Slashdot Mirror
What Does Open Source Need for Mainstream Desktop?
HesAnIndieRocker asks: "So what will it take to make open source technology a mainstream alternative on the PC desktop? It feels like we've been on the cusp for many years now and the applications available for most common tasks are certainly competitive, but we still hover around a 5% market share by most accounts. I've recently written an article in my weblog about some possibilities, but I'd love to hear what others think."
There should be absolutely one installation method, that should encompass ALL distributions.
/usr/bin, every doc into /usr/doc, every lib into /usr/lib*, or a distribution that keeps every single application's components in it's own seperate directories. All using the same install format.
/usr/lib/xlib1.0.so and /usr/lib/xlib1.1.so are actually totally compatible with each other, so you can erase /usr/lib/xlib1.0.so when installing 1.1.so .. but, /usr/lib/xlib2.0.so has a totally different interface, so if you have programs that depend on /usr/lib/xlib1.1.so and you install /usr/lib/xlib2.0.so, the installer will know to keep the 1.1 version around as well. (this would also eliminate the idiocy of having things like "glib-5" and "glib2-2", when glib2 replaces glib .. don't take any of these examples as examples of absolute truth, i'm just using the names as examples, rather than as case studies)
How each distribution actually DOES it can vary as it wants.
Each application should be packaged, with a file that has a lot of information about whatever is in the archive.
What each file is, wether it's source code, a library, an extension for something else, the main executeable, or some stupid utility to go with it.
Then it's up to the installer, based on WHAT the file IS, to determine where it goes.
Then you can have distributions that use the traditional *throw every executeable in the entire world into
Of course, each would also have version information, and also "compatible with" and "incompatible with" information, particularly for libraries, where
And I really love the idea of "nothing should ever be executed without the installer having previously known about it".. that would be a great thing to add to a distribution, IMO. Hell, the installer could keep track of checksums of the executeables, and make sure they haven't been modified (such as by a virus or worm or rootkit or malicious hacker) before running.
A unified installation METHOD (doesn't have to be the same program on all distros) would solve a huge amount of Linux distribution problems, and perhaps even provide an answer to more general computing problems.
"Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
After ranting for many years about never upgrading past Windows 2000 (mainly due to having to call MS should you need to reinstall, etc) I finally had to put my money where my mouth was when I purchased a new laptop a few months ago (eMachines m6805, AMD64). To make a long story short - I had a buddy help me install SuSE 9.3 on it and I've been on the penguin at home ever since.
What I have seen from a long time windows user perspective is this: functionality and abilities (and stability) is far greater on (SuSE 9.3) Linux then I ever experienced even under Windows 2000. The problem is the "Win95"-esque problems... such as getting my wireless networking card to work. Now fair enough... I had/have these issues with Windows upon an occasion as well, and I can work my way thru them faster then on Linux simply because I've got ump-teen years experience under Win. My gripes come when I have to follow quite esoteric HowTo's to get my gear to work (or to get this thingy to install, or, or, or).
Most times, I'll get whatever widget I need to working thanks to 2-3 of these HowTo's (mainly because 9.3 is a popular distro). But if I were unlucky enough to be one of the first people with problem 'X' I know I'd be screwed. Just the number of widgets and command line prompts and whatnot I had to tinker with to get my onboard WLAN card working was stunning. Then, after it was all said and done, I still couldn't get to websites 'cause the router didn't have valid DNS IP's configured (Linux seems to be a bit "bitchier" when it comes to certain things). Thankfully I picked up on this before blaming the card!
Now... I'm happy with SuSE/Linux and I cannot ever seeing myself turning back, but I'm a nerd that enjoys the occasional hw/sw challenge (something I've not had on a windows box in probably 3+ years). But for Joe Sixpack? We (as in the all of us, or the royal... take your pick) need to bring Linux's usability up past Win95, because in my opinion, that is exactly where (SuSE 9.3) Linux is currently at.
