Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz shows how the general public can take action to truly protect their privacy using GnuPG with Evolution email. Read the details.
Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds CIOs that XP Desktops destined for MS end of life support can be reprovisioned with FOSS Linux to run like brand new. Read how.
Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds readers of a long ago failed petition by Mathematician Prof. Donald Knuth for stopping issuance of Software Patents.
C'mon. Here is yet another sensational report 'wishing' that Linux is infection prone. It isn't okay?
The SecureList authors imply that there is a Linux version of a known Windows malware, called Turla. Conveniently, they call it a variant.
Where is the documentation for a Linux 'vector of infection'? Oops, somehow, they forgot to include it.
Including the source code doesn't count as documentation for vector of infection. It merely documents the program's purpose, not how it lands on a Linux PC.
On the other hand, one can visit Kaspersky to see it is well-documented for Windows.
Draining the Swamp, is the title of a 2001 GUADEC presentation done in Seville Spain back in 2001 by +Jim Gettys,
author of the X Window system. Citing his remarks in an April 2014
story, Christian Schaller (Senior Software Engineering Manager at Red
Hat, Developer at GNOME) writes about Gettys' vision:
(...) "We are trying to bring that ‘draining the swamp’ mindset with us into creating the Fedora Workstation product.
With that in mind what is the driving ideas behind the Fedora Workstation?
The Fedora Workstation effort is meant to provide a first class desktop
for your laptop or workstation computer, combining a polished user
interface with access to new technologies. We are putting a special
emphasis on developers with our first releases, both looking at how we
improve the desktop experience for developers, and looking at what tools
we can offer to developers to let them be productive as quickly as
possible. And to be clear when we say developers we are not only
thinking about developers who wants to develop for the desktop or the
desktop itself, but any kind of software developer or DevOPs out there." (...)
Fedora has embarked on an ambitious plan called Fedora.next which breaks out three distinct product lines: Server, Workstation and Cloud. I only give my initial impressions for Workstation. Here goes.
Shiny and New
It's a good sign when I find myself smiling, which is what happened after installing Fedora 21 Alpha Workstation.
As I write, and after a week of poking around Fedora Workstation Alpha, I am thinking:
"This is Alpha? It's more production-ready than other general releases I have seen". Seriously Folks, it's that stable.
The most obvious change? Visual.
Fedora Workstation gets the proverbial face lift with GNOME 3.14. And that is what keeps me smiling.
Adwaita Gets Some Love
In its default form GNOME is fitted to Adwaita Theme. There are no rough
edges. Just smooth contours, gradients, delicious fonts, all composited
to make the eyes feel good. GNOME has worked diligently in shaping
their Human Interface Guidelines to assist GTK Application Developers.
In other work done outside of Fedora, the Adwaita team did a major redesign which improves portability, provides maximum GTK compatibility for Developers and is now the default theme for the GTK toolset.
Bells and Whistles
Alan Day has labored and brings swarming animation. A nice professional touch of glitz never hurts and lends to the overal professional feel.
Venturing into GNOME Software, you'll discover the newest version now offers Live Search.
Pressing the nine dots icon (or tap the Super key) to type any city name will return the current time in GNOME Clock.
As well, typing a quick calculation into the search field will return from GNOME Calculator an instant result.
Other New Features
Touchscreen Gesture support
Interactive GTK Inspector (for Developers)
Mozilla Location Service
New Animations for Activities
New Minimize Maximize Transition Effects
Updated Apps
Weather App Geolocation Support
Maps Route Planning
Boxes Multi-Window, VM Snapshot Support
Music Online Provider Support
Photos Google/PicasaWeb Integration
Evince PDF Reader Redesigned
dnf (Yum replacement) Speed Improvements
Kernel Update
During this week, Fedora 21 yum update-testing downloaded Linux Kernel 3.17, which the Linux Foundation reports includes several feature enhancements.
New Default Terminal Theme
GNOME Terminal now defaults to using the Solarized theme (below).
GNOME 3.14 Solarized Theme
New System Log Utility
For those who feign going near system logs, a new utility called Logs will come in very handy (below) and makes viewing logs simple.
