However, having *.dlls and *.exes doesn't make a stack system modular.
You must have a very different meaning of modular then. DLLs are modules. YVendors are free to push out upgrades in DLLs without affecting the rest of the system. How on earth is that not modular?
What is this "stack" system you're referring to? I can think of many meanings for that word (pity it's such an overloaded word with multiple meanings) but I can't think of one that would apply only to Windows in the context of an operating system.
> Kernels - yes, as a software engineer you're correct, of course. I meant that, to the average User - a new Distro release has a "newly" rebuilt and upgraded kernel to suit the new system.
Whether or not the kernel is fully recompiled is irrelevant to any user. In addition to that, any software that is released is _always_ compiled from scratch in a clean environment. I still fail to see why this is even being mentioned?
And yes, Linux Distros such as PCLinuxOS do have alternative Kernels listed in Synaptic. As you say, most Users would never think of replacing the "default" that came with the release of the version of the Distro. However, there is a "Multimedia" version of PCLOS, which uses a reworked kernel - that better suits LiVES and Cinelerra, the best video-editors in Linux. You can use that kernel in the Desktop version if you wish.
That's because on you don't need any of that on Windows and OS X and any other sensibly designed OS. No one I know has bothered to compile their own kernel or swap out the default kernel since the 2.4.x days.
I understand that you were referring to Windows with its single Desktop, then trying to do the same with a Single Desktop in Linux
No I was not. To see an example of how shoddy copy and paste is handled, open up a PDF in Evince. Select some text. Copy it and then paste it into OpenOffice. You get screwed up formatting. Why does this happen? Because Linux lacks a unified clipboard format. Unix people in general are so fond of arguing over desktops that they're not interested in sitting down and working out some basic usability issues. Those who do try are labelled "interface Nazis" (e.g. GNOME developers) for dumbing things down too much, etc.
> I agree about the computer security - if not correctly configured it won't work properly... I'm using a properly set up version of Shorewall - and have had no problems whatever. That does include using the current version of Flash. Average Users who need a GUI setup to configure their firewall properly can install GuardDog or FireStarter in a few clicks from Synaptic.
That still doesn't protect you from cross platform exploits that make use of Flash.
> The Ext defrag tool is for the semi-jouralling (like NT), Ext2fs filesystems. Ext3fs and the new Ext4fs are both fully journalling - they "map" on shutdown, and reset and defrag where needed on each startup. Defrag-tools hasn't been needed since the start of Ext3fs.
Journalling has nothing to do with filesystem fragmentation. Can we please drop this now?
> For editing video, the basics can be done with Avidemux - ...
...so while I get joshed for not using Gimp all the time - being a Photoshopper from P/S-4 in the mid 1990s - I tend to retreat to Photy quite often. It runs very well in Wine - or you can use CodeWeaver's CrossOver Linux Pro, too.
That says a lot more about the ideological mindset of most Linux users than it does about the usability of the Linux desktop. It works if you're after the truly basic, but once you need a more complete and complex package (like basic 16 bit support, which is important to photographers) you end up running programs in Wine. Or you get told to shut up and go modify the source code.
Don't get me wrong. Linux may work for some people as a desktop, and that's all well and good. However, the majority of people browsing this forum are not interested in computers. They are _photographers_ and Linux support for photography is _really bad_ compared to the Mac and even Windows.