Linux on the Desktop: More Balls Through Windows

doom writes "There's a story up in the free area of The Economist site about 'Linux on Desktop PCs' called: More balls through Windows. Pretty much the same old stuff, but if you wanted something new you wouldn't be reading slashdot, eh?" Cynic.

Comments

The Year of the Linux Desktop

[jrj102]

Oooh! Oooh! It's the year that Linux is finally going to take over the desktop... again. Just like 1997 was. And 1998. Oh, and 1999. 2000? 2001? 2002? 2003? Sensing a trend?

As Bill Gates himself says, we often over-estimate the impact of a given technology will have in 5 years time, but we tend to UNDER-estimate its impact over 10 years. I think that the Linux on the desktop is similar: it will gain marketshare, but MUCH more slowly than people on /. (or even Linux-friendly journalists) assume.

Let's stop measuring progress in years, and start measuring it in decades-- only then will we see the impact that Free software is having. Revolutions take time.

Oh... and balls through windows? Could you have come up with a weaker punn? :)

--- JRJ

Re:The Year of the Linux Desktop

[ideatrack]

I think that one of the greatest aids to the take up of Linux on the desktop is the take up by companies.

We're read about several large organisations taking it up recently, and many small companies are turning to it as a cost-saving measure. As it's more prevailent in working life it naturally follows that users will use it at home.

If you use Linux at work, then it's simpler for you to switch at home. There's no need to learn two systems if you don't need to.

I'm aware that this sounds glib, but in my experience a lot of non-techy end users have enough difficulty getting used to Windows. As such if they want a home PC for e-mail and typing etc then they'll stick with what they know.

Another journo that can't use Google

[Sanity]

Software to manage personal finances or organise digital photos is also missing [from linux].

Um, yeah, unless you type personal finance linux into Google, or organize digital photos into Freshmeat.

Re:Another journo that can't use Google

[generic-man]

Call me back when GNUcash can:

1. Track a 401(k) plan.
2. Export to TurboTax, or whatever tax software is available for Linux.
3. Connect to my bank to do on-line transactions.
4. Import my eight years of Quicken data without error.

Oh, but GNUcash is free -- and it has a web browser built right in. Nice.

Re:Another journo that can't use Google

[Frohboy]

Call me back when:

1. A 401(k) plan, whatever that is, is in use in one of the countries where the GNUCash developers live.
2. There is a common tax system in use around the world, or when governments start approving free tax software implementations for filing.
3. Your bank switches to HBCI, the Home Banking Computer Information protocol, in use in Germany, where many of the GNUCash developers live.
4. Quicken exports to an open, or at least non-obfuscated file format.
5. More Americans start contributing to the development of new features for GNUCash.

GNUCash is free, and it does what many of its users want. It just happens that many of those users live in Europe, and for now, they seem to call the shots.

Cynic

[John Girouard]

Cynic

Best. Editorialization. Ever.

Stupid statement

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

"There is no real market for a consumer-grade Linux desktop," says Martin Fink, HP's Linux boss.

I'm surprised people in charge of any reasonably sized company can still say this classic idiocy:

Yes, there's not real market for consumer-grade Linux desktop, for the good reason that the market doesn't exist yet, and someone needs to create it, and whoever will take the plunge stands a fair chance to reap huge benefits from it.

Remember, investors said the same thing to Jobs when he tried to get backing to produce the Apple.

Mr. Fink, if I was your boss and I really wanted to push Linux, you'd be fired...

Re:What version is he using?

[Gilesx]

You mean on Windows I can buy a single use program that enables me to work out my tax returns and browse my digital photography??? Wow, maybe this Windows thing is worth a second look...

For me, the era of Linux on the desktop has passed

[tgd]

I ran Linux as my primary desktop OS from 1994 until early 2003.

Switched to OSX, now I've got two OSX systems, and a single lone Linux box running my e-mail. That may go the way of the dodo if I can actually move the 300+ meg of e-mail I've got on there into a gmail account and actually find things.

I was a Linux desktop user for nine years not because it was free but because there was nothing better out there. Now there is. It'll be a long time before Linux can regain that spot for what I use computers for.

Its about two things -- apps and polish. OSX's interface disappears when you really know it. Its totally consistent, and becomes nothing but an interface to the tools you're using. Linux's UI's are too inconsistent, and the best apps in each category use too many different UI toolkits. Its a distraction to have to switch from one UI to another when switching between applications.

Until *all* the applications I need on a day-to-day basis use the same toolkits, have identical hotkeys, consistent menu organization then those applications waste my time.

Free software is good in concept and ideals, but its really got a LONG way to go to get people to use it for its quality not its price. Companies think of switching because of their bottom line, not because its going to make their employees jobs easier.

The desktop is fine, it's the apps that suck.

[irexe]

Ah.. the Linux desktop again. Isn't it weird that these discussions always seem to focus on the question wether Linux has a good desktop, whilst this is not really the issue? Linux _has_ a good desktop. In fact, it has two excellent desktops. The thing is lacks is top quality applications.

I'd go as far as to say that Linux is about 95% there in terms of 'ordinary' desktop things like browsing, e-mailing and chatting, typing a letter, clipping a photo, playing an mp3, etc. The problems start when you are a professional that needs the last 5%:

- Open Office is great for plain text and layout, but it messes up horribly if you have a document with fields or tables. This is not something you use everyday, but people that use it for their work need to be able to fill out a form without having to deal with an address field that runs off the window for some reason.

- The Gimp is phenomenal, but how about those fonts? Sure, you can do lots and lots of cool things with just images, but graphics pros _need_ those slick fonts.

- Pro audio: sure, Ardour looks like a nice digital audio workstation on paper, but in practice you have to deal with a segfault every ten minutes and quite a few usability issues. Same thing for Muse (great sequencer, sloppy timing), Glame (nice, impractical GUI), Jack (fantastic idea, too bad it still locks up systems), etc.

- Your profession here.

Point being: I think and hope that Linux will be all that on our desktops someday, but 'good' is not good enough when it comes to application software. For Linux to take off on the desktop, it needs to have 'excellent' apps. Apps that, at the very least, should be as good as their commercial counterparts, preferably better. For some reason, we see a lot of this quality in server type apps, we see this quality in the actual desktops (KDE and Gnome are prettier than windows XP if you ask me), but the applications are still lacking.