Gradually, things changed. Over time, minimalism took hold. "Less is more" became the mantra in many sectors. We saw it in electronics (a philosophy Apple rode to great success), in interior design, in construction, and in architecture. We got low-impact homes and devices that were ever more powerful yet consumed less and less energy. And yet, in the one field that should embody efficiency and logic more than any other - computing - the exact opposite seems to have happened. We've progressively made things more complicated. Simple tasks, like hosting a website, have become, in the eyes of many, jobs that require complex and heavy stacks - stacks that consume resources and electricity just to get the base system running.

Operating systems are becoming increasingly complex, bloated, and packed with features that are useless to most people. Even the Linux world, which was often born under the banner of modularity and lightness, has in many cases followed the same trend. Just think of modern web stacks that, even on Linux, require containers, orchestrators, and complex build systems merely to serve a static page.

And that's why I've decided that my blogs, at least for now, will be hosted entirely on a VM that costs 1 Euro per month. By using efficient operating systems (like NetBSD, in this case), it's possible to run the whole setup with excellent performance on very few resources.

This isn't a matter of necessity - I have powerful, underutilized servers at my disposal - but a matter of choice. It's a small act of computational minimalism. I want to demonstrate, just as I have done and am still doing with FediMeteo, that you don't need to invest in extreme resources, powerful (and expensive) hardware, and complicated stacks to perform simple tasks. Tasks that today, for whatever reason (that's a rhetorical question, and the answers range from commercial interests pushing new solutions for already-solved problems to curriculum-driven development), are instead handled on oversized infrastructures.

As I like to say, it's like needing to buy some salad from the shop down the street, but instead of walking, cycling, or, at most, taking your car, you take a semi-truck.

Sure, it works.

But it makes no sense.

As I've often done over the years, I started my research online. Unfortunately, as is often the case recently, my searches didn't yield the desired results. I found hundreds of posts and reviews focusing on gaming monitors, not to mention the useless sponsored reviews or the far-fetched ones on e-commerce sites. Ultimately, I tried to piece together the information I could find and convinced myself that for a 24-inch screen, FullHD would be sufficient, provided it had a good panel and some eye-strain reduction certification.

The result? I bought a monitor that only partially satisfies me. The quality is good, but the resolution is too low for my habits and expectations. And I'm disappointed in myself and the research I conducted.

This experience led me to mentally retrace the history of my time online, and what I've observed on the internet for many years.

I remember the dawn of my online experience. For providers, the business was about selling network access and the ability to have an online presence, giving people the chance to reach the whole world. Gradually, shops, newspapers, and information sites emerged. Their goal was to sell their services THROUGH the internet, increasing their visibility and market reach.

Suddenly, someone realized that amidst this vast collection of sites and information, advertisements could be placed. All at once, many sites started displaying ad banners that helped both companies gain visibility and site owners earn a little extra. Search engines like Google were efficient and reliable (I still remember how we "techies" welcomed it) and helped people find products and content.

As time went on, ads multiplied, and e-commerce became dominant. The business model shifted to earning ON the internet (through views, ads, selling services, and products online) rather than THROUGH it. The market changed, content consumption changed. We reached a point where browsing without an ad-blocker became frustrating. Every site, even the most innocuous, bombards you with banners, commercials, and ads of all kinds, so intrusive they compromise the browsing experience itself. YouTube shows an ad every few minutes (unless, of course, you pay for Premium), and it's the same everywhere else.

The problem, therefore, stems from this business model. The internet is no longer a means to reach the customer, but a battlefield to "ensnare" them. Cloud services that are easy to get into but impossible to leave, expensive and restrictive SaaS, a total loss of information freedom, a total loss of control of our data.

And today? The internet seems like a modern evolution of "The Game of Life." For those unfamiliar, "The Game of Life" isn't a game in the traditional sense, but a cellular automaton devised by British mathematician John Conway. It consists of a grid of cells that can be "alive" or "dead," evolving through generations based on a few simple rules applied to their neighbors. Despite these simple rules, it can produce incredibly complex and emergent patterns, almost like a simulation of life itself. Similarly, on today's internet, bots, algorithms, AI, and automated systems manage, create, consume, push, evangelize, politicize, and incite, often with unpredictable and far-reaching consequences. The internet is now in everyone's hands, yet it belongs to no one. We no longer possess the tool; the tool (and those who control it) possesses us.

I shared my monitor experience on the Fediverse. Within minutes, dozens of replies poured in with advice and shared experiences. I should have posted before buying, but it's a lesson learned.

The FullHD monitor will go to my office; it'll be efficient and look good on the desk. I'll get another, more suitable one, and chalk this up to experience. Fortunately, there are still ways to interact with real humans. At least for now.

