Slashdot Mirror


Desktop Linux Is Dead

digitaldc writes with this quote from PCWorld: "It kills me to say this: The dream of Linux as a major desktop OS is now pretty much dead. Despite phenomenal security and stability — and amazing strides in usability, performance, and compatibility — Linux simply isn't catching on with desktop users. And if there ever was a chance for desktop Linux to succeed, that ship has long since sunk. ... Ultimately, Linux is doomed on the desktop because of a critical lack of content. And that lack of content owes its existence to two key factors: the fragmentation of the Linux platform, and the fierce ideology of the open-source community at large."

1,005 of 1,348 comments (clear)

  1. wrong OS? by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought it was BSD that was dead?

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:wrong OS? by Shoeler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      BSD's not dead of course - look only to the Mach kernel in OS X for verification.

      If you want to see how a desktop UNIX-based os should do it right, look at OS X. Say what you will about Apple - I don't care, only own a mac and an iPod (I have a Droid X for my phone) - but they did the desktop RIGHT. It's easy to use, fairly intuitive (passes the grandma test, for the most part), and is oh so easy to support.

      I remember when I got my first macbook a few years back and I had a sprint wireless broadband card for it. I was thinking "you know, I should be able to make my mac a wifi base station and share my wireless". Preferences, sharing, .... oh, that was easy. And it worked.

    2. Re:wrong OS? by Pieroxy · · Score: 3, Funny

      I see in the summary three tags: troll, trolltroll and trolltrolltroll.

      Does it mean it's a 6*troll or an average of just a 2*troll?

    3. Re:wrong OS? by skids · · Score: 5, Informative

      In the trollish counting system, there are only three numbers.

      Troll means "one." Trolltroll means "two." Trolltrolltroll means "definitely two."

    4. Re:wrong OS? by grub · · Score: 1


      No, BSD is just the one that stinks, it's not dead yet.

      Considering Mac OSX's BSD-Mach roots, it would seem that BSD has a far greater market share on the desktop than Linux.

      Even the OSX manpages have BSD everywhere in them.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    5. Re:wrong OS? by xtracto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow... indeed the summary and the title of the article is quite trollish. I guess the reason is that that is what sells nowadays.

      Nevertheless the author makes several insightful criticisms to the Linux community. (yeah I RTFA so sue me!)

      In general the criticisms are the same old we have been hearing since the beginning of the "Linux on the desktop" days. The thing is... people don't *understand* how the Linux community work. They cannot see how Linux has been steadily gaining a share of the desktop in all these years.

      Moreover, the term "linux on the desktop" has always been very ambiguous. In general, I believe what people mean is "the day some Linux variant gets 10% share of home PCs".

      The *only* way this will happen is when a company gets Linux and tries to achieve such an objective.

      The closest we were to that was when Lindows appeared; and it is very well known the backlash from the "open source community".

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    6. Re:wrong OS? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you want to see how a desktop UNIX-based os should do it right, look at OS X.

      I came at it the other way around, since I inherited an older-model Mac laptop from my wife when she upgraded. I've been using Linux since the early SLS (later Slackware) distributions on my desktop and server systems. I like the way Apple has gone to some lengths to make issues like dealing with wireless networks pretty much bombproof, but I still prefer the configurability of my desktop Linux systems. The Mac UI isn't bad, but it makes me a bit cranky that there's no way to configure it to suit the user's way of working. Seems it's good to think outside the box, but only if you think the way Apple damn well tells you to.

      Also, even after several years, it still bothers me that closing a window on a Mac doesn't terminate the application. I can understand the philosophical rationale (for what it's worth) behind this, but it seems unnecessary and wasteful.

    7. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      MacOS is only easy to use if you don't stray from the party line. Otherwise
      it can quickly become more difficult to deal with than either Windows or
      Linux. It's much like the iPhone except you are more free to employ free
      software (ironically enough) in order to smooth over these rough edges.

      What Linux is lacking is major studio games. That is really the only area
      where "content" is an issue since such games are ultimately as much about
      non-programmer content as "code".

      For most people, the web is where it's at and Linux is entirely suitable
      to take up the slack for mobile devices when the self-inflicted limitations
      of those cause you problems.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:wrong OS? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I believe what people mean is "the day some Linux variant gets 10% share of home PCs".

      Hey it only took Apple 20 years to achieve this, hang in there Linux.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    9. Re:wrong OS? by pegdhcp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BSD's not dead of course - look only to the Mach kernel in OS X for verification. If you want to see how a desktop UNIX-based os should do it right, look at OS X. Say what you will about Apple - I don't care, only own a mac and an iPod (I have a Droid X for my phone) - but they did the desktop RIGHT. It's easy to use, fairly intuitive (passes the grandma test, for the most part), and is oh so easy to support. I remember when I got my first macbook a few years back and I had a sprint wireless broadband card for it. I was thinking "you know, I should be able to make my mac a wifi base station and share my wireless". Preferences, sharing, .... oh, that was easy. And it worked.

