I know, this title might come as a surprise to many. Or perhaps, for those who truly know me, it won’t. I am not a fanboy. The BSDs and the illumos distributions generally follow an approach to design and development that aligns more closely with the way I think, not to mention the wonderful communities around them, but that does not mean I do not use and appreciate other solutions. I usually publish articles about how much I love the BSDs or illumos distributions, but today I want to talk about Linux (or, better, GNU/Linux) and why, despite everything, it still holds a place in my heart. This will be the first in a series of articles where I’ll discuss other operating systems.
Where It All Began
I started right here, with GNU/Linux, back in 1996. It was my first real prompt after the Commodore 64 and DOS. It was my first step toward Unix systems, and it was love at first shell. I felt a sense of freedom - a freedom that the operating systems I had known up to that point (few, to be honest) had never given me. It was like a “blank sheet” (or rather, a black one) with a prompt on it. I understood immediately that this prompt, thanks to command chaining, pipes, and all the marvels of Unix and Unix-like systems, would allow me to do anything. And that sense of freedom is what makes me love Unix systems to this day.
I was young, but my intuition was correct. And even though I couldn't afford to keep a full Linux installation on that computer long-term due to hardware limitations, I realized that this would be my future. A year later, a new computer arrived, allowing me to use Linux daily, for everything. And successfully, without missing Windows at all (except for a small partition, strictly for gaming).
When I arrived at university, in 1998, I was one of the few who knew it. One of the few who appreciated it. One of the few who hoped to see a flourishing future for it. Everywhere. Widespread. A dream come true. I was a speaker at Linux Days, I actively participated in translation projects, and I wrote articles for Italian magazines. I was a purist regarding the "GNU/Linux" nomenclature because I felt it was wrong to ignore the GNU part - it was fundamental. Because perhaps the "Year of the Linux Desktop" never arrived, but Linux is now everywhere. On my desktop, without a doubt. But also on my smartphone (Android) and on those of hundreds of millions of people. Just as it is in my car. And in countless devices surrounding us - even if we don’t know it. And this is the true success. Let’s not focus too much on the complaint that "it’s not compatible with my device X". It is your device that is not compatible with Linux, not the other way around. Just like when, many years ago, people complained that their WinModems (modems that offloaded all processing to obscure, closed-source Windows drivers) didn't work on Linux. For "early adopters" like me, this concept has always been present, even though, fortunately, things have improved exponentially.
Linux was what companies accepted most willingly (not totally, but still...): the ongoing lawsuits against the BSDs hampered their spread, and Linux seemed like that "breath of fresh air" the world needed.
Linux and its distributions (especially those untethered from corporations, like Debian, Gentoo, Arch, etc.) allowed us to replicate expensive "commercial" setups at a fraction of the cost. Reliability was good, updating was simple, and there was a certain consistency. Not as marked as that of the BSDs, but sufficient.
The world was ready to accept it, albeit reluctantly. Linus Torvalds, despite his sometimes harsh and undiplomatic tone, carried forward the kernel development with continuity and coherence, making difficult decisions but always in line with the project. The "move fast and break things" model was almost necessary because there was still so much to build. I also remember the era when Linux - speaking of the kernel - was designed almost exclusively for x86. The other architectures, to simplify, worked thanks to a series of adaptations that brought most behavior back to what was expected for x86.
And the distributions, especially the more "arduous" ones to install, taught me a lot. The distro-hopping of the early 2000s made me truly understand partitioning, the boot procedure (Lilo first, then Grub, etc.), and for this, I must mainly thank Gentoo and Arch (and the FreeBSD handbook - but this is for another article). I learned the importance of backups the hard way, and I keep this lesson well in mind today. My Linux desktops ran mainly with Debian (initially), then Gentoo, Arch, and openSUSE (which, at the time, was still called "SUSE Linux"), Manjaro, etc. My old 486sx 25Mhz with 4MB (yes, MB) of RAM, powered by Debian, allowed me to download emails (mutt and fetchmail), news (inn + suck), program in C, and create shell scripts - at the end of the 90s.
When Linux Conquered the World
Then the first Ubuntu was launched, and many things changed. I don't know if it was thanks to Ubuntu or simply because the time was ripe, but attention shifted to Linux on the desktop as well (albeit mainly on the computers of us enthusiasts), and many companies began to contribute actively to the system or distributions.