Me and Apple: The Early Days

I've always liked Apple products, and even in light of recent events, I continue to like them. I still have a green iMac G3, 400 MHz, purchased (used) in 2001, which I keep as a decorative item.

My iBook G4, which arrived in December 2003, served me well, later replaced by a "normal" x86 laptop for compatibility reasons with the virtual machine systems I was already using back then.

I've had two iPhones, a 3G and a 4, a MacBook Pro from 2009, which I'm actually using to write this update, and in November 2013, I thought it was time to accompany the "old" Pro with a new machine to use mainly at home: a MacBook Pro Retina 15" Late 2013. i7 processor, 16 GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD. A beautiful machine. I'd also add to the list an iPod Nano (first version), a more recent iPod Nano, and an iPod Touch.

Me and Apple: The Devices and Their Problems

I've owned a lot of electronics, and like everyone, I've had some problems over the years. However, my personal statistics show that Apple products are beautiful but not exempt from both design flaws and reliability issues. I'll recount all the problems I've had with my Apple devices, ending with what perhaps was, at the time of the original writing, my last device from the Cupertino company. I'm still convinced they are nice products, but they cost too much and are not as reliable as they should be. Everyone will have their own experiences; I'm sharing mine.

Note: Sections on devices 1 through 5, and section 7 ("The iPods"), are largely based on my experiences and writings from 2015, translated and with minor updates. Section 6 details a more recent issue.

1. iMac G3

The first Macintosh I owned was an iMac G3, purchased used but in good condition, which I used for a few years. It came with MacOS 9 and supported MacOS X (and simultaneously 9, thanks to Classic Environment). A machine that performed well, apart from some known issues:

• The CD-ROM was very picky, and refused many CDs and DVDs, even original ones. It was a known problem, unfortunately solvable only by using an external USB device.
• The mouse was something unusable. Nicknamed the "hockey puck" mouse, it was round, and it was common to pick it up the wrong way. Being USB, it could be replaced with any mouse, but the whole machine lost part of its charm.
• It overheated. Complemented by the CRT screen and no ventilation fan (a fantastic piece of engineering for its time), there was a problem: as soon as the machine started working intensively, a slight burning smell pervaded the room. I never had shutdowns or particular problems, but its smell was unmistakable.

Overall, an excellent machine, despite showing its limits. Replacing a disk was possible but very unpleasant, RAM was more easily accessible but sometimes, for no apparent reason, it would "lose" one of the two banks and see only one. A known problem at the time, and apparently unsolvable.

2. iBook G4 933MHz

Second purchase, a very important one, a beautiful iBook G4 933MHz. One of the first delivered in Bologna, very expensive, but it was my parents' graduation gift, so they were very happy to give something that would certainly be useful for future work. It was, and very much so. As soon as I got it, I immediately appreciated the design, the PowerPC architecture, the general speed of the system, andrenalinehe quality of MacOS, although I immediately installed Debian on a second partition.

After a few weeks, however, I started to notice a problem: during charging, sometimes, the power adapter's LED would turn off and the computer would continue to run only on battery, until it completely discharged. To get it going again, I had to unplug and replug the power cord. After various tests, I realized that the problem occurred only when the computer was under heavy load, for example, if it was processing video files from the camera (under MacOS) and, both under MacOS and any Linux distribution, during compilation.

Searches on all sorts of forums, until I discovered that many, like me, had noticed the same problem. The supplied power adapter was 45W, while the computer, at full load, required significantly more. This sent it into overload and overheating, activating the protection to prevent it from breaking. In short, Apple supplied a power adapter that was clearly undersized for the iBook's consumption at full load.

So I went to the service center (which was also the same store where I had bought the laptop) and the answer was almost more absurd than the problem itself:

"We know, it's undersized, and the problem exists. Apple does not provide for a replacement of the power adapter with a more powerful one, as for them it is sufficient for the average user. Besides, we're talking about an iBook, not a Powerbook, so if you need intensive use, you should change computers. Or spend 100 euros and buy the more powerful power adapter."

Speechless, I said goodbye, showing my disapproval, and left. I was "just" a recent Computer Science graduate, young, not a big industrialist, so I wasn't treated with the respect any customer deserved, but rather like a "kid-who-wants-to-scrounge-something". Needless to say, I never set foot in that store again.

I used my iBook daily until March 2008, when it was replaced by an Acer laptop (a shopping center offer), alongside an ever-present desktop computer, as I needed Linux and the BSDs more than MacOS, and the iBook had its little problems with it. I didn't sell it, for both sentimental and practical reasons.

However, I didn't lose heart, and I still believed that Apple was a valid company. So I postponed the purchase of the next Apple device, but didn't rule it out.

