What's Holding Linux Back?

Overall Stability

Frankly, I don't get this one. Anyone who uses Linux knows it is incredibly stable. Why? Because it is designed the way an operating system should be designed. The key kernel functions are command-line drive and the entire system can be managed without any graphical interface at all. That takes away a great number of possible headaches and incompatibilities and is also substantially more efficient. Apple has redesigned their entire operating system with this concept in mind, and so far, with the new 10.1 update of OS X, you are seeing some impressive results.

The biggest area that I can think of that might be a concern is the GUI. However, with the maturation of KDE and the extensive testing and development that went into its release, I am more confident than ever before that it can hold its own against anything the competition has to offer. I was nervous back in the day when you had to think about Gnome, Enlightenment and KDE all duking it out, but clearly KDE has risen above the fray to become a top level desktop environment with a level of stability that is to be expected of such a refined product. When I really sit down and think about it, there is only one real worst case scenario related to the GUI. If it somehow gets corrupted by an odd stroke of fate, you simply kill the GUI process. The underlying system is unaffected and all other processes continue to run without interruption. You are free to start other GUI's if the one you have been using does not cut it for you, and you should be no worse off. It is one of the benefits of choice.

Perhaps there may be issues with device drivers as well, but since most drivers are external from the kernel by default, there seems little chance, if any, that they could bring down the rest of the system, let alone affect it in a negative manner. Advanced users can actually modify the kernel to further stabilize the system and reduce chances of potential corruption, which is again indicative of the flexibility of Linux and a testament to just how industrial strength it really can be.

However, in my experience, kernels are rarely corrupted, and given that most distributions are self-repairing upon restart, common issues will be taken care of without any user intervention at all. Using applications like Midnight Commander, it is extremely easy to backup data and configuration files. Highlighting the /usr folder and copying it to a second drive is quick and simple to do, and if you have "root" access, you should be able to backup any folder on the system. Unlike Windows, there is no "safe mode" to worry about, and as most of us know, that is a very good thing. No issue with those goofy "~1" truncations that exist in Windows because the file system is supported in full at the command line. Why Microsoft didn't develop their file system this way is baffling, but hey, it is their loss and one of the reasons why Linux is becoming more popular all of the time.

Linux is in reality one of the most stable systems I have ever put my hands on. I've had hardware fail before the kernel ever does, so I'm not exactly worried about it. That is not to say there may not be compatibility issues here and there, but the chances of them affecting system stability are slim indeed.

It is important to emphasize to potential adopters just how stable Linux is at its core. Most of the web sites that stay up use Apache as their base of operations. Most that go down use something else. Linux is not prone to the security holes that have plagued Windows for nearly a decade and it is doubtful that it ever will be. The open source nature may seem on the surface to be slower in terms of development, but because it is open source, security holes and flaws can be found and corrected by anyone interested in contributing to the community. Bugs are much more likely to exist in the shadows than out in the light where they are easily seen and taken care of.