I am not against the participation of large companies in Open Source. Their contributions can be valuable for the development of Open Source itself, and if companies make money from it, good for them. If this ultimately leads to a more complete and valid Open Source product, then I welcome it! It is precisely thanks to mass adoption that Linux cleared the path for the acceptance of Open Source at all levels. I still remember when, just after graduating, I was told that Linux (and Open Source systems like the BSDs) were "toys for universities". I dare anyone to say that today!
But this must be done correctly: without spoiling the original idea of the project and without hijacking (voluntarily or not) development toward a different model. Toward a different evolution. The use of Open Source must not become a vehicle for a business model that tends to close, trap, or cage the user. Or harm anyone. And if it is oriented toward worsening the product solely for one's own gain, I can only be against it.
What Changed Along the Way
And this is where, unfortunately, I believe things have changed in the Linux world (if not in the kernel itself, at least in many distributions). Innovation used to be disruptive out of necessity. Today, in many cases, disruption happens without purpose, and stability is often sacrificed for changes that do not solve real problems. Sometimes, in the name of improved security or stability, a new, immature, and unstable product is created - effectively worsening the status quo.
To give an example, I am not against systemd on principle, but I consider it a tool distant from the original Unix principles - do one thing and do it well - full of features and functions that, frankly, I often do not need. I don't want systemd managing my containerization. For restarting stopped services? There are monit and supervisor - efficient, effective, and optional. And, I might add: services shouldn't crash; they should handle problems in a non-destructive way. My Raspberry Pi A+ doesn't need systemd, which occupies a huge amount of RAM (and precious clock cycles) for features that will never be useful or necessary on that platform.
But "move fast and break things" has arrived everywhere, and software is often written by gluing together unstable libraries or those laden with system vulnerabilities. Not to mention so-called "vibe coding" - which might give acceptable results at certain levels, but should not be used when security and confidentiality become primary necessities or, at least, without an understanding of what has been written.
We are losing much of the Unix philosophy, and many Linux distributions are now taking the path of distancing themselves from a concept of cross-compatibility ("if it works on Linux, I don't care about other operating systems"), of minimalism, of "do one thing and do it well". And, in my opinion, we are therefore losing many of the hallmarks that have distinguished its behavior over the years.
In my view, this depends on two factors: a development model linked to a concept of "disposable" electronics, applied even to software, and the pressure from some companies to push development where they want, not where the project should go. Therefore, in certain cases, the GPL becomes a double-edged sword: on one hand, it protects the software and ensures that contributions remain available. On the other, it risks creating a situation where the most "influential" player can totally direct development because - unable to close their product - they have an interest in the entire project going in the direction they have predisposed. In these cases, perhaps, BSD licenses actually protect the software itself more effectively. Because companies can take and use without an obligation to contribute. If they do, it is because they want to, as in the virtuous case of Netflix with FreeBSD. And this, while it may remove (sometimes precious) contributions to the operating system, guarantees that the steering wheel remains firmly in the hands of those in charge - whether foundations, groups, or individuals.
And Why I Still Care
And so yes, despite all this, I (still) love Linux.
Because it was the first Open Source project I truly believed in (and which truly succeeded), because it works, and because the entire world has developed around it. Because it is a platform on which tons of distributions have been built (and some, like Alpine Linux, still maintain that sense of minimalism that I consider correct for an operating system). Because it has distributions like openSUSE (and many others) that work immediately and without problems on my laptop (suspension and hibernation included) and on my miniPC, a fantastic tool I use daily. Because hardware support has improved immensely, and it is now rare to find incompatible hardware.
Because it has been my life companion for 30 years and has contributed significantly to putting food on the table and letting me sleep soundly. Because it allowed me to study without spending insane amounts on licenses or manuals. Because it taught me, first, to think outside the box. To be free.
So thank you, GNU/Linux.
Even if your btrfs, after almost 18 years, still eats data in spectacular fashion. Even if you rename my network interfaces after a reboot. Even though, at times, I get the feeling that you’re slowly turning into what you once wanted to defeat.
Even if you are not my first choice for many workloads, I foresee spending a lot of time with you for at least the next 30 years.