3. iPhone 4 (after a brief stint with 3G)

After thoroughly criticizing it, I had the opportunity to experience the iPhone. In an era when Android was still nascent, the iPhone 3G seemed far ahead. As soon as my mobile operator made it available, and after a few months with an iPhone 3G (also slowed down by the device's age relative to current OS versions), I rushed to get a beautiful new iPhone 4.

I still remember the moment I opened the box, on the top floor of my old house. It was August 2010, and I couldn't wait to connect it to my MacBook Pro (which I'll talk about in the next point) to activate it. Excellent materials, excellent feelings of quality, too bad it actually lost signal if held in a certain way, but I never considered it a major problem.

Same for multitasking: iOS doesn't manage true multitasking, or at least not at the individual application level. The situation, over the years, has improved anyway.

After about a year and a half of honorable service, I noticed that the central button ("Home") started to not work well anymore. You had to press it very hard for it to work, and it didn't always register the command given. I decided to take it for service, also because the problem was quite widespread and entire conversations about it could be found online.

Here's my conversation with the employee at the Apple Store in Bologna:

ME: Hi, I have this iPhone 4, here's the receipt, bought through the mobile operator. The central button doesn't work, you can try it yourself. What can be done?

AS: Hello. Known problem, but our policy does not provide for button replacement. We'll give you a new phone (refurbished, Ed.) instead of yours. Shall we proceed?

ME: Sure! Here's the receipt.

AS: Oh, but we don't need that. From the serial number, we know your phone is 20 months old. For us, it's out of warranty. For the replacement, it's 200 Euros. Shall I proceed?

ME: Wait... doesn't Italian law provide for a two-year warranty on products sold?

AS: Apple provides only one year. If you don't like it, go to the consumer association. Or go to your mobile operator and they will handle it, at your expense. For us, your phone is out of warranty, and it's 200 Euros for the replacement. Shall I proceed?

I didn't let him proceed, and I went to my operator. Who, without making a fuss, took the iPhone and after two weeks returned a new (refurbished, Ed.) phone to me without batting an eye. I sold it immediately, as I had already returned to Android with an LG Optimus Black (excellent device, but I never talked about it here), for a good sum. I later found out that the phone ended up in water, dying about a year later.

If I had bought the iPhone at the Apple Store, I would have had to pay for the replacement or start a legal battle. This story that they provide only one year of warranty doesn't seem to denote much confidence in their own products, and it's not the only time it has caused me problems (next point).

4. MacBook PRO 15" Mid 2009

After moving to the (then) new house and discovering that I wouldn't have a decent ADSL connection in the short term, given the space constraints, I decided to give up the desktop computer. During that period, I had also started traveling a lot for work, and I had already begun to get involved in some interesting international projects. The choice was simple: "a single laptop, but good and stable, that doesn't require constant security updates and lasts over time". After a brief investigation, the choice fell on the just-released MacBook Pro 15" Mid 2009. Impossible to find, after visiting all the official Apple dealers in three provinces, they still had one in a shopping center in Bologna. I went to pick it up immediately, on a very hot August day, arrived home, and unboxed it. I'm writing this article on it right now, although the original disk has been replaced by an SSD and then by a hybrid, the RAM was upgraded to 8 GB in 2012, otherwise it's intact, despite having survived a couple of (recent) fairly significant falls.

So it seems this MacBook PRO is perfect... but it's not!

After about 14 months, I noticed that the touchpad button started to become unreliable. Like the iPhone 4 from the previous point. To make it click, you had to press very hard, and it didn't always work. As a temporary remedy, I set tap as click, but given the machine's young age, I decided to take it to Apple service.

Same old story, the same as the iPhone 4:

"We see the problem and confirm that others have come in with it. Unfortunately, you don't have 'Apple Care', so for us, the product is no longer under warranty. If you want, you can leave it, we'll give you a quote, and then you can decide whether to repair it."

I decided to take it away, for the simple reason that having chosen to have ONE valid computer (and other little things, but not enough to manage my usual work virtual machines), I couldn't accept downtime of more than 48 hours.

In short, once again a situation where it seems Apple made a design mistake and the user has to bear the cost. Many companies do it, but I didn't expect it from Apple.

Since then, I haven't had any other particular problems, so overall I've been very satisfied. The battery, after 6 and a half years (at the time of original writing, 2015), still lasts almost two hours, keeping the promises Apple made back then.

Currently (2015), it has two operating systems: Arch Linux as the main OS, which I use every day, and MacOS on an external drive, which I insert as needed.