"1984" was ment to be a warning, not a guidebook. You hear that Kim Jong-il!? BushCo?!
Seriously. I was recently given the opportunity to take the OS X plunge and I've had the OSX epiphany that goes along with it. It's changed the way I see user interfaces, and I finally understand why the mac "addict" types have been so rabid. It's _that_ good.
FOSS UI's need to integrate or at least peacefully co-exist, and do so with a standards-based foundation.
That's the key (or ticket depending on your view).
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
A multimillion dollar ad campaign. That's what it'll take.
Now please, for fuck's sake, let's talk about something else. Every couple of weeks there's another damn article whining about how open source is soooooooo close to succeeding as a mainstream desktop alternative and asking what's keeping it from taking that final step, and everyone always answers "consistency" or "usability" or "accessibility" or "pictures of naked ladies", but the real issue here is that Grandma doesn't know what the fuck Linux is because she doesn't see ads for it on TV.
Goodness I'm bitter today.
We don't need a new distro every week. Too many people are wasting their time reinventing the wheel. They need to cooperate and consolidate. Until then, a mainstream desktop will always be 2-4 years away.
1) Drivers
2) Drivers
3) Drivers
From a High Level, to convince people to switch systems, you have to offer them something an order of magnitude better than the system they are invested in without giving up any substantial functionality. This means:
The computer should do exactly what the user wants, whenever the user wants, without the user having to think about it. This means extensive end-user testing and brutal simplification. The user should never see anything unrelated to exactly what they want to do. The folder heirarchy they see on the drive should ONLY contain things relevant to their activities. They should be able to re-arrange everything on their disk and still have it all work. They should never have to edit a config file. They should have to wade through "interface spam" of a million options which one in a million users will ever actually use. And yes, this means extensive high level architecting of everything that goes into the system, something OSS isn't traditionally good at doing.
The computer sould be able to replace legacy systems. That means being MS Office compatible, not a small feat. Not just word, but scheduling, and Excel macros must be readable in the new system.
The computer still needs a killer application or usage that makes everone want to switch to it. Apt-Get is pretty killer for me, but command line functionality will never reach the average desktop user. What else can the nature of Open Source provide? How can we use dynamic re-compilation to do something amazing that retail software can't provide?
No offence, but Linux as a desktop OS is still pretty hacky. There are a million unnecessary (to me) files hanging around when I'm just trying to do something, dozens of different ways to try to do something but four or five of which will work, command line still being integral to anything fun on the system (and even some baseline functionality), etc. My feeling is that the current state of Linux isn't the way to get there, any more than Dos should be the way to get to Windows. Perhaps it is time to throw our collective weight behind SkyOS, Zeta, or another upcoming Desktop-oriented OS, and refocus Linux on being the kick-ass server OS we all know it to be.
The ______ Agenda
Simply put, 95%+ of all users don't care at all, and see no reason to change.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
I have been using Linux on my desktop since 94, so I can relate to this feeling.
.... *application promptly dissapears*
I tried to rip a music CD on my Fedora Core 4 system the other day...
I put it in and ran Sound Juicer... it saw the CD and loaded all the track info for it. So far, so good.
I wanted to set it to rip me an OGG at quality 6, the same as all my other ones I ripped in windows. It would let me choose between OGG and FLAC (no MP3), but there was no quality setting. An audio ripper with no quality setting?!? Impossible I thought...
I looked in the help file, and it said nothing. Though the help file mentioned if you wanted MP3, you could use something called 'gnome-audio-profiles-properties'. There was no link to run this in the program, and I can't find it in my Gnome menus, so, being the guru I am, I ran it from the command line...
This is a GUI which has a text field to type in a GStreamer pipeline!
"audio/x-raw-int,rate=44100,channels=2 ! vorbisenc name=enc quality=0.5"
Like anyone (especially grandma) is gonna know how to fill in that!
Anyhow, me being the guru I am, I fish through it and see the quality setting... I want OGG quality 6... so what does "0.5" mean in OGG terms? Well, let's look in the help file...