New System Logs Utility
Wayland Remains Non-Default
To those who have been anxiously awaiting the arrival of Wayland production support, I say: "Good things come to those who wait." ;)
Seriously, Christian Schaller gives an update on the status of Wayland and I will say from my own vantage point while Wayland may be stable, the process of migrating GTK Apps to use Wayland is ongoing. Schaller writes:
(...) "So we want to keep being a place where you do get access to new and exciting technologies first, but as you see with the Wayland effort we are now going to go the extra mile to make sure we offer this new technologies in a way that allows you to still use Fedora as your day to day working machine without worrying that these new features will hinder your work. So we will keep Wayland available as a separate non-default session until we feel very confident that our users are not going to be negatively impacted by the switch. Which means we want to fix and polish up the last remaining bits and pieces, make sure that performance is top notch, make sure all input hardware works flawlessly, work with NVidia and AMD to help them make their binary drivers available for Wayland before we make this the new default." (...)
Conclusions
As for 'Draining the Swamp', I am giving a thumbs up to the Fedora and GNOME Teams for their hard work. Fedora Workstation really shines and despite being Alpha, I have not had any major problems aside from what gets sent in the automated crash reports.
Fedora succeeds and while the use case Target Audience includes, Students and Developers I would feel comfortable recommending it to Grandma.
Fedora Workstation product documentation can be found here.
Alpha/Beta Testers are encouraged to participate. Get the Prerelease here.
Generally, I try to avoid giving out unsolicited advice, but, sometimes, will reflexively do so, especially for a friend who I know encountered some kind of "Windows" security issue.
Well, a friend posted up a gmail message they had received with concern to make their circle of friends aware of.
It is of the email 'click-bait' variety. They all work the same on legacy Windows (x86) from present 8.1 back to Windows 2000. The commonality is that all versions share the same core WinNT design that Microsoft cannot change as it will 'break' Enterprise software badly.
No, it's more what I call "shooting fish in a barrel" or "taking candy from a baby". The email sent to the unwary Windows user is 'socially engineered' to steer them to opening the email and/or attachment, either of which (on Windows) will spawn Javascript to download and inject DLL code and run all silently unbeknownst to the user -- until, of course, it's too late when suddenly a rogue fake security warning comes up or the dreaded CryptoLocker virus has just finished locking (encrypting hard drive) the user out of their system and very professionally offers up a screen of payment credit card options for making payment, which will unlock said PC. CryptoLocker is becoming endemic.
So, my weak moment was to offer unsolicited advice to the poster of Drive-by threats inherent in the use of Windows. This kind of advice was coupled to my 'standard' recommendation to the poster to consider switching to Linux which I have used since 2005.
I've been in the IT business for 20 years and ought to know something at this point in my life about issues regarding computer security, one would think. Yet, despite offering up this kind of friendly advice, there is always the random respondent who turns up and shows his/her ignorance with great facile, I might add. Here are their remarks:
"I hate this kind "commercial" attitude some people have. I dont like Linux. It may be the safest whatever OS and good for servers. But I don't like it. How can someone possibly even think Linux is safer when its open source for God's sake the only reason Linux is safe is because is not as popular as windows yet. Maybe it might become that much popular and be used almost everywhere but as far as I'm concerned almost all companies and 90 % of the users worldwide are still on windows. That is why its the most vulnerable because if I was a criminal who would I attack? A bigger area of effect obviously.
How little people think nowadays really. Thank you for your kind offer but I'm not going to an open source program. Keep your eyes open for "these kind of threats" and alert others. No operating system that is on the internet is safe. Not even Linux. Linux has one of the biggest issues if anything for being open source. If anything attacking the Linux website one day for example and their downloads and all other server connections they have would compromise absolutely every single user and you do not need to be a computer tech to realize that.
Thank you, but no. Have a wonderful day. :)"
Okay, instead of responding in my friends post, I chose to submit to her woeful ignorance and put things into perspective here point by point:
1) "I hate this kind "commercial" attitude some people have."
Commercial? This was posted to a 'friend' for her benefit and so wasn't a commercial or if she meant an endeavor to profit, Linux is FREE. It wasn't motivated by money.
2) "How can someone possibly even think Linux is safer when its open source for God's sake."
Huh? The user presumably associates the word 'open' with some form of security vulnerability like 'leaving the door open'? One of the cornerstones of Linux is its Gnu Public License for sharing the entire source code base and making changes to it freely. Because of this, user of Linux enjoy true "Transparency", which means many eyes (more so than what Microsoft has in employee headcount), around the globe are looking at and vetting source code to ensure no rogue code insertion occurs. Unlike Linux, Windows is proprietary and the end-user cannot see their source code, cannot copy it, and thus have NO idea whatsoever what the employees of legacy Windows did or did not do to the code base. Being proprietary means effectively, Microsoft can write the operating system and applications however they wish, and, that includes code insertion of functionality like 'back doors'.