5. MacBook Pro Retina 15" Late 2013

In light of the experience with the old MacBook Pro and its age (I can't stop part of my work just because a computer stops, so I always need one more powerful and one sufficiently powerful to cover, even slowly, all needs), in November 2013 I decided to buy a new MacBook Pro Retina 15". A wonderful computer, with an endless battery, very fast, with a screen capable of not tiring the eyes even after many hours of work. Silent, with the excellent PowerNap function that allows me to always have recent backups on a Banana Pro via Time Machine.

Everything went extraordinarily well from 26 November 2013 - date of purchase - to 16 November 16 2015. While I was working on a remote server via ssh, the (local) terminal started spitting out a series of disturbing errors. It no longer recognized any commands and gave I/O errors. I immediately understood that something was wrong and started doing some tests. Needless to say, my bad feelings were confirmed by reality: the 512 GB SSD was gone.

I was incredulous. The computer was used very little, had 23 battery charge cycles, and had left the house twice, for as many moves. For the rest, I always carry the old MBP, as its value is now low and a possible theft and/or failure wouldn't be so terrible.

I took it for service, knowing that, even in this case, the valid warranty was one year. The aggravating factor, then, was having bought it with a VAT number, so the warranty becomes one year anyway. Fortunately, however, I had subscribed to one of those supplementary insurances that they offer for a few tens of Euros.

After a few days, the phone call arrived. The damage is the SSD, and since there is no third-party part available, it has to be replaced with an original Apple one. The cost? 1,200 Euros. The insurance, however, has a maximum limit of 800. So I'll have to pay the difference.

I was speechless. Again. 1,200 Euros of damage on a machine paid almost 2,800 Euros less than two years ago? I've never had failures on SSDs costing a few tens of Euros, stressed and battered in every way, and the super-mega-awesome Apple SSD dies after less than two years??

I was (and still am, regarding that specific incident) uncertain about what to do back then. Take it back and use it with an external USB 3 drive or pay the difference and have it repaired? Meanwhile, discussions were read online from people who had purchased the same machine around the same time and were having the same problem. Who knows if Apple would decide that the caseload was sufficiently large and that those who had spent all that money shouldn't have to spend further for damage that, undoubtedly, indicated a not insignificant problem.

6. The 2021 MacBook Pro 16-inch: A New Chapter of Frustration

Fast forward to early 2024. You'd think after all these years, things might have improved. And for some products, they have. But then, my wife's pre-Silicon MacBook Pro 16-inch, purchased new in 2021, decided to join the hall of fame of Apple disappointments. From one day to the next, its battery completely died. No warning, just... gone. This wasn't a machine abused or heavily used in terms of battery cycles; it had just over 100 charge cycles on it. Barely broken in, you might say.

The diagnosis? A dead battery. The Apple response? "It's out of warranty". Just over two years old, a premium laptop with a premium price tag, and we're looking at a costly battery replacement. This incident is what truly spurred me to translate and update this old post. It felt like a painful echo of past frustrations, reminding me that for all the gloss and performance, the specter of unexpected hardware failure and rigid warranty policies still looms large over the Apple ownership experience.

7. The iPods

I won't write much about the three iPods I've had, as the experience was pretty much in line with everything else. The first iPod Nano (first model) I put in a drawer because of its poor audio quality. I didn't like it; it was metallic and had low volume. I eventually sold it, as (like all Apple products) the brand's desirability contributed to a good sale.

The second iPod Nano I had, a very welcome gift, was instead the only iPod that fully satisfied me. Good audio, fast, sufficiently streamlined music loading (via iTunes, of course), excellent battery life, it spent years in my car's armrest and as a travel companion. It still works, but now I mainly use Spotify for music, so it's less stressed.

The last iPod I had was a Touch 3g. Unfortunately, I didn't get to use it much; it was a mistaken purchase. When I decided to sell it, there was a problem: due to the violent earthquake that hit Emilia Romagna and which I experienced fully, as my house was a few kilometers from the epicenter, the iPod got irreparably scratched. It was on the table and the tremor made it fall to the ground, ruining part of the front glass and completely scratching the beautiful silver back. It works, but in its condition, it's hardly desirable. So I didn't have any real problems, apart from being disappointed by the fragility of the back.

Final Thoughts (2025)

So, after all these experiences, what do I think of Apple products? They are beautiful and generally well-engineered, but they are not of such superior quality compared to the rest. Or, at least, the price difference is not proportional to the difference in the general quality of the products. This isn't to say all Apple products are flawed. As I mentioned, my current M1 Pro MacBook Pro, iPad Pro, and the iPhone 13 Pro Max (now used by my wife) have been excellent, living up to the Apple promise.