*clicks help button*
No "this help file does not exist" dialog, no stack trace, nothing. *Poof* Gone.
This is why Linux still isn't really ready for my desktop.
The drivers are great if you buy supported hardware.
"Linux isn't free; it costs $150 to replace my scanner." Those who rely on donated hardware cannot choose to obtain supported hardware over unsupported hardware. Those who are switching from Windows to Linux on paid-for hardware have similar problems.
There's a lot of hardware that won't work well on Mac either, but you won't find it in Apple's store.
For peripherals compatible with Macintosh computers, I can look on the front of the box for "Compatible with Macintosh computers" or (better yet) a certification mark on the front of the box. I haven't seen any penguins on home PC peripherals available at Best Buy or Circuit City. Which stores in Indiana should I be trying?
It needs to be the large hardware vendors and game company devs push this, they are the only ones who can really crack it, it is NOT, repeat NOT, going to come primarily from the software side of the equation by some billion humans deciding one morning to "tryout this li-nux thing" they heard about. Ain't happenin'. Not any time soon, anyway. You aren't going to change human reality that people run what comes pre-installed. It just "is" is all.
You're falling into the same-old the-chicken-or-the-egg trap that we've been in for the past few years: the only way the hardware vendors and game devs widely accept Linux is if the demand is there from J. Sixpack. And as you mentioned, we aren't going to change human nature.
Wide acceptance for desktop Linux can only come about through the same back door that the PC came to the home, and this is acceptance in the office. It's going to be an even longer and harder process, but by that vector it is actually possible. And because the FOSS community often goes out of its way to provide portability, we lack powerful traditional pulls, that of lock-in and incompatability.
Cronjobs are never "simple fixes". 'chmod -w' is much easier. Anyway, the desktop is doomed as long as you have to edit anything (via a gui, but especially by hand) to get simple peripherals to work.
An Exchange-killer.
Have you tried Open Exchange? Not that exchange is appropraite to a discussion on the Desktop market.
A definitely legal method of playing encrypted DVDs.
Try xine! (btw Xine is an awesome app!)
For 3rd-party companies (Intuit, Adobe, Autodesk, etc etc ad nauseum) to release either Linux or Wine-friendly versions of their apps.
If you can't find an alternative application in Linux you could always run Windows through VMWare - you can also disable network support for the VM so that you always have a nice clean copy of Windows instead of one riddled with ad/spyware! Further you'd be surprised how fast this can be, I run an AMD 1600+ with 1GB and Windows runs very fast in VMWare.
For companies like Cisco to make it easy to run the VPN Client.
Cisco VPN client for Linux!
A perfect VT220 emulator. There are many in the Windows world.
xterm & gnome-terminal can be used to emulate VT220, for the latter it's as simple as adding a line to your xresources file.
Better wireless support, both thru more drivers from "industry", and better "management" front-ends.
I think you'll find that Wireless support in terms of drivers is just as good in Linux as it is in Windows - just install ndiswrapper and use the windows drivers!
Better looking fonts. Sure, fonts are 100x better looking than they were in 1999, but they are still better looking in Windows.
If font's are so important to you, why not just use the Windows true type fonts in linux??
In my opinion the reason people don't migrate to Linux is because they either think it'll be too hard to use or, like the parent poster, they believe that Linux won't be able to do what Windows can - and don't bother to do any research as to whether they're correct or not.
Haydn.
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. - Douglas Adams
To be mainstream it will have to lose many of the features that make it attractive to tech enthusiasts.
If you want a very nice and easy to use *NIX desktop, head down to the Apple store.
Ah, well, whether it renders them "correctly" or not, they look much, much better and are (I find) much easier to read. (My biggest gripes with most Linux font rendering have to do with inconsistent stroke weights and character spacing, not to mention the antialiasing which straddles the line between ugly and intolerable.) I say, if the correct way looks like ass, better to do it the wrong way.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.