Its architecture and file hierarchy is archaic and resistant to change.
I have been using it long enough, it is stable, robust and I do not need to worry about it except running it 24 /7 schedule in spite of electricity bills going up to get its maximum. Since I am doing regular download of Linux distributions for testing (a hobby of some sort) this rigmarole is OK. All the CRON jobs are (regular maintenance) done for me and I do not need to worry about configuring it to suit my needs.
Since I am not a Server Master but only a Desktops User (perhaps as workstation) how the developer can figure out what I do with my computer in the 24 hour schedule is something I ponder.
I would like the computer to be my slave rather than it masters things for me.
1.That is one of the weaknesses. Linux is a work horse but my horse is very finicky in its behaviour what he eats and what schedule he follows .
He follows the developers schedule and not my finicky behaviour schedule. One can say in that case you configure it yourself. That is a good argument but with file architecture being streamlined, rigid and resistant to change, one cannot change a cabinet and put it in an less obtrusive place for me. If I do that whole file system crashes and even with the root permission when the system boots next time it goes back to its preferred protocol.
I need to know like a developer every bit of file structure and of scheduling routine. I love to do that but I am a professional in another field not computer field. My field needs and structures are completely different form automatic response of a computer.
2. My needs are customer based. That is the second nuance. The file hierarchy and resources are good for a Server but not an ordinary human being like me.
I do not want to go to the loo exactly at the same time and same place and void exact amount of void. In other words I need some personality to my voiding or consumption habits that vary from day to day.
Not the way the developer voids and eats.
The file hierarchy is stable and is not customizable.
3. The sames goes with programs. I cannot change a system program and go for a more flexible program. In that case I have to go for a different distribution or for a different desktop (Gnome or KDE or LXDE).
I cannot interchange desktop experience. It can be done by installing Gnome and KDE versions in the same computer separately but one can use only one session at a time. They do not speak to each others library systems and GTKs are different. That is the third.
4.The real disadvantage is its package management system. One has to be satisfied with one grand package version and and cannot go back to old or new one without radical change to the system and install procedure. One has to wait for the rolling system or to a new radically changed system. For example I have been using Redhat for years (not really I cut my teeth with it and changed with Fedora evolution and migrated to PCLinux) and the company changes its protocol from Fedora 13 to 14 with sea of changes (like Microsoft) and file formats. The other distributions resident in the same computer cannot mount them or effect changes to the files in the home partitions. This is ridiculous change for the user who had being doing something as a routine is changed without his feed back.
It is a corporate decision not a community decision or request.
I am not resistant to change. I am for it but uses are not scape goats or made vulnerable like what Microsoft or Apple does to its customer base.
This is the change that make Microsoft user looking for other avenues like Linux. If Linux distributions also on commercial bent use that strategy it will certainly misfire.
GoBo Linux had been trying to address this issue by radically changing the file architecture and ability to use old and new in versions (say Open Office and Libre Office libraries are organized in a structurally different architecture with sharing (common) and not sharing independent (Java Suite).
This can be done but this distribution has not received the backing of the rest of the community. In fact I have been waiting for its new release over last three years and it does not seem to be coming. It is long overdue.
I hope Libre Office coming it to its existence they should attempt to reorganize the library system (at archive level and user level) and make innovations.
It is hard work but worth a try.
Then we can have long term (LTS) support for 10-15 years instead of the present 3 to 5 years instead.
5. Other nuance is the release cycles. It is at its extreme from months to years to decades. There is no agreed protocol and they have this rolling system also. It is OK for distro-hoppers but not for old people like us. I of course hopped distributions at a regular interval and I have 5 to 8 distributions in my laptop, that does not mean that I use them regularly.
They are for a particular purpose.
I keep GoBo Linux and Yoper because of their original approach and I love their changes and that gives me some opportunity for research material to engage in.
Then I can give perhaps some visionary advice.
GoBo thinks of the file architecture and its rearrangement.
YOPER thinks of truncating file extensions and throughput.
Linux is a visionary approach.
It needs new vision and dimensions for the current century.
Live CDs was a vision (demo to begin with) but now it is a universal approach.
Try it before you use it.
Then speed of booting is another vision.
6. With big hard disk coming we must make not 15 to 60 partitions but 1000 or more partitions.
Linux can handle it but not Microsoft. The number of partition a distribution uses (the minimum and the maximum) changes constantly.
7. Hardware compatibility is a major issue. This is not due to the fault of Linux. It is the manufacturers and vendors ploy to support one particular operating system over the other. It is time we should have legislature to regularize this at least in the European community if not America and UK.
8. Cloud Computing is taking a corporate stand now with Google taking a bigger bite. Linux User must be ready for dual purpose. One is browsing, the other is using Linux utilities like Gimp, Sribus and Inkcape and Blender for personal use. We must not let these excellent utilities disappear with Cloud Computing.
9. There are over 300 very good distributions and reviewers review only a few and the reviews are also not balanced, They do not do it at a research level. They do it at the level of blogging not professional to say the least. Gut feeling like in politics and daily papers.
Review means reviews (pros and cons and neutrals) and not shoddy hasty writing. There is professionality attached to this word.
Nothing more nothing less.
10. Last but not least. many distributions do not have a multilanguage capability. Only recently Sinhala has two distributions supporting it. This is essential for children programs doudoulinusx is attempting it.
Others should follow..
There are many other minor matters but this is to highlight no operating system is perfect. We only have to know the good and the bad and drop all the ugly ones.
No comments:
Post a Comment