Yep, back doors exist in Windows for both Microsoft's use and for their partnering governmental agencies which wish to access your PC. They come and go silently with impunity. After you've thought about that for a minute, go find some black electric tape and place it over your Laptop's camera, mmmkay?
This doesn't even speak to the unfixed zero-day exploits present and hidden because Microsoft's code base is not viewable by anyone other than their privileged but shrinking staff of programmers most of whom didn't write the original code and might not have a clue as to how to go about changing it. Those programmers left 5-10-15 years ago. So, Zero-Day exploits are rampant, and, the hackers that have discovered them sell their exploits on the black market to people on the other side of the globe who want access to you, usually for money.
Microsoft code doesn't get continually refactored like Linux and vetted for safety. It gets written and then forgotten. Their maintainers will fix what they can if they can do so without breaking the system, but their resources are limited.
3) "Linux is safe is because is not as popular as windows yet."
Oh right. The security by obscurity argument. Alright let me explain the central security issue with Windows:
If an exploit (drive-by, email attachment same difference) on Windows is 'successful' in running, it will make its own SYSTEM call() to perform an 'Administrative' function. It is at this point that Windows should stop to check on what that 'action' is and by what process id (parent) is making the call. It doesn't. Nope. Once the exploit gets a toe hold, it proceeds to run administratively with no other cross-check security mechanism. Got that? Your PC is officially owned.
With Fedora Linux, you have what is called sandboxing technology. SELinux, a Linux Security Module (LSM), binds to the kernel at bootstrap and maintains a 'hook' api in the SYSTEM kernel. This 'hook' gets called on each granular system administrative process invoked on Linux. SELinux (the Sandbox or Mandatory Access Control), cross-checks each discrete action against its policy group for the calling app and if it isn't an allowed action, it on returning from the hook sends a 'deny' to the kernel. The rogue code, exploit, is stopped cold.
It doesn't matter from whenst it came, the sandbox blocks it from getting a toe hold in Fedora Linux.
Windows Legacy users? To you I say: Go with God.
Fedora Linux: The safest operating system on the Planet.
I stake my reputation on it. -- Dietrich
If memory serves, it was +Greg Kroah-Hartman who last December enthused on Google Plus about Terminology, the terminal emulator component of Enlightenment. It was just released at version 0.4.0 by one very talented, industrious Samsung developer, Daniel Juyung Seo.
I took a look at it, put it away and all was forgotten. The other day, I was looking around for new software and decided to revisit the state of Terminal Emulators.
Incidentally, Solarized Theme will be part of Fedora 21 and I remember trying it at some point. But didn't recall how. To my surprise, Terminology includes a number of themes, one of which is Solarized, so, I decided to install it. Yes, one can install Terminology separate from Enlightenment and it won't pull in a lot of dependencies -- just what it needs.
Okay so, I thought lets see what this puppy can do. Five minutes later it was installed and shown on my Fedora 20 LXDE menu under System Tools.
It's quite pleasant in terms of aesthetics and given it is an Enlightenment component, that is to be expected. But there's nothing keeping one from using it with another Desktop UI and many do just that.
Those partial to certain emulators like Gnome-terminal, Konsole, will prefer one over another, especially if doing development work and dwelling in a character-based shell.
What is especially nice about Terminology is that selecting a theme, such as Solarized, makes doing other things at the terminal prompt most pleasant and easy on the eyes, including other ncurses-based applications like vim, nano, htop. And the entire window is bit-mapped scalable which means it can be as small or large as needed just by moving the lower-left screen corner.
I am including below a few screen shots I took of Terminology running on Fedora 20 LXDE.
Terminology with Solarized theme shown in split-screen mode
Terminology with Solarized theme running ncurses-based htop
Terminology settings screen with Themes selected
Install
As mentioned, it took all of 5 minutes to install Terminology on Fedora 20 with this command from the lxterminal:
$sudo yum install terminology
Then, I went straight to the terminal window, right-click, settings and selected my personal favorite font Droid Sans Monospace 12 point, and, of course, Terminology's Solarized ('Dark') theme.
Bayam! Sweet relief. My eyes feel so much better now.
Go get some relief. Now.
Terminology. The terminal emulator with bling. -- Dietrich
Albert Einstein once defined insanity as this, "Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results."
