ok
I don't think I'm really qualified to be a tech blogger but I thought it would be good to post something about why I have chosen GNU/Linux (hereafter when I refer to Linux that is what I am refering to excuse my laziness) as one of my primary operating systems and why, on my next tech upgrade, I have decided to move over completely to Linux.
This post is mainly because there has been so much talk lately about the importance market share in the desktop market (which in reality doesn't really exist but more on that later) and its relation to the to the UEFI implementation.
I have not been an avid user of Linux for a long time, only about 6 months or so, and I am by no means a guru, however I know enough to make it useable and to theme, which is the reason for my switch. Before then I was on Mac's and before that Windows, but with both of these I was never really satisfied, there was always something I wanted to do but could never quite manage with both operating systems. (Admittedly the last time I was on a permanent windows was about 5 years ago and since then windows 7 has come out so I don't think my comments on windows may necessarily be true anymore but I refuse to use an operating system that continually get bloated and required a reinstall once a year to keep it speedy, that should be unnecessary in today's day and age). Basically I always found Windows Bloated and it didn't implement the best use of user space and relied much to heavily on the mouse (again this was before 7 and this was before I learnt about key mapping and the such so). Mac had NO themeing you went with want Apple wanted and nothing else. I deplore that attitude as once I have handed over my money it is MY machine and I should be able to do what I want with the software and hardware.
So enter Linux. I originally had it on my main laptop (macbook pro 13 inch 5,5) however it was simply to much of a distraction so I had to replace it with MacOSX which as an operating system is heads and shoulders above Windows as it has a proper implementation of user space on a small screen and does not get bloated. It also has a sane (partially) folder structure that actually makes sense. So I went back to MacOSX on my laptop because it was boring and there was nothing I could do with it.
When I recently received an old desktop I decided it was time to implement Linux Mint on it to speed it up and see what I could use it for. This machine which is over 5 years old now currently runs a dual screen setup and quite a speedy pace and is simply the easiest machine to use because every time I think if something new I want to do I jump on the mint forums find some one else who has done it and implement it. EVERY TIME it works and at this point the only crash I have had has been when a ram stick fell out (can't blame Linux for that lol). I don't think If I had reinstalled WinXP (which had crashed so hard it had irreparably corrupted the hard disk, still don't quite know how it did that), that the current setup would be possible at least now without significant lag.
I'm not even going to bother talking about the File server, DAAP server and torrent box I set up with Fedora on a box that is almost 13 years old, It runs like a dream and has almost run for 6 months straight with no issues.
Here is my problem with the UEFI, with every new computer we buy breathing new life into them once their old machines like this (which, if you are looking for the latest and greatest updates on old computers means Linux) would be impossible. If we do not implement it in the way proposed in the white paper by Red Hat and Canonical, we will inevitable increase tech waste and have to spend WAY more money, this is just wrong. Also, if we do not implement UEFI in this way my choice to run Linux on my main machines will disappear. Why is it that when I buy a piece of hardware it needs to have a certain operating system? I can understand why Apple do it, and they have the right to as they are the manufacturer as well as the software supplier. Microsoft on the other hand does not have this right, THEY ARE NOT THE MANUFACTURER, and as such any manufacturer who implements this without the choice to change to linux made easy (either through the ability to turn off secure boot or providing the end user with certs) opens themselves up to a massive anti trust case.
There has been a lot of anger at Microsoft over this, but they have been very clever, you can't blame Microsoft, even with their supplier power, for this, and it will rightly be thrown out of court if we try. The blame and pressure needs to be shifted to the manufacturers. Linux Australia needs to stop this action as it will lose, they need to go after a manufacturer, and a big one. My thought is DELL. This would be the easiest way to send a message. It needs to be made clear that it is the manufacturer that has the power here and it is them who will be locking out other operating systems, not Microsoft.
Now I am not on the Microsoft side here, far from it, and they are playing a very underhanded game, but to go after them is the wrong way to go about it and could make things worse. the 'desktop market' argument is the biggest misnomer but seems to be the biggest argument against stopping the UEFI problem, it goes something like "only 1% of people use linux so why bother?". put simply, this doesn't matter. The software we use is not a market, windows/Linux whatever operates the computer and is not a market. The market is laptops not desktop environments and this is the fundamental problem with argument. The choice of software I choose to use on MY hardware should not be a problem. It is MY hardware and I should be able to run it however I want. Granted a lot of people don't care, but why should those that do be disadvantaged? This is what people need to get over, it is the HARDWARE you are buying not the software (except for the rip off Windows license) and if you choose to not use the software that comes with it there should be no difference. This is where the manufacturer can get into anti trust problems and this is the argument that should be used. it's not about security or anything else it is about being able to use the hardware in any way I choose. To not have this right is anti competitive and a misuse of the power that the MANUFACTURER has.
Anyways, just my thoughts on the UEFI thing and why I think the anger about it is misdirected.
Tomorrow I think I might do a piece on my current and future home network plans maybe see what people think (cause I'm obviously not the only one that reads this lol.)
Talk soon!
No comments:
Post a Comment