Thoughts on Linux-based Systems and Desktops#

Terminology and Definitions#

First, a few words about terminology. This may seem petty, but the fact is that many arguments or misunderstandings are based on saying something different than what you actually mean.

Linux

Linux is a kernel – and therefore not really an operating system. To a certain extent, an operating system also includes userland environments or programs, e.g. B. a shell – a kernel alone is pretty much useless. Hence the name GNU/Linux…

GNU/Linux

The actual operating system, consisting of the Linux kernel together with the GNU system (which is often simply (and incorrectly) referred to colloquially as “Linux”).

There are also other Linux systems that do not run on the GNU system. So used e.g. B. Android also has a Linux kernel, but no GNU tools.

Further information:

Desktop Environment (DE, GUI)

The Desktop Environment (DE or GUI for Graphical User Interface) is the graphical user interface with the user and in a broader sense a kind of working environment.

The fact that I don’t count the GUI directly as part of the operating system is arbitrary, but has the reason, especially with Linux-based systems, that the same can be replaced relatively easily, especially since there are many different competitors and corresponding options. In addition, the actual graphics server should also be mentioned, but it does not play a significant role in the following discussions (and only there), so I will not go into this any further.

However, it remains to be said that the GUI represents the essential, visible part of the overall system for most users. Much of what is attributed to “Linux” actually refers to the desktop environment.

Distribution

In principle, a Linux distribution is a bundle of a system consisting of the operating system, a corresponding configuration and a suitable software offer. Depending on the target audience, the range of software can vary in scope and e.g. B. include one or more desktop environments and update options. A Linux distribution makes a Linux-based system out of the kernel, the GNU system, the desktop environment and the appropriate software.

Linux Based System

A Linux based system (LBS) is the overall system in this context, which is derived from the operating system (Linux kernel + GNU system), the desktop environment and the appropriate software offering (i.e. the respective distribution) results.

Linux Based Desktop

This means a Desktop System, consisting of a Desktop Environment and an underlying Operating System (LBS)

The actual foreword#

I’m very positively biased towards Linux and Linux Based Systems. I’ve been using Linux-based operating systems for about 20 years now, and have been fascinated by it since my first installation attempts in the mid-nineties. For well over a decade – with a MacOS interlude – LBS has also been my primary desktop operating system.

I owe a lot to the open source world. I’m grateful for having a cool operating system, that has the “slash pointing the right way”, that does not nag me with account subscriptions and unwanted data transfers, that I can backup solely with included system utilities and a “one-liner”. I was able to experiment with professional grade server systems when I still wore my IT diapers (figuratively, obviously) without any license or financial hazzle. I was able to found a company using open source software. People like Linus Torvalds shaped my understanding of collaboration in general, not limited to the IT sector. But I owe the open source world a lot more than that. I owe it some heavy criticism.

If you are not inert towards open source chances are you will have started hyperventilating and are trying to leave some comments below. However, since this site is static and doesn’t have a comment section I consider myself quite safe and I suggest you just read on.

My problem is rooted in the ecosystem around Linux.

The thing that frustrates me a lot about Linux-based desktop environments is that – figuratively speaking – 80% is really nice and excellent, like:

  • the package management

  • a lot actually works out-of-the-box

  • the native environment for many wonderful tools (in my case that would be above all Emacs, the Sphinx toolchain and LaTeX, but also smaller things that make life easier or even save it (rsync, …)). You can certainly get a lot of things to run on Windows, but on LBS these things are just “there”

  • the extensive set of standard applications

  • great desktop environments (you can go to the individual projects and developments (KDE, Gnome, Mate, Cinnamon, … ) stand as you want but what was built there and what kind of performance is behind it is simply breathtaking).

Naturally, there are limitations that are largely determined by others and exist independently of the quality of the system:

  • Driver support

  • Compatibility with very specific software

Given this wonderful home base, two things depress me:

  • End of the world as we know it

  • The 20%

  • Periodic euphemism

End of the world as we know it#

The “end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it” symbol means that there is a comfort zone on the Linux-based desktop within which the operation works smoothly and largely without complaints, I call this zone that Desktop biotope. These are usually things like:

  • Installation of a standard application (e.g. Darktable, Thunderbird, Gimp, …)

  • Installation of a printer (if supported by the driver)

  • Set up a WiFi connection

The installation of a common distribution on a hardware-supported computer without any special features can also be included. These standard processes are now very well mapped and managed by the common desktop environments, the interface provided is usually user-friendly. The software repositories operated by the distributions are usually extensive and rarely lack a standard application.

Periodic euphemism#

If you’ve read this far, you might think I’m not a fan of Linux-based systems. But that is definitely wrong. I could live with many of the problems addressed better if they were recognized as such and above all named.

Yes, I think my biggest frustration is that you don’t call things by their real names, but instead get caught up in a wave, or even a whirlpool, of sugarcoating. The truth is reasonable for people, said Ingeborg Bachmann, and I think clear words are the same.

  • Linux is a craft system

    no In areas where, by definition, extensive or special configurations are required, e.g. B. in the server area, this is not called “tinkering”, but flexibility. And this is where Linux-based systems show their great strength, or are also represented with a corresponding market share.

    In the desktop area, the answer is that the desktop biotope (see above) works “out of the box” so well, without having to search for drivers on the Internet or first having to laboriously install application programs, after all everything is already there.

    However, my experience is different. In order to be able to use a system accordingly, some ordering work may be required.