However, the litany of issues I've personally encountered over two decades – from undersized power adapters and faulty buttons to prematurely dying SSDs and now, a suddenly deceased battery in a relatively new, lightly used premium laptop – paints a picture of inconsistency. It's this inconsistency that's particularly galling for a brand that positions itself (and prices its products) at the premium end of the market. One expects a higher baseline of reliability and longevity, and perhaps a more understanding approach when expensive hardware fails unexpectedly just outside a often too-short warranty period.

As of now, I remain cautious. While I appreciate the Apple devices that work well, the repeated stings of significant hardware failures make me hesitant. I've learned that one should never say never, especially in the fast-paced, impatient world of consumer electronics, but my enthusiasm for automatically choosing Apple has certainly been tempered by these experiences. For a premium brand, I simply expect more consistent, long-term reliability.

News from the past months: "Libero and Alice's emails are not working. They have not been working for days and will resume as soon as possible." Everyone is outraged - I understand - but in fact, seeing the level of advertising, spam, and the like, I would say it was clear that the two services were no longer being managed "impeccably".

News appeared in the same period, Microsoft had problems, so Outlook, Teams, etc. had serious disservices for hours.

Even Facebook, Whatsapp, and Instagram had serious problems in the past. And these are all services that lose millions of euros for each minute of downtime.

Yet today, in the interconnected world, a disruption in connectivity or service is seen as a tragedy.

I've been managing servers for so long that a child born when I put my first services online could have graduated and had children of their own. My first server was archived by the Wayback Machine in 2002, but it's at least a year older. Some colleagues I work with daily were born after my first server.

Yet today, like never before, a stop of a service (even outside of business hours, even if planned, even if the service is not needed at that moment) has become unacceptable.

Every morning a system administrator wakes up and knows that they have to race against time to patch, check, and reboot services before a vulnerability can hit their system. Every morning a user wakes up and will have to use the service just in the few seconds in which the system administrator is rebooting it. Even if the system administrator had warned that they would reboot the service at that time, causing a "few minutes" of interruption. Even if the system administrator got up at 4 in the morning to do it. Even if the user, at 4 in the morning on Sunday, usually sleeps.

The Network is made of interconnected components and only parts of it are controllable. It can happen that something jumps: a service provider, a backbone, an external dns. We have to learn to accept that something, sometimes, may not be fully efficient.

When you have a physical store, there can be a power outage, water, gas, a flood, road work... why can't what's online be idle for a minute every 6 months, if announced? Or an hour every year, if there is an unforeseen problem?

The promises of the "cloud" have led everyone to believe that 24/7 always and anyway exists. But no, it actually doesn't exist and the more complex the infrastructure, the more parts can break. And the promises of "always online" are often drowned in terms and conditions with very limited liability in case of breach.

Better five minutes offline today than an attack tomorrow, with the relative risk of leakage of personal data.

The operating systems are different, the question is the same, and the outcome is identical. To better understand why these operating systems haven't dominated the desktop market, it's helpful to examine the evolution of the tech industry over the past few decades. While the desktop market has always been dominated by giants like Microsoft and Apple, Linux and FreeBSD have found their success in other devices and platforms.

Anyone with an Android phone effectively has Linux in their hands. Android is based on the Linux kernel, and thanks to its immense popularity, has brought Linux into the pockets of billions of people worldwide. Likewise, anyone with an Apple device, such as an iPhone or a Mac, has a BSD "heart" inside, since macOS and iOS are based on the XNU kernel, which in turn is derived from BSD. Sony's Playstation also has a FreeBSD base, and even Windows itself, with the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL), has (partially, in a way) embraced the Linux-related world, enabling easy use on all PCs.

The market pushes what is demanded, and there has never been a real demand from any "big player" for "pure" Linux/FreeBSD/etc. on desktops. The desktop market, like the mobile one, is dominated by a few big players (such as Microsoft and Apple), and the average user is not knowledgeable enough (and, in the future, will be even less so) to fully understand the advantage of using a free, expandable, non-obsolete system without planned obsolescence.

Furthermore, the adoption of Linux/FreeBSD on desktops is hindered by the lack of support from hardware and software manufacturers. Many popular applications and games are developed exclusively for Windows and macOS, making it harder for users to switch to Linux or FreeBSD. However, in recent years, the situation has improved thanks to the introduction of portable tools, which allow running Windows games on Linux, and the increasing support for open-source applications.

Even if the desktop market may never be dominated by Linux or FreeBSD, their presence in other sectors provides users with the freedom and flexibility that these operating systems promise.

In conclusion, the year of Linux/FreeBSD on desktops may never come, but their widespread presence and impact on the technological landscape are undeniable. These operating systems will continue to play a crucial role in the evolution of technology, providing innovative and flexible solutions that adapt to the ever-changing needs of users and businesses.