Are you using Windows Legacy (x86) 8.1 and older?
If you answered yes, then, I am afraid you are technically insane. ;)
Oh. That Anti-Virus software subscription tool you so diligently run? It is money and time wasted. The types of attacks now occurring simply fly 'below the radar' of AV scans and morph their signatures on a daily basis so as to not be seen.
If you aren't thinking about switching operating systems, you really need to have your head examined. It has become child's play for global crime rings to perpetrate the kinds of attacks such as the one depicted at the top of this story (aka RansomWare) and they get away with it by a process known as 'Drive-By' Javascript DLL injection into Windows Legacy operating systems going all the way back from 8.1 to Windows 2000. Why? Because they all share the same legacy WinNT kernel design and because Enterprise has been thoroughly invested in Windows, they cannot change the code or it would break Enterprise systems.
This is their dilemma -- their personal nightmare. And just as with the slow death of XP, Legacy won't go away any time soon -- it is entrenched and businesses are 'married' to it for better or for worse.
You, the consumer, have a choice. Distance yourself from a known problem. Research 'Stuxnet' and then ask yourself how that could possibly happen (cough backdoors).
As long as you insist on using Windows Legacy, you are assuming the role of a 'victim'. Don't be a victim. Own your privacy. It's your right.
Reclaim it with Fedora Desktop Edition Linux: the safest operating system on the Planet.
Most people don't give a thought to this subject. In fact, with Legacy Windows (x86), including Windows 8.1, there is no such concept as a 'repository'.
Every Linux Distribution (call it a 'flavor' if that helps), provides its own repository. What is a repository? Imagine a Castle (Library of Applications) with a moat around it and a draw bridge. Only keyholders can get in and get out.
The keyholder conceptually is provided by a technology used extensively with Linux, called GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG or GPG for short). The idea is to guard all software in the library to assure that no 'tampering' can ever occur. Tampering scenarios include adding rogue software (applications with hidden trojan viruses), unauthorized code edits which have negative repurcussions and usually include software exploits, such as the kind that politely advises the user that their drive is now officially encrypted/locked and cannot be used unless a monetary consideration (extortion) is provided that will cause the encryption to be unlocked (CryptoLocker being one such application aka Ransomware targets Windows, not Linux).
This GPG technology allows each piece of software in the Library to be linked to your Linux on the Desktop GPG-keyring and will not install, per se, unless it can be unlocked by your Desktop keyring (Fedora is my Distribution of choice).
The advantage is clear. The maintainers of the repository for your Distribution are thus able to maintain strict control over who can contribute code, vetting of software and the author's background, all done to assure that the program being considered for acceptance into the Library is safe for general use, devoid of any rogue code.
The absence of a repository of protected software applications has been an historic security problem of endemic proportions for Microsoft who must continually apply Zero-Day security patches to the operating system once a month to thwart introduction of rogue software onto the operating system. It is a hopeless, unending situation and the fact that such software as CryptoLocker and Stuxnet exist should be a flashing neon roadside billboard to the average user, but, sadly isn't. The public is bamboozled and has bought into the accepted practice of running third-party Anti-Virus software, lulled by its false sense of security and done by the user at their additional out-of-pocket expense for purchasing said software, time and effort. Indeed, the Windows Legacy security software business produces multi-billion annual sales all of which does nothing to deflect a Drive-by Download, for example. The user won't see it, but their machine is infected and there isn't anything they or Microsoft can do about it, short of a complete redesign effort which has gone into their ARM processor based product which has suffered languishing sales.
Below is my system running an update download from the GPG keyring-protected repository at Fedora. If you run automated updates, this will occur daily with Linux, not monthly as Microsoft does on Patch Tuesday.
Fedora Linux: The safest operating system on the Planet
Users of Windows Legacy must therefore 'fend for themselves' and go into the 'wild' so to speak in search of software, whatever that may be, with no assurance that it isn't laden with trojans ready to deploy silently, unbeknownst to the victim user, who believes they have found a nice game program, for example.
You may think things are safe with Windows. They are not.
Fedora Linux: The safest operating system on the Planet.
I've been looking for browser alternatives to Chrome and Firefox.
Both are relatively bulky -- replete with features -- which is to be expected.
Chrome does things I don't like and I simply cannot account for why. At times it will remain quiet and at other times it will do whatever it decides to do and throttle up even pegging the cpu. My netbook strains to cooperate when that happens.
