It is definitely possible and work is being done. The issue is that many devices have a restrictive bootloader and pre-determined partition setup that prevents the creation of additional Linux partitions and installing extra boot options. Some devices do have "developer" boot loaders (such as Archos' SDE) or modded in custom boot loaders (such as moboot on HP Touchpad) that allow you to boot whatever you want. Beyond that, getting a proper "real Linux" environment requires Xorg drivers for the video devices and many mobile systems do not have such drivers. Even when they do, those drivers are often merely framebuffer implementations which allow GUI functionality but with zero hardware acceleration. The GPU's on mobile devices are pretty much exclusively proprietary and require binary firmware blobs that may or may not be compatible with non-Android (or other OS) environments. Finally, devices found in many mobile devices are nonstandard and are not present in the main line Linux kernel source, so a one-size-fits-all kernel package such as is typical on PC setups will not work for mobile. Instead, each device must have its own custom maintained kernel that keeps all the device-specific hardware patches up to date. Some devices (such as the Archos tablets) require you to flash the kernel and initramfs into a special boot area, meaning that typical kernel upgrades through package managers will not work. Finally, even if you do get GPU acceleration to work, mobile GPU's only support the limited OpenGL ES architecture. Almost all of the desktop window managers that support acceleration do so through traditional OpenGL interfaces, meaning that these window managers must be rewritten to support OpenGL ES instead. The same applies to video acceleration in media players, and the DSP and GPU systems are much more varied in mobile devices. These are just some of the restrictions that prevent true Linux installations on mobile devices. I actually did get Debian running decently on my Archos 43 tablet but only after finding a modified 2.6.37+ kernel that did not have all the necessary drivers installed. The core functionality worked despite having to write some boot scripts to initialize the WiFi, Bluetooth, and power management systems. Even then the Bluetooth was spotty at best, often dropping connections and refusing to pair (despite working perfectly in Android with the same devices). To all mobile hardware developers: Please, if you really want consumers to get the most out of your hardware, make sure your drivers are compatible with standard Linux system utilities in addition to those found in Android and other mobile OS'es. This will help out such porting efforts and give your device a wide variety of OS choices. Also, please consider open-sourcing more drivers, especially video drivers. If not open-sourcing them, at least make Xorg compatible drivers with OpenGL ES acceleration so we can actually use the full potential of the hardware.

This was the start of Ubuntu's downfall in my opinion. The purpose of a free OS isn't to try to scam me into giving you money, that's a commercial OS's job, and Apple and Microsoft have that one covered. I tried Mint, but this dumb search scam crap was intolerable and I ended up at Debian, which is awesome.

That's better I guess, but why switch from Google at all? I have never heard of DuckDuckGo and I'm sure most new users haven't either. The purpose of maintaining a Linux distro is to provide something users want, and this is obviously not a change that is in favor of the users. When distro maintainers try to control their users for personal benefit, I see no reason not to switch distros to something better suited for the users.

Obviously you've never used Mint. Debian does default your homepage to debian.org, but it doesn't try to masquerade as a search engine to get money from users' searches. Mint actually replaces the default Google search engine plugin for Firefox with a customized one that uses a Mint Google page with ads and tons of sponsored links. This file is buried deep in the system, where average users never go, and must be replaced with an unmodified copy that is not particularly easily found. You can obtain this file from Firefox on a non-Mint machine or find a link in some Mint forum posts. The problem is that after running an update to Firefox (even non-Mint Firefox, as I had installed the Mozilla PPA Firefox Stable), the file gets reverted to the default Mint version and your searches get screwed up all over again. Yes, you could write a script to automatically replace this file, but in my case switching to Debian made more sense.

Agreed 100%. Ubuntu was this until they started losing all their initial money, then they started adding in stupid crap (Ubuntu Music Store, Ubuntu One Subscriptions, and at one point tried to switch to Yahoo for money) and also stopped doing their CD shipments. That was when I started to see Ubuntu's downfall. Mint should give up on the money grabbing garbage, they have a real potential with their distribution but their stupid browser hijack is going to turn off most of their new users. At very least make it a default but separate entry from the Google search in Firefox, so users can simply switch back to Google and uninstall the Mint search if they want. Linux is all about freedom, and freedom needs personalization and customization. If users have to put up with stuff they don't want, they will switch. Debian is great about this, no ads, no spam, no hijacks, no asking for donations, no stupid "Debian Search", nothing. You're free to install whatever browser you choose, pick whatever search you want, and use your PC the way you want to. We need more distributions like that. FYI - Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) has the annoying search crap as well, and is the number one reason I switched from LMDE to straight pure Debian.