IPv6 (Internet Protocol version 6) is the latest version of the communication protocol that manages Internet traffic. Its main difference from the previous version, IPv4, is the use of a 128-bit IP address, compared to the 32-bit IP address used by IPv4. This means that IPv6 can support a much larger number of IP addresses than IPv4, which proved inadequate to meet the growing demand for Internet connectivity. However, the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 has been slow and gradual due to compatibility with the old protocol and the need to update existing network infrastructure.

For over 20 years, the adoption of IPv6 has been a hot topic in the world of networks. Despite a steady growth, we are still far from full support for this new generation of IP addresses. IPv6 promises greater efficiency and scalability, but its adoption is hampered by a series of challenges and resistances.

One of the main difficulties in adopting IPv6 is the change, at least in part, of the network concept. This requires a deeper understanding of how it works, but once the mechanism is understood, it is more logical and practical than IPv4.

In addition, IPv6 challenges the beliefs of many "technicians" who for years have considered NAT as protection for the local network (it is not). LAN security is not guaranteed by simply "being behind NAT." Many "technicians" disable IPv6 as their first operation because they believe it can only cause problems, while in reality, what is lacking is proper knowledge of IPv6 management.

Meanwhile, IPv4 addresses have run out, and the few available on the market are sold at high prices. Providers like Hetzner and OVH have also increased their prices for IP addresses, affecting management dynamics. IPv6, on the other hand, is more efficient and suitable for the modern interconnected world, offering a virtually unlimited number of addresses.

However, IPv6 introduces new issues, such as the direct reachability of all devices through direct routing (without NAT), making the firewall even more critical in managing network security. It is necessary to better understand the dynamics of networks and subnets, and given the number of digits in IPv6 addresses, it is almost impossible to remember them by heart.

Today, all my devices are connected via IPv6. When I do not have direct support (such as in mobile connections), I use a Hurricane Electric tunnel or, if impossible (due to the lack of a public IPv4), a WireGuard connection to an external VPS capable of performing Nat66. I have created a ULA to still allow direct connection to public IPv6 addresses.

Unfortunately, many operators still do not fully understand the functioning of IPv6 and the number of addresses available. By assigning "only" a /64, they limit the possibilities of use, while a /48 or a /56 would allow the creation of numerous /64s, facilitating the use of SLAAC for connected devices. Operators likely fear repeating the mistakes made with IPv4 when large amounts of addresses were assigned, leading to the current scarcity. Fortunately, IPv6 has such a vast number of addresses that we should not worry about similar problems, even in the case of massive waste.

To accelerate the adoption of IPv6 and take advantage of its benefits, we must push for it to be implemented extensively and as quickly as possible. It is crucial to learn how to use it correctly and abandon the old (often wrong) criteria related to the technical limitations of IPv4. In this way, network quality will improve, optimization will be more effective, and everyone will benefit.

It is essential to overcome the resistances and fears associated with IPv6, adequately train technicians, and continually update ourselves on new developments. Only in this way can we ensure a more efficient, secure, and sustainable future for our networks and connected devices.

The Server is Full, Add more Space!

Even if there are tens of gigabytes of useless logs. Even if there are tens of gigabytes of useless stuff, left on the server just due to inertia.

Recent innovations in the field of hardware resources have generated devices with increasingly high performance, higher memory capacity, and reduced energy consumption. This trend has enabled the development of applications and services that were unthinkable until recently. However, a dark side of this progress concerns the decline of software optimization.

Optimization is no longer a priority

Technological progress has led to a context where powerful and accessible hardware has become the norm. As a result, developers no longer feel the urgency to optimize their software. In the past, when resources were limited, optimization was a necessity to ensure the proper functioning of applications and to avoid wasting resources. Today, developers tend to focus on other priorities, such as implementing new features or improving the user experience. Optimization doesn't matter anymore. The solution, for them, is always to resort to more powerful hardware.

The decline of software optimization has several negative consequences:

• Energy consumption: Unoptimized applications consume more energy than optimized ones, contributing to a greater environmental impact. The growing concern for climate change makes this issue particularly relevant.

• Resource waste: When developers neglect optimization, applications use hardware resources inefficiently, wasting disk space, memory, and computing power. This waste translates into higher costs for users, who may be forced to upgrade their hardware more often than necessary.

• Reduced performance: Unoptimized applications can cause slowness, lag, and crashes, compromising the user experience and productivity. Moreover, less recent hardware may not be able to properly run these programs, limiting access to a portion of users.

• Security and stability: Unoptimized software may have security vulnerabilities or bugs, exposing users to potential risks. In addition, unstable applications can cause data loss or compromise system integrity.

• Maintenance and updates: The lack of optimization makes it more difficult and expensive to maintain and update software, as developers must deal with more complex and disorganized code. This can lead to delays in releasing patches and new features.