To a lesser extent that happens with Firefox, but really not nearly as often. I know from personal experience that opening a google plus tab will elicit periods of frenetic cpu activity which I watch in my LXDE cpu graph. Seconds can pass even minutes before Chrome settles down. That annoys me.
So, I know Google Chrome is not 100% open source like Chromium. What are they doing exactly with my bandwidth? There is no way to know for sure and there certainly isn't any transparency given one cannot see Google's Chrome source code. That is 'off limits'.
This goes against the grain with me. I hold in reverence open source standards; Gnu Public License v2 in particular ensures public oversight to any single piece of code used.
This is what transparency is all about. It's hard to create 'rogue' code in the open source world, when 'many eyes' can see what is or isn't being coded and if something is 'amiss', corrective action can be taken appropriately.
Still, one wonders, if Linux was not open source, how long would such exploits thrive before being noticed? That is an important question and a major distinction for readers to consider -- especially those who currently depend on proprietary and closed source Microsoft Legacy (x86) Windows. Transparency is not a given in the Windows world.
Alright, you get the point. So, I began looking for something which is more lightweight and open source and, as important, would run reasonably well on my Netbook without pegging the cpu like Chrome does. Luckily, after a few days of searching around with Google and testing various browsers, I came upon one obscure Lightweight browser called dwb (dynamic webkit browser). It struck me at how minimal the developer's web page appeared to be. That minimalist mindset fit with my programming philosophy and was just what I was looking for.
With that, initially, I installed a revision of dwb found in the Fedora 20 repo. It worked, but, for some unknown reason it was not recognizing the presence of Adobe'sFlash plugin. And, even after I reinstalled the newest 11.2.202 update, the error still persisted on youtube's website.
So, I uninstalled dwb with yum and then dispatched directly to the BitBucket dwb project site which supports git, downloaded a copy of the project, manually compiled and installed the newest version of dwb. That fixed the flash problem. That was yesterday and I've been puttering around using dwb exclusively ever since.
This is day two and I am here posting up my experience with dwb after several hours of use under my belt.
What a hoot. That's right. dwb is making me smile and I really think it is funny how straight up I was able to quickly adapt to using a 'keyboard-centric' minimalist browser and it got me to thinking about the general public.
People tend to be lazy and are reluctant to change habits.
But using dwb was not a radical change either.
In fact after a few minutes of googling dwb, I located some documentation at the BitBucket git project where dwb is developed and also some good material on the Arch wiki. (Is there ever anything but 'good' material on the Arch wiki?)
So, I admit being a computer geek does help getting up to speed. But I would bet some of the curious readers might be wondering if they should try dwb.
I say: "Why not?"
You stumble. You fall. You then pick yourself up, dust off and try again. It's like your first experience with a bicycle and training wheels as a child. After a while (hours) you start building up confidence as navigation becomes easier. Reading the Arch Wiki on dwb helped immensely and I don't think I have read for more than a half hour to find the keyboard shortcuts I use most often.
It's not that you can't use your mouse. Quite the opposite. A judicious amount of mouse use in combination with the keyboard will result in gained efficiency as you begin recalling which key does what.
I began to chuckle at how fast I was able to perform the same tasks on dwb verses Google Chrome. And I would add that I have yet to see an open tab to Google Plus peg the cpu -- not once has it happened. So, that makes me wonder even more -- what the heck is Chrome doing with my bandwidth?
As I continued using dwb, the thought occurred to me, it's not just that dwb is small, compact and arguably the fastest browser -- it's that the keyboard still provides major advantages when included in the design of any software. As the dwb home page says:
"dwb is a lightweight web browser based on the webkit web browser engine and the gtk toolkit. dwb is highly customizable and can be easily configured through a web interface. It intends to be mostly keyboard driven, inspired by firefox's vimperator plugin."
And that is the point: Keyboard optimization. The icing on the cake is, if you should happen to know how to use the vi editor, all the better, as many of dwb's shortcuts parallel with vi.
Consolidated development on one Distribution with continual refinement and focus. Don't waste time with non-standard cookie cutter, me too Distros which, most likely, won't be here in five years.
The next Fedora Desktop Linux is taking shape, continually evolving. Being the first to include new advanced technologies like systemd, Fedora leads the way to the future of Linux.
That's right. Fedora is a 'test bed' for future RHEL feature enhancements. Most importantly, work done on Fedora is 100% Linux Standard Base (LSB) ISO compliant.
