I have an FA account, although I doubt that I’ll use it anytime soon.

Anyway, I wonder if the scrappy few computer companies which have decided to choose a particular Linux default distribution (like System76 picking Ubuntu) have ever thought about offering an iMac-like all-in-one PC?

I’m asking that because one of the main criticisms by both Linux and Windows users of the different iterations of the “Mac platform”, particularly the iMac, is that it isn’t expandable or extensible on the hardware level. It’s just whatever is offered to you in that all-in-one package by Apple.

However, while it is a weak point to many who are more accustomed to more-flexible home computing environments (the sysadmins, the gamers, etc.), it is also a very strong point or attraction for many others who want a “KISS” approach for their hardware: a monitor, a keyboard, and a mouse, with as few wires with which you would need to entangle yourself.

Of course, the Mac Mini-like small-form-factor computer could whet that whistle, and most of the aforementioned Linux-geared desktop vendors are already selling such systems.

However, the Mac mini is simply a computer that is meant to work with any type of peripheral hardware; the iMac, on the other hand, is a computer that emphasizes whatever is present on the screen (the GUI) above all else, even placing all the hard drives, USB ports, on/off switch, and other such components to the side and back of the monitor.

Really, that’s what the iMac is: a truly media-oriented home computer that isn’t really meant to be portable, or expandable, but simply a voyeur for whatever media is present on the screen.

So it would be particularly interesting to see if a made-for-Linux all-in-one PC can be developed by a desktop computer manufacturer.

What could come out of that, though? What if System76 were to start selling an iMac-like Ubuntu PC? How would it influence the GUI design? Which crowd or audience would be willing to buy such a computer?

One can only wonder about the possibilities…

I don’t think that software, free or proprietary, will do any good for the environment, the way that it looks now.

I mean, why should software, and the growing evolution of it, benefit the environment? It mostly benefits the various manufacturing industries in various forms (especially the companies which make the chipsets for today’s electronic devices), who use the smelly, environmentally-hazardous factories in China, India, and Central America to create these devices (ranging from cell phones to personal computers to servers) which need bigger, better, flashier operating systems every two or so years and are built accordingly to handle such power.

What components do these computers and electronic devices use? They use various materials mined from the most minerally-resourced, most minerally-diverse regions of the world (DR Congo, South Africa, the Andes, etc.). Such ventures have tied into the local conflicts in these areas, such as the Civil War in the eastern DRC (blood diamonds, blood gold, blood coltan?), as millions of dollars in weaponry are to be gained through these minerals by the warlords who thirst for greater political control of these regions.

I mean, sure, we’re on our way out of the industrial age, and the transition from industrialization and industrialism to software and services is similar to the conflicts which accompanied the move from agrarianism and agricultural dependence to industry and manufacturing. Unlike the violent conflicts on the battlefield that accompanied the agriculture-to-industry movement (American Civil War, for example), the battles of this transition are being fought out in the courtroom, with every sort of company suing each other for copyright, patent, or some other form of intellectual property violation just to make a quick few billion dollars/euros in damages just to hold the company’s head just above the waters at the expense of someone else.

But, in the midst of trying to further the advance of software development (for- or non-profit), are we thinking about the environment?

Are we thinking about the ecological consequences of software being dependent upon industry and manufactured components, the makers of which depend upon mining and the building of factories in order to function?

At which point does software help preserve the ecological balance of this planet? Or is it simply a client of those who wish to expand the breadth of human civilization at the natural sciences’ expense?