To reverse this trend and ensure a more sustainable and efficient future for the software industry, it is crucial that developers recognize the importance of optimization. Below are some steps that can be taken to promote positive change:

• Training and education: Teach programmers the importance of optimization and provide them with tools and techniques to implement it from the beginning of the development process. It often becomes difficult, especially for us "adult" system administrators, to explain to those who are not used to the physical limits of hardware but believe that the cloud has "infinite resources, just pay more." However, we must do it, otherwise, we will be the ones to answer when the server is slow or, worse, full.

• Standardization and best practices: Promote the adoption of standards and best practices that guide developers towards a more efficient approach to software creation.

• Benchmarking and metrics: Use tools and metrics to evaluate software efficiency and compare it with competing solutions, thus encouraging continuous performance improvement.

• Incentives and recognition: Create awards or incentives for companies and developers who commit to producing optimized software, publicly recognizing their efforts.

The abundance of low-cost hardware resources (at least in appearance) has led to a decline in software optimization, as developers no longer consider it a priority. However, it is possible to reverse this trend through training, the adoption of best practices, and the promotion of a more sustainable and efficient approach to software development. Only in this way can we fully exploit the potential offered by technological innovation while ensuring a positive impact on the environment and the user experience.

Experience teaches, experience shapes. If you're young, you're probably thinking "ok, boomer" and ready to close this article and move on. If you're less young, on the other hand, you might think it's the usual "revolutionary" article, against the system and against big corporations.

It's not.

About 20 years ago, all users of alternative operating systems (i.e. not Windows) were seen as aliens because "the whole world uses Windows." We dreamed of the "year of the Linux (or FreeBSD) desktop revolution," a topic that is still joked about today. In fact, these operating systems have really arrived everywhere (in the form of Android, Smart Home, Playstation, partly MacOS, etc.), obviously in a different way than we would have dreamed of.

Even then, I would get angry and answer "why should I use Windows? Just because everyone else does?" The answer, usually, was this: "In the real world and in the workplace, everyone uses Windows."

While they may have had a point in some sense, it didn't seem like a valid reason to force me to use an unsuitable or at least less effective operating system for my work.

Time has proved me right. The internet has seen Unix or Unix-like-based servers prevail, data centers have become mainly based on Linux (thanks, Amazon, for pushing this trend even further!), the concept of "cloud" has been born and everything that comes with it. Routers and firewalls have started to be based on Linux or *BSD systems and development has gone beyond just keeping a packet filter running to the additional features that we have available today.

The big players have entered the game, Microsoft itself has started to love Linux, FreeBSD and, with WSL, has definitively shown that "the other" cannot be ignored.

Today, saying that you're a Linux system administrator generates admiration and respect, while less than twenty years ago, I would be told "Linux is a toy used in universities, the world uses Windows." Being an expert in *BSD systems administration, on the other hand, still generates strange thoughts in the interlocutor.

Experience has taught me that there is no (and should not be!) only one way to do things. In the world of Open Source, the plurality of solutions facilitates a diversified development that could, over time, hold surprises.

A few days ago, I published an article on how I migrated from a Proxmox server to FreeBSD without any particular problems and improving system efficiency. The article had an unexpected success, receiving a huge number of visits in just a few days, and the comments were enthusiastic. Some critical comments, of course, came in. I love critical comments because sometimes it is essential to see things from another point of view. When I am truly convinced, I still stick to my idea, but if the critical comment were to arouse doubt, I would have the inspiration to investigate further. To do research. To experiment, which is the foundation of our profession.

That's why I have never sympathized with those who, with arrogance (and arrogance often synonymous with ignorance), close off any solution that is not their favorite.

We should have learned by now that the technological world is a virtually infinite world, made up of tools (i.e. bricks) with which to build a solution to our problem. Seeing adult or elderly people entrenched in rigid positions is sad, and even sadder is seeing young people (perhaps also competent) who close the door to anything that is not the "hype" solution of the moment, perhaps driven by the marketing of those who have invested a lot of money in those solutions. Saying "it's 2023 and everyone uses Kubernetes on the cloud, on managed clusters," for example, means ignoring that not all tools are suitable for solving all problems. I don't use an industrial scale to weigh myself because it would be too big, too expensive, or otherwise unsuitable for the purpose. Therefore, not everyone should use industrial scales to weigh themselves. Studying the problem should always be the first step towards finding the most suitable tools to solve it. Fortunately, there is no "one size fits all" in computer science. Just as not always the most "modern and trendy" tool is the most suitable and long-lasting over the long term.