      Interestingly lots of people (including my wife and a number of fine arts graduates around her) do not realize that they are using a Unix system behind those shiny buttons and sliders. Do they need to know, what is a kernel, what is X and such? No, I do not think so. However if you know _and_ need you can start a terminal and start typing a cryptic series of charactes while people is watching you in amazement. This especially works, if you want to shutdown an ethernet in a _not so_ obvious way :)

      More importantly (than interesting), Apple is doing something extremely correct and keeping their GUI intuative and (I do not know how, but) compatible with older OSs they released. Like the event you mentioned, after something like 10 years away from Mac environment, it took 2 or 3 minutes for me to have a secondary monitor connected, up and running with a macbook.

      More to the point, related to the TFA, unfortunately I agree with it, on the point that Desktop is not a stronghold for Linux. The solution (if there would be any) will be in the form of a desktop manager, designed really professionally, probably not by geeks, and preferably by people who know users, and do not refer them as lusers, or talking about larting them etc.

    10. Re:wrong OS? by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      BSD's not dead of course - look only to the Mach kernel in OS X for verification.

      BSD is dead in the same way Linux desktops are dead. i.e. not at all.

      Most people I know use either Linux or OS X on their desktops. The people I know who use windows instead keep asking me how to get rid of spyware, viruses, web browser hijacking things, and why their machines keep getting slower.

    11. Re:wrong OS? by psbrogna · · Score: 1

      Seems a relevant time to bring up and old adage, "Health is merely the slowest way someone can die." (Anon) A saying particularly relevant in the fast moving world of technology. And I can't help but think of "Weekend at Bernie's" when I look at the way other OSes often get propped up.

    12. Re:wrong OS? by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      "What Linux is lacking is major studio games. That is really the only area where "content" is an issue since such games are ultimately as much about non-programmer content as "code".

      I agree with this. I and many of my friends use Linux as desktop exclusively. The only time I don't is when I am forced to (such as at work).

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    13. Re:wrong OS? by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. I dual-boot my gaming system, mainly because I don't want to screw around with WINE (and because the music production software I use doesn't play well with Linux), but for non-gaming and non-music-production use, I use Linux for EVERYTHING.

      It mainly comes down to resource requirements, ease of use, configurable (is that even a word?), and security. If games had a bigger presence on Linux, that would leave only a single reason why I use Windows.

    14. Re:wrong OS? by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      In the trollish counting system, there are only three numbers.

      Troll means "one." Trolltroll means "two." Trolltrolltroll means "definitely two."

      But now there is a Trolltrolltrolltroll. And I am not even kidding!

    15. Re:wrong OS? by Pojut · · Score: 1

      configurable (is that even a word?)

      gah, meant "configurability", lol

    16. Re:wrong OS? by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      I'm not one of natures mac users, I'm happy on windows or linux but the mac interface drives me nuts and I can't explain why.
      It's ok once I get a console up and can tap away and pretend it's just unix.

      I've pulled down half the linux games I could find on the standard repositories and I've noticed something.
      There's a few games decended from old commercial games which opened up the source years later which are gold (try the ur quan masters, it's basic graphics but is a surprisingly fun game.) and there's no shortage of .... potentially good games.

      Some of the open source linux games I've tried have had a lot of potential and seem quite well made except for a lack of any kind of campaign or storyline.
      I'm guessing a lot of coders get to the point where they have a working engine and all the tools needed to create a campaign and then get bored.

      There's some good rougelikes out there but the open source ones seem to fracture into a hundred varients (look at angband/zangband/etc) or nethack.

      As for other things I'd say drives can still be an issue, it's less of a problem now-days but it still comes up now and then because companies don't want to spend the time or money making linux drivers.

    17. Re:wrong OS? by Intron · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, is it this that time of year again? Another "Linux Desktop is DEAD!" article? Is the writer really in need of something to put in front of his editor?

      C'mon. i'm tired of reading these damn articles all saying the same shit. They've been saying the same crap for over 5 years now.

      That means we should soon see a headline "2011 will be the year of desktop Linux!"

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    18. Re:wrong OS? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      There are three certain things: Death, Taxes, and Linux Impersonators.

    19. Re:wrong OS? by DrgnDancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your sig aside, isn't that what Canonical was supposed to do? Has done really? That's the problem, when you get down to it. Canonical has done everything right. Ubuntu is easy to install, easy to configure, easy to patch, has about as good of driver support as is reasonably possible given manufacturer reluctance, its package management system is extensive and has a nice front end... There's nothing at all that Canonical did *wrong* to make a great Desktop OS, people just aren't interested. People buy a computer, they use what's on it. Manufacturers make computers and use what's easiest (which given the ecosystem of drivers and trained people is Microsoft no matter how easy an individual Ubuntu install is).

