indows and Mac users face long procedures of installing and recovering software whenever a computer is bought. This time-consuming process shows the strengths of comprehensive Linux distributions such as SuSE or Fedora.

PC users sometimes assemble a list of programs, each of which needs to be installed in turn. Why not use an image with all the software pre-loaded? Since hard-drive capacity is enormous, redundant bits cannot harm (with the exception of the Windows Registry). Also, one can distribute everything on several machines, without any repeated effort. If this does not illustrate the power of free Open-Source software, what does?

here came a time when I stopped shutting down machines, let alone restarting them. The waiting is unnecessary and re-opening of programs is avoidable. Today’s computer architecture is sophisticated enough to deprive monitors from power and stop the rotation of hard-drives after a specified time-out. What’s more, modern programming languages, standards and fast-growing operating systems make memory leaks rare, while in fact, perhaps needless to mention, memory becomes cheaper.

My personal experience has shown that Windows XP is stable, but it slows down considerably after hours of work. Similarly, the Registry gets bloated after months of regular use. Linux (and branches like Mac OS X) suffers from none of these issues. I typically reboot after 50-100 hours of persistent work. Windows CE suffers from similar problems and needs to be reset quite often (provided it has not already crashed). My Palm gets reboot every 3 weeks or so.

The bottom line: if you tolerate system crashes or reboot too often, consider alternative platforms.

Linux Desktop

Slashdot have spotted a demonstration of Luminocity [sic.] — an experimental OpenGL-intensive window manager for GNOME. For the hi-tech savvy, the site includes stunning videos of Luminocity in action.

An illustration of transparency in KDE

Sneak Peek at Microsoft’s Longhorn

For the curious, there are recent Longhorn screenshots at Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite for Windows.

hat follows is a succinct comparison between dominant desktop environments/window managers for Linux. It is based on personal experience with KDE (under SuSE and Fedora) and
GNOME (under Ubuntu and RedHat).

The Linux enhancement under question is based on OpenGL. It revolves different virtual desktops (if you use a pager) to achieve the illusion that they hover around in space. This looks great, but it is not necessarily practical. See the 3-D Desktop project homepage.

Throughout the past few months, as Palm users began to migrate elsewhere, there have been talks about embracing the open-source community (i.e. Linux) and placing special emphasis on inter-operability. Many Mac users, in fact, have chosen Palm, their reasons being obvious. When one gets to think about this trend, Apple followed a similar path when Mac OS X was introduced. An alliance, in some sense, appears to be the best way to tackle giants and benefit from each other’s strengths. As an example, the wonderful design of the Macs, in particular their user interface, made Jaguar one of the most appealing and the most reliable ‘Linux distributions’. Also it made it commonplace in the market of laptops.

Let us hope that likewise, we may soon see Linux in our pockets and our schedules under Linux — something which was miserably lacked despite Linux-Palm projects like KPilot.

CNET have have just reported that Palm pursue this possibility further:

PalmSource moved a little closer to the open-source community this week.

The maker of the Palm OS has joined the Consumer Electronics Linux Forum, or CELF, pushing ahead with its plans for a version of the Palm OS that runs on top of Linux.

Cited by: PalmAddict

Open-source advocates must have come across odd GUI‘s where formality is neglected. An example is presented below (from GIMP 1.2.3, edited using the GIMP):

Firstly, have a look at the window title. Is the exclamation mark necessary? Secondly, look at the poor layout of the buttons. Thirdly, is the message at the bottom helpful? It does not make the application look professional. Is it inexcusable that open-source programmers cannot deploy their products in the commercial world?