GNU/Linux Desktop: The Case Against Running Windows Apps, Feb 27, 2008

Does GNU/Linux need to run Windows apps? This question resurfaced last week, when the media noticed that Google has been contributing heavily to the Wine project, which develops a compatibility layer on GNU/Linux for running Windows applications.

At first, ranking GNU/Linux distributions seems alien to the spirit of free software. After all, free software is all about choice. What should matter is that your distro suits you, not how others judge it.

Right now, my candidate for the worst job isn't a nanny on a visa or a roofer on a hot summer day. It's being a publicist for Trend Micro. By launching a patent violation suit against Barracuda Networks for distributing a piece of free software called ClamAV, Trend Micro has created a public relations disaster for itself, and possibly a financial one as well.

Every now and then, someone suggests that Debian GNU/Linux should be more commercial. To further this goal, some create derivative distros like Linspire, Ubuntu, or Xandros, or organizations like the stillborn DCC Alliance. Others act as pundits, whispering advice from off-stage, like Debian founder Ian Murdock, or, more recently, columnist Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols.

Contrary to what you may have heard, free and open source software (FOSS) is not anti-business. But neither is it pro-business.

Hearing the terms "free software" or "open source," you might imagine that they referred to a single school of thought. Even "free and open source software" (FOSS) suggests only two different outlooks: Free software, which values political and philosophical freedom, and open source, whose main interest is enhanced software quality.

How do you produce a major update of a popular desktop for GNU/Linux? Following the release of KDE 4.0 last week, I talked with Wade Olson, the press contact for KDE in North America, and a member of KDE e.V., the German non-profit organization that is the financial and legal arm of the project. Olson talked about the goals of the release, its highlights, what was left out, and where development of KDE is going next.

...for the most part, you can expect free software users to differ from proprietary in a number of fundamental ways.

Every couple of years, someone compiles a list of programs that GNU/Linux needs to compete on the desktop. For example, in early 2006, Novell conducted a survey of the applications that people most wanted ported to the platform.

Like Dracula, the old myth that free software can't innovate keeps returning. Its latest incarnation is in the form of a column by Jaron Lanier in the December issue of Discover Magazine.

Anyone looking for a summary of the free software movement's concerns needs only to look at Richard M. Stallman's essay "Some Confusing or Loaded Words and Phrases that are Worth Avoiding."

Microsoft just isn't relevant to my daily computing. I don't need the programs that run on its operating systems; for the most part, I have programs as good or better, and those that aren't as good are adequate and improving quickly.

How is the third version of the GNU General Public License (GPLv3) being received four months after its official release? Not well, if you believe the Evans Data survey released on September 25.

... what you think of Symphony will very likely depend on your own level of expertise with office applications -- and probably your computer's specs as well.

Contrary to yesterday's report, the lawsuit against Monsoon Multimedia for violating the GNU General Public License (GPL) in its distribution of BusyBox may not be headed for a quick settlement. Nor will the settlement necessarily be out-of-court.

GNU/Linux offers a bewildering variety of flavors -- or distributions, as they're called. To a newcomer's eye, many of these seem virtually identical to each other.

As a desktop, GNOME is standard enough that most computer users can feel comfortable within ten minutes of first using it. Yet what always puzzles me is how often people fail to explore it beyond the basics.

Linus Torvalds is often described as an open source champion, interested in licensing only insofar as it affects his ability to share code and improve software more quickly. However, his real position is more complicated -- and to some, perhaps surprising.

Hill replaces free software legal expert Eben Moglen, who resigned from the board two months ago in order to focus his efforts on developing the Software Freedom Law Center.

... what follows is a list of some of the more common distributions, grouped into several basic categories. The list is not exhaustive, and may sometimes be idiosyncratic, but should give at least some idea of the variety available.