The Ideal Linux Distribution, As I See It

Before I begin this post, if you're wondering how I manage to churn out these posts and still claim to be busy, I will say that I write almost all of these posts on the weekends and then schedule them to automatically publish during the workweek. I don't usually have time to write posts on weekdays.

As I review more distributions, I'm continually fleshing out exactly what I want to see in a distribution. There are a few things that I would like to see in Linux distributions, none of which should be especially hard to do, as some of these features have already been implemented. Here's what I'd like to see:

• Mozilla Firefox (Rekonq and Arora are acceptable substitutes in KDE; Opera and Google Chrome are also acceptable substitutes anywhere)
• OpenOffice.org (AbiWord and Gnumeric are acceptable substitutes if the distribution is more lightweight)
• A graphical package manager
• Most proprietary codecs either included out-of-the-box or installable by clicking on a highly visible link
• Support for various peripherals out-of-the-box (especially mice, webcams (and external mics), and printers)
• Stability and security
• Rolling releases (just so that installation only needs to be done once)
• Minimal visible bloat

The ideal candidates for this are PCLinuxOS and Linux Mint "Debian"; both are rolling-release distributions but test their packages extensively to ensure the stability and high quality of the packages. Both include Mozilla Firefox, but only Linux Mint "Debian" offers OpenOffice.org. Both include graphical package managers and most proprietary codecs (out-of-the-box). Finally, both have excellent support for mice, webcams, and printers. As PCLinuxOS doesn't have OpenOffice.org, I'm going to continue with just Linux Mint "Debian".
I would say that the best-looking GNOME theme present today is the Elementary theme, and that Linux Mint "Debian" with Elementary (and things like the Nautilus Elementary mod) would look positively stunning and will age well with the distribution (which doesn't make sense considering the distribution will always have the latest packages). (On a side note, there are some rumblings in various blogs about how Linux Mint may use the Equinox Faenza icon set in version 10 "Julia".) I've already done this with my FreshOS respin of Linux Mint "Debian". So what else would I like to see? Not a whole lot, except for one other thing:
I want to see an installer (and Linux Mint "Debian"'s installer, while adequate, isn't quite up to the level of polish of the Ubuntu-based releases' Ubiquity installer) that gives options for different application categories. What I mean is that if someone is big on multimedia, applications like F-Spot will be replaced by digiKam and OpenShot during the installation. Similarly, if someone needs programming tools, programs like Emacs, Eclipse/Netbeans, and other similar programming utilities could be installed. This way, while the user can always go to the package manager to install and remove packages of his/her choice, there are options in terms of what default applications are present after installation, nicely grouped into different categories.
How does that sound?

Sun Tzu and File Sharing

Yesterday, I was reading articles about eBook software for various OSs when I stumbled on the site Feedbooks which distributes eBooks of public domain works in various formats (including PDF). One of the featured books was Sun Tzu's The Art of War. I've heard several times that this book (handbook, really) is often used now for improving business and management strategies, and producing and selling movies and music is one such business, which file sharing is supposedly destroying. The debate over file sharing is often portrayed in popular media as a war between the poor, starving artists and the greedy freeloaders. In reality, of course, the poor, starving artists are just the RIAA and MPAA (though there are a handful of artists/filmmakers who genuinely resent and want to stop file sharing because they believe it harms there business), while the greedy freeloaders are actually people who would pay for such content if it was easy to buy and use and didn't have so many restrictions on its use (though there are quite a few people who would in fact only listen to music or watch videos for free (without regard to the legal status of said listening/watching)). So what if Sun Tzu was talking about file sharing? I can't analyze every single point made in the original book (I believe this is the Giles translation), but I will list a few that are very relevant to this issue (the citation of point Y in chapter X will be given as "(X.Y)"):

• Sun Tzu said: The art of war is of vital importance to the State. (1.1)
• It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected. (1.2)
• According as circumstances are favourable, one should modify one's plans. (1.16)
• Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardour damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue. (2.4)
• Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays. (2.5)
• Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them. (3.1)
• Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. (3.2)
• The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain, while the town still remains untaken. Such are the disastrous effects of a siege. (3.5)
• Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field. (3.6)

Follow the jump to read a more sensible interpretation of this with regard to filesharing. (NOTE: I don't intend to be fair/balanced with this. I'm just interpreting it from what I've read and from my own preexisting opinions. If you don't agree, please feel free to leave a comment with a suggestion/alternative interpretation.)

Red Hat: The New Big Monopoly?