This is exactly why I only used Mint for a week. I hated 11.10, so I installed Mint LMDE but was disgusted by the hideous Search page. I hacked around and thought I had a way to permanently undo it, and then installed the newest Firefox from Mozilla's PPA. It worked for a while, but an update brought it back. I ditched LMDE for regular Debian and couldn't be happier (except that Debian Testing has now moved to GNOME 3...). Luckily I got MATE to compile from sources just in time to keep going through the transition. If the GNOME team wants to do stupid things and ruin their credibility among their users, so be it, but I am not joining the party. The great part about open source is that you're never truly forced to change. The code is out there, and should a project maintainer takes a wrong turn (or multiple maintainers in this case, as both Ubuntu and GNOME have lost it), you can just grab the last good version and maintain it into a new project. I don't care how many hackish ways are invented to kludge a taskbar and apps menu into GNOME Shell, it will still be a bloated, GPU eating unintuitive desktop with some useful stuff tacked on. GNOME 2 just works, everything is streamlined for functionality, and it is pretty efficient on resources and GPU (and still has plenty of eyecandy if you can afford it using Compiz). I much prefer a system that runs on all of my computers, not one where I have to use different desktop environments based on how powerful each machine is. While I do like the Mint team's idea of making GNOME 3 usable, I do not see it as a perfect solution. It feels like something that would break often due to GNOME 3 changes, and would have to keep being updated. I think the idea of a stable, updated GNOME 2 fork is better and support the MATE project. Hopefully they can get a rebranded GNOME 2 packaged for all distributions and provide updates. The project does seem to be going well.

But you do find your perfectly configured GNOME 2 replaced by that hideous GNOME 3 Shell... I don't care if it's outdated/unsupported/dying/etc, it only is dying because distro maintainers are removing it from the repositories. Users still want it, and I see no problem with that. In the world of open source, distro maintainers shouldn't control who uses what, they exist to provide options for the users to choose from. If users want GNOME 2, then they should provide GNOME 2. I compiled Mate from source yesterday after hearing "No." as the only answer to when it would get to the repos. Works fine, and I really hope they reconsider their stubborn decision to not package a desktop that many people want.

True about the touchscreens, my A43 has a resistive screen and got a lot of negative reviews for it, but I love being able to use a stylus for precise control. Sure, you can buy a fancy expensive stylus for multitouch capacitive screens, but I'm not sure how precise it actually is. I've been following some threads on the GNOME 2 fork called "Mate" and it seems to be nearing release. Hopefully a PPA will be up soon so I can try it out on Ubuntu. I think GNOME 3 still has some potential, but the mindset in the GNOME department is all wrong right now. Either way, it isn't ready for mainstream use and having a GNOME 2-based fallback to use would be useful. I really don't want to switch to XFCE or anything else, I tried XFCE and it just isn't the same, nor is GNOME 3's horribly implemented "fallback interface". I hate how the popular opinion always affects technology. Just because the majority of novice users like a dumbed down interface doesn't mean it is the best interface ever, it means you made it shiny to please the masses. This type of "design" is terrible, especially when companies ignore their power users to focus on selling a shiny brick to people who just want to check Facebook and Twitter with it.

I have Debian Stable running on my Archos 43 tablet (4.3" resistive touchscreen, 1GHz ARM, 256 RAM). The GUI is easy enough to read and easy enough to touch click with a stylus. There is decent amount of screen area for the application (the screen is 480x854/854x480 depending on orientation which can be set at boot). The real issue is that there is no room for a good on screen keyboard without wiping the whole screen, so I use a Bluetooth keyboard instead. I don't get how Unity improves the tablet experience other than it makes it easier to punch buttons with fat fingers, it doesn't actually solve any real tablet problems like on-screen keyboard integration or automatic orientation switching or scrolling applications larger than the screen.