How important is Linux Standard Base?
One need only look to the pure number of Distros that exist today for examples of variation to understand the problems inherent in added complexity introduced by ignoring standards like LSB.
You are reading this wondering what that means. Google Engineers have, in earnest, attempted to bolster Chrome for Windows by placing it in their own crafted (Not Microsoft -- they don't have one) security sandbox. Despite their best efforts, they have posted to their Chromium developer website that they cannot guarantee your security if you use Microsoft Windows. Here is their disclaimer:
Other caveats
The operating system might have bugs. Of interest are bugs in the Windows API that allow the bypass of the regular security checks. If such a bug exists, malware will be able to bypass the sandbox restrictions and broker policy and possibly compromise the computer. Under Windows, there is no practical way to prevent code in the sandbox from calling a system service.
In addition, third party software, particularly anti-malware solutions, can create new attack vectors. The most troublesome are applications that inject dlls in order to enable some (usually unwanted) capability. These dlls will also get injected in the sandbox process. In the best case they will malfunction, and in the worst case can create backdoors to other processes or to the file system itself, enabling specially crafted malware to escape the sandbox.
That's quite troublesome when you think about it. Google Engineers post up a 'caveat' -- their legal disclaimer, if you will. Simply put, Windows 8.1 legacy (x86) uses a legacy code base going all the way back to the Windows 2000 WinNT kernel. Microsoft cannot fix the security issues which are under eternal attack unless they completely rewrite the operating system from the ground up. Enterprise is 'married' to the operating system with applications which must run 24x7. Microsoft cannot rewrite the code which is heavily depended upon. They have a dilemma and they really don't want you to know about it. They just keep diverting your attention to 'the attackers' away from themselves as though they have no responsibility. This is the cost of using proprietary software. Unlike Open SourceLinux, no one can see the code of Microsoft Windows, review it, inspect it for defects -- FOR MICROSOFT EMPLOYEE EYES ONLY. This is the disadvantage that one accepts when agreeing to the Microsoft software licensing terms. Microsoft own the code -- the Licensee does not.
So, why not consider making a switch today to Gnu Public Licensed Linux and own the code? It's yours for free and it is so secure, I'll even say Fedora 20 Linux is the safest operating system on the Planet.
It's almost too painful to watch. Really. Whenever Debian gets around to getting off their collective hands and coming to grips with reality, it's as though a new Pope were being selected and we are all waiting with great anticipation for the 'smoke signal' indicating a decision has been made. Good grief. This is what constitutes progress for Linux. It's really border-line funny how Debian committees work through the pros and cons of adopting Upstart vs. systemd. Do these Folks realize they are running the risk of becoming irrelevant in their inaction while the earth continues to turn on its axis? Seriously, systemd is a foregone conclusion and while it took time for me to digest the technical issues during the past year, I do see its importance. The thing is, this does represent not only a technical advancement, but also galvanizes the Distro community into a level of conformance which begets standardization. Oh there's the standardization word again. I said it. Let me pose a hypothetical question for you developers out there: What would happen if you dropped all of your current development efforts on your Distro X and enlisted to work on one mainstream Top 5 Distro, such as Fedora? Think about that question for a moment. What would you be giving up and what would you be gaining? The initial knee-jerk reaction might be to say "I'd be losing my right to choice". But would you? Is the act of being independent and creating variation 'because I can' and "it's my right" of higher importance than say putting forth the effort to build a superior singular Distro? Imagine if you would, hundreds, thousands of developers going to work on one Distro. Leveraging the intellectual resources and manpower would be amazing. But wait, all of that 'variation'? It would fall to the wayside and we as developers could all focus on working with one software API, one file hierarchy structure. The effect would be the same as if overnight we all chose Android and focused on application development in that ecosystem. Honestly, I wonder where Linux will wind up and hope that if consolidation occurs as I predict, more effort will be redirected to a single Distro which can be forged, annealed, hardened to become as popular as Windows. The success of Windows is as much about a monopoly as it is about one standard, one api, which was embraced and flourished. Microsoft Windows legacy 8 is aged and I believe we have reached a turning point where Corporate Enterprise knows it must do something to unshackle itself from a marriage to an ever-restrictive proprietary solution. Mark Shuttleworth acts like a defeated Man in his Losing Graciously concession to adopting systemd. It's silly. Look at the big picture. One Distro, one API, with thousands of developers behind it, is a powerful thing. -- Dietrich