Given the presence of Microsoft and Apple, of course Red Hat can't be a monopoly (at least in the desktop market). However, there have been a slew of reports of Oracle rebranding RHEL as Oracle Linux a.k.a. "Unbreakable Linux". This article (Brian Proffitt, ITworld) discusses how that and Amazon Linux AMI (Amazon's Linux distribution built for its own cloud servers) are proof that companies are "stealing" Linux, as Oracle and Amazon are bundling their hardware with their own Linux distributions.
First, I think it's misleading (at best) to say these companies are "stealing" Linux. How is what they are doing any different from what Canonical, Novell, and Red Hat do to Linux? Are they also "stealing" Linux to make their own distribution? I feel like this is the point of free software — allowing anyone to build customized versions of software to fit their own needs; good for Oracle and Amazon for taking full advantage of the benefits of Linux and free software. I don't think Oracle and Amazon are going to prevent loading other Linux distributions; it's just that the bundled distribution will be Oracle Linux or Amazon Linux AMI, as opposed to Microsoft Windows or Ubuntu. Also, isn't this what was supposed to happen to Android — phone makers customizing Android to suit their phones' needs? Isn't this what is happening, at any rate? Saying these companies are "stealing" Linux to suit their needs just seems a bit silly to me.
The bigger problem I have, though, is that both Oracle Linux and Amazon Linux are based off of RHEL. I think it's great that Red Hat has become so successful and so widespread, but this incredible adoption rate worries me at the same time because it could give Red Hat a monopoly over the market similar to the one Microsoft currently has over the desktop market (and I fear similar effects stemming from this). Come on, Canonical and Novell. (I am fully aware that it's easy for me to say this from the comfort of my keyboard.) Learn from Red Hat and give Red Hat some competition. People will have more choice regarding the back-end, and everyone wins from choice and competition.

Review: aptosid 2010-02 "Keres" KDE

Main Screen

What's aptosid, you ask? I had reviewed sidux 2010-01 "Hypnos" before, and unfortunately, that review didn't turn out so well; it refused to load after booting in VirtualBox. So why am I bringing up sidux? Well, sidux, due to various legal and financial issues, has changed its name to aptosid (but otherwise continues the release naming/numbering system as well as the fundamental base (Debian's sid (unstable) system)). Let's see if this one works. (NOTE: I have reverted to allocating 1024 MB of RAM in VirtualBox.)

Featured Comments: Week of 2010 September 19

There were a few posts that garnered comments this week, so I will list them all.

Whose LXDE Is It Anyway?

Anonymous reader 1, referring to my example of KDE as a tightly-integrated DE, counters, "Funny the components you mentioned as integral part of KDE (Nepomuk, Akonadi, and Strigi) can be run in any DE (like LXDE) as well."
Anonymous reader 2 counters this by saying, "To use Nepomuk, Akonadi, and Strigi you'd need to have some kde libraries : x11-libs/qt-qt3support. This probably means you have kde installed and lxde."
As anonymous reader 3 points out, "If someone really wants, it's possible to even run a KDE main component (like Konqueror) in a Gnome desktop (say Ubuntu), provided the necessary infrastructure (in this case, among others, kdebase) is provided. That, of course, defeats the idea of economy and the practical results desktop integration brings."
Finally, anonymous reader 4 explains, "Besides, I don't see that lack of identity as a problem, and something rarely mentioned: the main advantage of OB (and LXDE) is not really lightweightness,but customizability. No other DE is even a match in that respect (except maybe some tilling WMs, but those generaly require you to know some programing language)."

Microsoft's Hardware is Good Stuff

An anonymous reader corrects my description of Microsoft and its hardware: "That's cuz they don't make it, they contract for it."

Review: ArchBang 2010.09 "apeiro"

An anonymous reader asks, "Why are the pics not thumbnails so I can view larger?" I'm still working on it.

FOLLOW-UP: SourceForge, Pages, and Respins

I mentioned in my last post on the topic that Oxidized Trinity is now on SourceForge. I am linking straight to the download link here. Also, Oxidized Trinity now has a wiki page (which I haven't had the time to develop, but when I have a bit more free time, I will get around to it).
Finally, I have semi-successfully created my respin of Linux Mint "Debian" with the Elementary theme. Yay! It too is on SourceForge for download. Please note that as I made it with Remastersys Backup (as opposed to Remastersys Dist), it is not an installable live DVD. Also, the username is "live" and the password is "vbox". (This project does not yet have a wiki page; it does have a name, though: "FreshOS".) Have fun!

Review: ArchBang 2010.09 "apeiro"

Main Screen

You may be asking, "Why are you reviewing this? You just did a review 2 days ago!" Actually, I wrote the preview on Sunday and scheduled it to automatically publish on Wednesday. On Thursday, the official stable version of ArchBang 2010.09 "apeiro" was released. As I have touched upon most of the things relating to this distribution in the last article about ArchBang, this will be a slightly shorter review. Or will it? Follow the jump to find out.

Presumed Innocent Unless A Digital Pirate

There's a new article (Gautham Nagesh, The Hill) that talks about a new bill being put through Congress regarding tougher restrictions on file sharing. Let's go through it, piece by piece.

Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee including chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, which would create an expedited process for DoJ to shut down websites providing pirated materials.
“Each year, online piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods costs American businesses billions of dollars, and result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs,” Leahy said in a statement. “Protecting intellectual property is not uniquely a Democratic or Republican priority — it is a bipartisan priority.”

