Now a huge number of devices come with operating systems – televisions, watches, set-top boxes, game consoles, routers, 3D printers, etc. Legislative regulation is necessary so that such devices can change the OS and write drivers for specific equipment.

Problems with closed operating systems

  • they do not expand – usually the functionality is deliberately cut down and it is impossible to expand it either for free or for money
  • not supported – sometimes no updates are released immediately, sometimes some small time is released relative to the lifetime of the device
  • surveillance – if earlier it was at the level of conspiracy theories, now very real surveillance is being actively implemented
  • dependence on the manufacturer’s “cloud” - in most cases, it is unclear why, rather for data collection (see the previous paragraph). At the same time, if the manufacturer goes bankrupt, then you can throw out the physical device.

Mobile devices

  • iOS is a closed OS, it has been showing its problematic nature for many years: ordinary commercial developers are suffering, and in the current situation it is even worse.
  • Android seems to be an open OS, but not really: in reality, it is almost impossible to find a phone on a pure Android. Almost the same problems arise.
  • There are almost no other operating systems in practice, and it is unclear who will write regular applications for them.

Desktop OS

  • Windows 11 with sending a bunch of data, turning on and off updates from Russia and other problems.
  • macOS – they’re going back to their processors, soon it will only work there.
  • Linux – more or less, but still unacceptable childhood sores are repeated from time to time (like the second monitor fell off after the update).

The main thing is that I would like more stability in Linux and better data protection: backups of data and settings, a simple reinstallation of the OS.

Server OS

I’m only considering Linux options here. The rest is strange and specific.

  • CentOS was ordered to live for a long time not so long ago – Rocky Linux and other forks appeared.
  • Russian OS - unclear release policy, the payment of the OS itself, and not support (why pay if you can not pay for the same?)
  • Ubuntu is trying to make money on IoT, so the most interesting server development has been made paid (and is installed only through their cloud) – Ubuntu Core . As for me, this principle should be applied to all servers without exception and slowly displace traditional operating systems. This means that Ubuntu is not on the way.
  • The Reds have a similar variant called CoreOS. It is used as the basis for Kubernetes, but it does not develop separately (unlike Ubuntu Core).

Unfortunately, there is practically no SOHO (small office / home office) segment of server OS. We know that they should have routers and NAS systems in them. For example, installation and management via the web console. But practically no major manufacturers have such a thing.

The result

Strange as it may seem, everything is relatively bad with operating systems. There are serious development options, but it is unclear if and when it will be. The main problem is the need for serious expenses, which it is unclear who should lead.