Slashdot Mirror


Rasterman Says Desktop Linux is Dead

anguished writes "The future of Linux, its best hopes for blowing past everything else on an x86 machine, once was located in a little Austrailai website, with a window manager called Enlightenment, which we all hoped to be good enough to build and configure. In an interview with Linux and Main, the recently silent Rasterman talks about GNOME, KDE, E, and his view that the future of Linux requires new playing fields."

6 of 675 comments (clear)

  1. Linux for Grandma and Uncle Jim-Bob by dowobeha · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I posted this in another thread, but it got buried, so here goes...

    For you and me, KDE and GNOME, along with any of the good standard distros makes GNU/Linux a great, pretty-easy-to-use choice.

    But that's not good enough.

    What I'd like to put together is Linux for Technophobes. The machine that Joe Schmoe, who has never used a computer, can walk in to Wal-mart, take home his new box, and be able to use it for email, web browsing, and word processing with zero assistance from anyone else.

    He should open the box and find a simple (a la iMac) one-page sheet that shows him how to connect the mouse and keyboard.

    A simple wizard sets up the net connection with him.

    I'm picturing a very simple interface for the Basic mode. One big button that says Email and has a picture of a mailbox. Another for the web browser. Maybe a couple more apps, but not many.

    And, if you click on the Advanced mode button in the corner, you get switched to KDE or GNOME.

    Let me know what you think, and maybe we can put something like this together.

    --
    I am concerned about any program, any piece of hardware, any treaty, any law that treats me as a consumer, not a citizen
  2. The Seeds are Still Being Planted! by omnirealm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At the start of each new school year, Microsoft hits our campus hard. They hang big banners, set up booths in the student center, and get the managers to make the on-campus computer store employees wear Microsoft t-shirts.

    The BYU Unix Users Group gives its own response. This year, we're going to have a booth in the student center too. We're inviting students to bring their machines, and a group of volunteers will install Linux on their machines on the spot, for free.

    We're making up flyers that read, ``Thrusday and Friday only! Get a FREE COPY of OpenOffice Suite version 1.0 (must have student ID or employee ID). Save HUNDREDS of dollars on your computer software this year!''

    We're not just going to be pushing Linux, but Free Software in general. For those who are queasy about jumping full-force into Linux, we will offer to install Mozilla and OpenOffice on their Windows partitions, so they have some familiar ground to refer to when they boot into Linux.

    The biggest debate in the group at the moment is which distributions to recommend to the newbies who bring their computers to the booth. I argue that since we're installing it for them, those who live on-campus and are on the university's network should use Debian because of the ease of maintenance. Others claim that Mandrake/RedHat/SuSE are more user friendly in general, and so they should be advocated instead.

    In any case, we're doing what we can to let starving students know that they don't have to shell out hundreds of dollars to feed an addiction to proprietary software, when perfectly usable and functional Open Source alternatives exist for them. KDE+Mozilla+OpenOffice+Evolution is a powerful combination that makes Linux very much a viable desktop operating system.

    Plus, anyone who switches over has the best support team around: the campus Unix Users Group! A perusal of our mailing list shows that we don't sleep at night until your problem is solved. :-)

    --
    An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
  3. Why switch? by be-fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the main issue that's preventing most people from switching is that it isn't worth it. Linux, on the desktop, is not that much better than Windows XP on the desktop. Its not noticibly more stable, its not noticibly faster, but there are noticible downsides (application support and ease-of-use) to using it. I've been running Linux on a desktop machine for years now, and have recently settled in pretty well with KDE 3.0 and Gentoo. I use it not because it really gains me any technical merit I don't get in Windows XP, but because I hate Microsoft, the windows-style command line interface, and that blasted tooltip that keeps popping up in the corner of my screen in XP. Still, whenever I boot back into XP (to run Photoshop or the occasional game) I have to admit that Linux really isn't technically superior anymore, at least not in ways that a desktop user would notice. XP is reasonably fast, reasonably stable, and reasonably easy to use. For those less rabid then me, then, its an easy choice. They can endure the pain of switching to Linux, for a dubious set of benifets, or they can stay with Windows. This has been the situation forever. Why did MacOS never manage to take back its market share from Windows? Its been superior (from an average desktop user's point of view) for a very long time. Simply because people didn't percieve enough benifet from doing it. Windows was *good enough* compared to what MacOS was at the time. Now, if the timing had been different, had a Linux 2.4/KDE 3.0-style desktop been available around the introduction of Windows 95, would Linux have taken off? Hell ya. People would have seen a significant benifet in moving to Linux. Thus, if Linux ever wants to beat Microsoft on the desktop, it can't settle for being a "better Windows." It has to be *more*. Not just different, but a generation ahead technically. Now, this is what Microsoft does best. When they're not designing stuff like Palladium, MS engineers come up with genuinely cool stuff. A lot of it may be ripped of from other sources, and the first implementations may be less than perfect, but overall, they keep advancing the desktop. If Linux wants to be the next Windows, it has to beat Microsoft at its own game. It has to think up the next generation of user inteface and implement it before Microsoft can.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  4. absolutely it is alive and well by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Linux is doing fine thank you.

