The news that United Linux may include only one GUI – probably Gnome – is, of course, creating a small firestorm (See the /. thread).

When I first read the blurb on Slashdot, my first reaction was, “What ever happened to ‘Linux is all about choice’ “?

As I thought more about it – and read Bruce Peren’s take on all this – my thinking comes down to this:

• Users still have a choice of installing KDE etc on their machines. While this is a barrier to entry and will in some way hurt KDE, the option is still there
• Linux is about choice. This is a choice the UnitedLinux folks (mainly Perens, I assume) made. May not be your choice, but it is a choice.
• Sure, it would be great if UnitedLinux came with every possible UI … not. Can you say MS-style software bloat? Tough decisions have to be made, and that includes cutting some features/apps some like. Get over it.
• Don’t like the choice? Get another distro or build your own.
• By making the disto as streamlined and uniform as possible, UnitedLinux is doing Linux a service. It’s putting a Linux distro in front of a lot of people who have never used it; it’s best if this first Linux use/deployment is as easy to use/deploy as possible

Also, Perens notes that UnitedLinux will probably go with Postgres for a standard database, instead of the vastly more popular mySQL.

Why? Not really on the databases’ relative merits – it’s because Postgres is fully open; mySQL has some proprietary baggage (the same is true of Gnome vs. KDE – Gnome is fully open).

Again, before people flame, realize that a company deploying UnitedLinux can still standardize on mySQL. They are not “stuck” with Postgres.

Linux is about choice.

UnitedLinux is one of many distro choices.

What’s the problem?

(Full disclosure: On the one Linux box that I have X Windows installed, I run KDE. However, I rarely touch the GUI, so I’m not particularly vested on one GUI vs. another. But my bias is to KDE, and I’m still not at all upset about this development.)