      Apple has, through multimillion dollar ad campaigns, product differentiation, aiming at the premium space, and tie ins to its iPhone/iPod/iPad ecosystem, managed to get a couple percent more market share than they had 5 years ago. A few percentage points of the market for an ad campaign that no Linux vendor could hope to match, a premium hardware budget that few manufacturers would be willing to risk, and a device ecosystem that is unmatched by anyone. Honestly if Linux ever breaks 1% market penetration on the desktop it will be shocking.

      I agree with the author. Linux on the desktop shouldn't be ignored of course. People do use it (including me), and will continue to use it. Continued focus on it as some sort of magical goal is silly though. Linux servers are everywhere, Linux portables are everywhere. Focus on what is working for you. It may well be that in ten years the "desktop" is irrelevant anyway. Whether because of the "cloud", portable devices, both, and/or them + some currently unknown factor the whole discussion is likely to have shifted anyway.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    20. Re:wrong OS? by skids · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's orcish. Trolls can't count past two, and as such have no concept of "many."

    21. Re:wrong OS? by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      But every year since the inception of Linux has also been the year of Linux on the desktop!

    22. Re:wrong OS? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? My understanding it was ... One, Two, Many

      That means trolltrolltroll could be any number greater than two. And if you're counting trolls, anything more than two is ... well "many", and that is never good.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    23. Re:wrong OS? by BlitzTech · · Score: 1

      No, it's troll + troll^2 + troll^3, or troll * ( 1 + troll + troll^2 )

    24. Re:wrong OS? by Scholasticus · · Score: 1

      Of course Canonical did everything right just as you said. There's one thing they haven't done, though, which is absolutely necessary for widespread adoption of any OS: pre-installation. If you could easily buy a PC with Ubuntu on it (say, as easily as you can buy a Mac), adoption would go up a lot. I have no idea by how much, but look at how well Android is doing. Android uses a Linux kernel, and lots of people who have Android phones have never heard of Linux. This is how MS Windows became #1 - you didn't have to install it. You could just walk into a computer shop and buy a Windows machine, take it home and have it up and running in less than half an hour. If you could do that with a Linux machine (they should probably give it some nice but generic name, e.g. "Diamond Computer") in the same way, lots more people would be using them.

    25. Re:wrong OS? by DJRumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stray from the party line? In what way? An OS does what it does. The fact that you can add 3rd party addons to expand or tweak it goes counter to your first statement. I equate the OS X GUI to Gnome. Minimal configuration for less hastle. Are you going to imply that you can't tweak Gnome because it's not very configurable out of the box?

      MacOS is only easy to use if you don't stray from the party line. Otherwise it can quickly become more difficult to deal with than either Windows or Linux.

      I support multiple households across 3 families with various flavors of Ubuntu, Windows, and OS X. OS X by far takes literally zero support hours. Linux takes second, and Windows is a weekly call from someone. For the average user, the GUI is perfect for 'the party line' because that's where the mainstream uses it.

    26. Re:wrong OS? by emmons · · Score: 1

      Nope. It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: Linux is dying.

      --
      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    27. Re:wrong OS? by tudsworth · · Score: 1

      Creative software (music creation, video editing and so on) for Linux is pretty scarce (excluding proprietary in-house software used by companies like Pixar). I'd be inclined to say that this is because Linux users aren't very creative people, but considering some of the solutions I've seen for problems on the coding side of things (and some of the themes I've seen on Gnome-look.org), that's far from the truth. In reality, it's because companies in that market don't see the point in supporting what is, in the mass market, a niche operating system. So that's supporting a niche market within a niche market (linux users who need professional standard creation tools); far from a good idea.

    28. Re:wrong OS? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Office is even a stronger monopoly than Windows itself, if such a thing is possible. And the worst part is that Office (particularly Word and Access, and any of the apps once you start doing any VBA) is just plain horrible. The only reason anyone uses it is because of one of the two following things: 1. It's all they can use. 2. It's all they know how to use.

      I can't imagine there's anyone with any real software experience who actually thinks Office is good. OOo is better, although it's hardly great. Of course, when it comes to word processing, I think the whole paradigm has completely failed. IMO, if you're not doing DTP, you should be using markup. Of course, that will never happen for 99.9% of users, even though it would be several orders easier and more efficient. Just think of all the billions of dollars of productivity going down the sinkhole of using Word. It boggles the mind.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    29. Re:wrong OS? by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      I don't use a gui with Linux -- we use only the server OS here with command line. I don't know the state of the GUI in Ubuntu for example, but if a normal user ever needs to use a terminal window to run a program, install a program, or make a basic-to-medium configuration change, then you've already lost 90% of your audience. The DOS people are finally content with the Start menu, and Apple hasn't had command line for decades (discounting the extras in OS X of course).