    Oh sure, it is a bit slow selling on desktops but that will change as more and more consumers find out that Microsoft can more than double the cost of every PC you need.

    The Microsoft office suite is $400 or so a seat. And, they are getting nasty about blocking the install on home, laptop and second or third systems by the same person. For $76, StarOffice suggests 5 personal installs. And, if $76 is too stiff, use OpenOffice.

    Once the white box boys figure out that they can deliver all PCs with a free copy of OpenOffice and simply charge $15 or so to have it preinstalled, the casual market for the Microsoft Suite could dry up completely. And, the same may be true with large organizations such as corporations, governments, etc. Why spend $300-600 more per PC when you can go with linux, OpenOffice or StarOffice and double the number of new machines you buy?

    Money is money.

    And, right now money favors linux hands down.

    Plus, that does not take into account the progress that Xandros, Lindows and others are making to expand the number of viable desktop systems under the linux banner.

    The absence of QuickBooks, TurboTax and a few other key applications is a problem right now. GNUCash is fine. And, other software does substitute for much of what people think they need Microsoft for. But, it takes time for that information to filter out. But, it will filter out. Those who sell PCs (not the big OEMs) will be taking the lead packaging complete systems including software for a whole lot less than the Microsoft burden. Then customers can decide if the extra money is really worth it. It is not if you can make the choice.

    And, if you write custom applications anyway, Java or Delphi/Kylix is right there to give you the same powerful GUI based RAD development systems you expect on Microsoft stuff.

    The more machines you need the bigger the price benefit helps linux.

    And, if you think that consumer PC buyers really want to pay twice the price for a system just because it has some Microsoft software on it that they rarely use, you are crasy. The typical consumer simply is unaware of what they can buy and use. That will change.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  5. Desktop is dead! by Stiletto · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I couldn't agree more with the parent poster. It's not "Linux on the Desktop" that's dead, but the DESKTOP itself that's dead (or dying).

    Normal people don't want to use computers, in general. They want to do tasks that they consider worthwhile. They want to communicate with others asynchronously. CURRENTLY, this is done through email, and CURRENTLY it requires a computer. Who says email NEEDS to require a computer? What if your email could be read to you automatically when you walked into your apartment? Most people would see this as a usability improvement over:

    1. Sit down
    2. Turn computer on
    3. Wait
    4. Double-click
    5. Wait while phone dials
    6. Click
    7. Click
    8. Scroll
    9. Click
    10. Click
    11. Stand up

    People don't want to use computers. They want to get things done. They want to create letters and presentations. Currently this requires a computer , a printer, and a lot of typing. Does it have to be this way? No! A lot of research has gone into voice recognition and computer vision. In the future we'll just describe a document or presentation in basic terms, using a natural interface like voice or gestures, and a device will spit out what was requested.

    I predict computing's next "killer app" will be something that allows people to get rid of their computers.

  6. It's the usability, stupid! by DrXym · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I really don't understand why Linux is dominated by the head-up-the-ass attitude that users are lusers. A good, well designed desktop helps everyone. OS X is very easy to use whether you're a newbie or an expert. Apple took the time to create a simple UI, one which is intuitive, where the settings are in one place and where there aren't a zillion advanced settings cluttering up things.

    As a power user on OS X I don't feel constricted by this. I still run X and various Unix tools thanks to fink and I find the UI to be straightforward and easy to use. In other words, the simplicity helps me get on with stuff rather than wasting hours reading through FAQs or HOWTOs just trying to figure how to share a folder or whatnot.

    The same cannot be said for a Linux desktop. I'm constantly wasting my time trying to find some stupid option in the zillion control panels KDE/GNOME puts up for me, or swearing at the stupid help system that doesn't integrate distro help with KDE/GNOME help with manpage help etc., or scratching my head trying to figure out to get my scanner to be recognized, or grinding my teeth because the distro fills its multiple menus of apps with cryptic apps with names starting with g or k.

    It doesn't have to be that way. Unless Linux becomes usable for everyone, not just experts it will never get on the deskop. Besides, the more users there are, the more jobs there are for admins and developers to meet demand. I would have thought it's in everyone's interest to see it succeed.