’t need to replace all of its code with, say, Rust, again, for no particular reason whatsoever, to reap the benefits of a modern, memory-safe language. Even by focusing on memory-safe languages only for new code, you will still exponentially reduce the number of memory safety vulnerabilities. This is not a new discovery, as it’s something observed and confirmed many times before, and it makes intuitive sense, too; older code has had more time to mature.