I'm more than a little wary of giving the government more power in dealing with issues relating to digital copying and such, especially if that increase in power does not come with increased checks and balances or caveats limiting such actions in some way. And really, Mr. Leahy? Online piracy results in "hundreds of thousands of lost jobs"? Doesn't copying and modifying works digitally open up new avenues of creativity and progress? How could that possibly cost jobs?
The article goes on to talk about how the DoJ could obtain a court order to shut down an infringing site by showing "'substantial and repeated role in online piracy and counterfeiting'". It would then require the site owners "to petition the court to have the order lifted".
First of all, I think it's misguided (at best) to lump together piracy and counterfeiting. I don't think torrent sites deal with counterfeit goods. Oh, wait, I can think of a loophole: the site would have to deal with "online piracy and counterfeiting", so if it only deals with online piracy, it can't be shut down. Yay! Except that the media lobbies will likely convince the DoJ that both are somehow occurring simultaneously and that any amount is "substantial and repeated", so the site must be shut down (even if many of the torrents are legal, like those of Linux distributions). Oh, think of the poor artists!
The bigger problem I have with this, however, is that it essentially turns the presumption of innocence on its head. If this was a regular case, it would be on the plaintiffs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that such infringement occurred and that it caused huge damages and that this is why the site should be shut down. Now, the site owner (who may or may not know what activity is going on between users of the site) bears the full burden of proving innocence. Even nastier criminal trials have presumption of innocence and shorter jail sentences/lesser fines. Is copyright infringement really that bad? (I agree that counterfeiting of physical goods isn't a good thing especially for products like foods and medicines, as these counterfeit goods could potentially be life-threatening to consumers. That said, how are copies of songs life-threatening to anyone?)

The article concludes by describing the Chamber of Commerce's (one of the primary groups involved in introducing the bill into Congress) estimates of losses due to piracy, and quotes a sponsor of the bill on its benefits to all parties involved. Please tell me again how piracy costs jobs, and please tell me with a straight face how piracy is causing financial losses when the MPAA itself admits that the movie industry has been growing at a record pace this past decade; finally, please do tell me how consumers benefit from even more draconian restrictions on online content. I'd love to know!

200th Post: Preview: ArchBang 2010.09 "apeiro"

Happy 200th post Das U-Blog! I hope you readers have enjoyed reading these posts as much as I have enjoyed writing them! And, as always, if you have not already done so, please take a moment to click any one of the various subscription buttons to get updated on new Das U-Blog posts as they come out (either by email or in your favorite RSS/Atom reader)

Main Screen

1. This is not a typographical error.
2. This is not "CrunchBang ('#!')".
3. THIS. IS. ARCHBANG! [insert dramatic music here]

Of course, the real story is slightly more nuanced (did I use that word right?) than that. ArchBang, while not a badly-spelled version of #!, is actually inspired by (but not derived) from #!; it aims to be to Arch Linux what #! is to Debian (and was to Ubuntu before version 10 "Statler"). That's right: ArchBang is an Openbox derivative of Arch Linux. I was actually looking for other reviews of Linux Mint "Debian" when I found this article whose comments section linked to an article on #! and ArchBang. Naturally, I was intrigued upon seeing Arch's response to #!, so I went ahead and downloaded the ISO image to try it. Please do note that to better reflect this distribution's advertised capabilities as a solution for old computers, I have decreased VirtualBox's RAM allocation for this distribution to 192 MB (keeping video memory at 12 MB). Technically, the minimum requirements are 128 MB of RAM, but I think 192 MB is a reasonable stand-in for an old computer these days. Follow the jump to see how it fares in these harsher conditions.

Microsoft's Hardware is Good Stuff

Readers of this blog know that I have many beefs with Microsoft, primarily over software and their overzealous patent protection/bullying of other organizations. However, please do not extrapolate my issues with Microsoft to the realm of hardware. I will say it loud and clear: Microsoft makes good-quality hardware.
I know a few people that use Microsoft webcams for video calling on the computer; the quality is certainly as good as (and in many cases better than) the quality of either my integrated laptop webcam or my Logitech QuickCam Communicate STX.
About 10 years ago, one of my relatives and one of my friends went outside of our house to the street across from ours, which was filled with construction workers building new houses on that street. They found, in the construction dirt, a Microsoft ball mouse. They brought it home, cleaned it a little bit, and started using it. It still works (and is being used) today.
Today, I was working in my college's library. I usually work at a computer that has a Dell mouse and keyboard. The Dell keyboards' keys are usually sticky to the point of near-uselessness, and the mouse surface is similarly sticky. Today, however, I used a computer with a Microsoft mouse and keyboard (which seemed to be as old as the other Dell mice and keyboards). Using the mouse seemed like using it on a cloud (no pun intended), and pressing the keyboard keys yielded a fluidity in the key motions that I have never seen before. (Even the Apple iMac's keyboard's (as there is an iMac in that workstation as well) keys aren't as fluid, and iMac keyboards are renowned for their smooth operation, long life, and quietness.)
So make no mistake: while I don't agree with (to put it mildly) Microsoft's software, policies, and stance on patents, I love Microsoft hardware. I think it's ironic that its hardware is this good, considering that it puts its software on other companies' hardware.
(UPDATE: An anonymous reader has pointed out (something that I remember hearing before but slipped my mind when writing this) that Microsoft tends to contract its hardware manufacturing to another company. In any case, that company makes good hardware!)