The fateful day has arrived: today I turn 28 years old and celebrate the 20th year of owning a personal computer. Precisely on December 19th, 1987, I received a wonderful Commodore 64 as a gift, equipped with a recorder (not the famous Datassette, but a compatible one that often worked better than the original), two non-microswitch joysticks, and the famous "first cassette". What was it? It was a strictly duplicated audio cassette that one of the two Commodore stores in the city gave to those who went to buy a C64. It contained old games (the first one on side A: Pole Position) that were very popular at that time, and we all saw that first cassette as a symbol of owning a computer.

I did everything with it and tried to avoid letting it steal my childhood. However, my interest was so great that I collected countless cassettes, a beautiful floppy drive 1541-II (which, even today, I believe was a jewel of aesthetics), and so many games that would envy collectors. My favorite? Probably the legendary Zak McKracken which, almost twenty years later, I still haven't finished. Zzap was a must-read, and I fantasized seeing "The Games Machine" or TGM on newsstands, dedicated to expensive and unattainable 16-bit computers. The hidden dream? A Commodore Amiga, just like my cousin's.

After years of C64, my parents promised to give me an Amiga 500 if I did well in middle school (it was 1991). The promotion came, and with it, the Amiga. It was an Amiga 500 1.3, nothing special, but it was beautiful because... it was mine! :-) Unfortunately, I sold the C64 and bought a dot-matrix printer. It's still in use at a relative's house. Over time, I took many expansions: almost immediately, 512KB of additional RAM because I wanted to play "The Secret of Monkey Island," probably the most beautiful graphic adventure of all time. Then an external module with 4MB that allowed me to create many RAM disks and put my floppies on them, to avoid the wild swapping that was so popular at that time. I also took an external floppy and an "Action Replay" cartridge, but I never used it enough. Years passed, and I had the opportunity to try an IBM PS/1 at a friend's house. Although I wasn't impressed, I immediately understood that the future would be on a PC. The Amiga was mostly a gaming machine (in my perspective at that time), and I was growing up. I also remembered that my uncle had a beautiful 386 PC in the office, and it looked really professional. In short, I wanted a "professional" computer too.

It was in September 1993 that my first PC arrived: an Olidata 486 DLC at 33 Mhz. I think it had 4MB of RAM and 120MB of disk, but I wouldn't swear to it, it's been a long time... The processor was a Cyrix and was famous for having a bug for which you had to disable the cache to run some programs in protected mode, penalizing performance. Obviously, it was one of the few 486s without a math coprocessor (which I emulated, with terrible results, via software).

A year later, my first laptop arrived: a Compaq Contura Aero 4/25, a really small and lightweight sub-notebook. It was fantastic, I loved it: its gray-tone LCD screen was almost illegible with so much light, its trackball was inconvenient, and it tended to break the screen hinge, but... it was my laptop! It was a 486SX/25, had 4MB of RAM and 85MB of hard disk. The novelty was that it didn't have an internal floppy but an external one that could be connected via PCMCIA. I wonder if it still works today, maybe on my modern laptop! It was around that time that I became interested in networks. It was the era of FidoNet, and I connected once a day (sometimes twice) to download mail and messages. The calls, strictly long-distance due to the absence of BBS in my city, were always quick, so I didn't have a big impact on my bills. I became a national moderator of VREALITY.ITA and a co-sysop of a local BBS. I was only 15 years old, and none of my friends understood exactly what I was doing and avoided asking for information not to be faced with an incomprehensible monologue, but... I liked it, and that was enough for me.

I openly (almost) attacked Usenet because, in my opinion, it would have induced many incompetent people to participate and, in return, greatly worsened the quality of the conversations. I thought that the Internet was too "dispersive," suitable for general use but not very technical. In part, I was right, the dispersiveness is there, but we have still found a way to have our space and avoid too strong "overflows." However, the fact remains that today, the Internet is accessible to everyone, and the mother of idiots is always pregnant. The conclusions are obvious...

I won't go into the description of all the hardware that has passed through my hands in the following years; it would be impossible and too boring. Perhaps the noteworthy moment was an unspecified day in September 1996, the day I saw an advertisement somewhere that for 10,000 lire, they would send you a box set with six CDs directly to your home, including a "free" and "open-source" operating system. I ordered it, curious. A package arrived containing an archaic Red Hat and a Debian. I did some testing, but I decided it wasn't for me. I still had a way to go (and my Internet connection was still too slow).

I decided to try GNU/Linux again in 1998, before enrolling in university. I put Debian inside, and this time, I was really hooked... the rest is recent history, and I don't feel like telling it. It should be quite clear from what you read on these pages.

I've seen things change, I do things that I couldn't even imagine five years ago, and unfortunately, I don't do some things that would have seemed obvious a few years ago. Anyway... happy birthday to me! :-)