I switched to Mint Debian but ultimately went to pure Debian. Mint has some issues with Firefox (they customize Google and it sucks, it's hard to remove, and if you install a new version your changes are reverted). Debian is awesome if you're coming from classic Ubuntu as it has pretty much the exact same interface. You may have to configure some system policies to your liking (it asks for password too much in my opinion, but I disabled the prompts). If you don't want to deal with problems, use Debian Stable (Squeeze). The testing version (Wheezy) is what Mint Debian is built off of and I had a bug with the nVidia driver that lagged the computer really bad.

Yeah, Ubuntu's users were typically new Linux users, but often they were still experienced PC users with other OS (Windows/Mac) knowledge. Ubuntu is trying to impress users who have zero knowledge of how PC's work and make it super intuitive for those who haven't used any other OS, but these people aren't ever going to install Ubuntu in the first place. Meanwhile, Ubuntu's maturing userbase has finally decided to ditch the training wheels and move to another distribution after the horrendous 11.10 release. What were they thinking!?! I have Debian on my Archos 43 4.3" tablet. With GNOME2 and Bluetooth mini-keyboard. It's awesome. I seriously would rather have a classic interface even on a tablet, if you have a stylus you don't need obnoxiously wasteful buttons that take up 2-3 times the space they need to, and fitting more stuff on the screen gives more functionality (compare LibreOffice to tablet office apps and you'll see a big difference in the number of features provided).

Except it will still suck, Unity pretty much requires a keyboard to navigate more than one page of icons by typing the application name in the search bar. If you're going to do touch interfaces, at least do it right, and also note that most of the userbase DOESN'T use touchscreens. This applies to the Windows 8 developers as well, who also have a screen hogging touchscreen Start menu that is useless to most users.

We already have that, Android has been selling competitively with Apple for a while now, and it is built around Linux. Having a standard GNOME userspace on top of Linux would be awesome though. I just don't trust Ubuntu to create new UI's anymore after what happened with 11.10.

Fallback is NOT GNOME 2! Everyone keeps saying it's the same, but it is quite different (try it sometime!). The theme looks like crap for one (inconsistent coloring and shading), the applets can't be positioned other than left/middle/right, to right click on anything you actually have to alt+right click, it uses a lot more RAM than GNOME 2, it takes more work to get Compiz effects running, it lacks a System menu and instead clutters up Applications categories with system and administration items, Nautilus (file browser) lacks home/up folder/view/zoom functionality with its new dumbed down UI, and I'm sure there are plenty more problems with it. I COULD get used to it, which would take a lot of time, and would still mean I have to give up using my old 512MB RAM laptop altogether, or I could just go use another distro that hasn't gone crazy and still uses GNOME 2, have none of the above problems, and still use my old laptop without issues. Change for the sake of change is a terrible idea, it seems like the Ubuntu and GNOME devs have all gone off the deep end, and that's not good considering together they make the most widely known and used Linux distro (outside of the business world at least).

I switched to Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) on Ubuntu 11.10's release day. Enough of that crap, LMDE provides a powerful GNOME2 interface with all of its customizability and productivity and none of that stupid Unity garbage. I'm not sure when they plan to switch to GNOME3, but I have more trust that they will keep supporting GNOME2 than Ubuntu, where you just throw obnoxious UI changes that everyone hates without listening to user feedback. Problem is, it isn't just Ubuntu. If it was just Ubuntu shooting themselves in the foot I wouldn't care so much, but the whole GNOME team has gone insane with them. GNOME 3 also tries to push the stupid "modernized" crap where you just remove useful features in the sake of "simplicity" and the more useful "fallback" (apparently productivity is out of style these days) lacks tons of classic GNOME 2 features. Xfce isn't anywhere near what GNOME 2 was and I don't really like KDE4 either, so the entire Linux world appears to be falling apart. If GNOME3 were GNOME2, you would have the option to make fallback look exactly like GNOME2's interface, but sadly the development team forgot what customization was all about while they were pandering to new users who don't know what a proper GUI should look like.