      Games are definitely important, but if I want to set up an HTPC in Linux, I shouldn't need to rewrite conf files. (Not saying I do....)

    30. Re:wrong OS? by bledri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ... Also, even after several years, it still bothers me that closing a window on a Mac doesn't terminate the application. I can understand the philosophical rationale (for what it's worth) behind this, but it seems unnecessary and wasteful.

      It's funny, but I actually like the differentiation between closing a window and an application. But I do a lot via the keyboard, not the mouse, so when I want to close a window I use Command-W and know that the application will still be in memory to use Command-O or Command-N rather than having to relaunch the app. If I want to quit then I use Command-Q. I was actually a bit annoyed when they changed "single window/document/view" type applications to exit when their window was closed (though I get the rational.)

      I also launch everything from Spotlight rather than spelunking around the Finder. One of the funniest things to me is how people (not saying you) assume that Mac OS X is not for power users and is mouse centric. But if you enable "All Controls" in System Preferences->Keyboard Shortcuts, have Spotlight enabled and know the difference between Command-Tab and Command-`, you can do most driving from the keyboard. Add the Automater's Save As Service, the consistent Service interface, applescript and the ability to assign global, application and context sensitive keyboard shortcuts and for me Mac OS X is a power user's dream. All right out of the box. For instance, using the Application's Shortcuts I've bound Command-. to bring up the System Preferences and by creating a "Finder Application.app" in the automator I can use Spotlight to jump right to the finder rather than tabbing through 20 apps or mousing around in expose. Plus Shift-Command-G in virtually any file dialog and Finder and you can type in a path rather than click up and down folder hierarchies.

      While I'm in fanboy mode, I'll mention what I love most is the consistency. All (non-MS) application's text edit areas support the basic emacs-like ^a, ^d ^e, and ^k functionality. I'm an old emacs/bash guy, so I'm happy, even if it makes no sense to young-uns. Also, once you know about property lists, you can figure out where prefs are for 99% of applications. And if you can find to the right docs, you can tweak away. It almost sucks that there is no uninstaller, but it rarely matters and if you care - once again the consistency tells you exactly where to look for any left over files. I think that the "application bundle" is a great way to deal with managing all the files related to a program.

      Apologies for the fanboyism. I also came from years of Linux experience, which I loved. But for some reason Mac OS X just "clicked" for me.

      If you don't have it, I highly recommend TinkerTool which is free "as in beer" to explore some level of system/UI tweaking. Also, Lingon

      is a pretty decent open source tool for navigating all the system and user startup services provided by launchd. It's no longer under development, but it's an Apache licensed program and pretty useful so maybe someone will pick it up. I install Lingon via MacPorts (though the git based HomeBrew" is intriguing...)

      OK, I'll go away now...

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    31. Re:wrong OS? by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      I've tried getting into it (as in contributing) and it can be a very painful experience. Granted, it is mostly caused by kids who (sometimes, unwittingly,) poison the well with privately owned content.

      I'm not saying that the GPL isn't compatible with assets (I'm sure there are a thousand examples where it works just fine), but being 100% certain that all of your content was actually created by the jack-leg who submits it can be a real, real pain. Just from reading boards, I've noticed that some projects even go so far as to white-room asset creation. This can be unbearably painful, though not as bad as audio, where you might as well give up before you start, because something somewhere isn't going to be compatible. I've seen some projects just ask for sheet music.

      Honestly, if I were to go back in and try to contribute, I'd have a video of creating every single texture and every single mesh; unedited. It is the only way to get in without this huge shadow of doubt over you. On second though, I'd just contribute code, it is much safer.

    32. Re:wrong OS? by bb5ch39t · · Score: 1

      Though I personally prefer my Linux/KDE to my Mac Mini, I have a friend who __used to be__ a Windows partisan. Until he was forced to get a Mac laptop. Now he is in love with the Mac instead of Windows. It is a nice system. And nowhere near as vulnerable as an average Windows system.

    33. Re:wrong OS? by Americano · · Score: 1

      You just hit the nail on the head.

      People who are going to download and install and configure Ubuntu don't need it preinstalled - they know enough to do it themselves. People who need help to do that don't even know what the fuck Linux is, much less how to download & install it. Stop focusing on "what it is" - "Free!" "Open!" "Alternative to Windows!" - and start focusing on "what it does," and show people a fully functional appliance, and you'd see increased adoption rates. For non-technical users, 'free' and 'open' are "so what?" points - if I don't have the time, ability, and inclination to modify my own software... who cares if I *can*, when I never *will* and will never *be able* to?

      Of course, "sell bundled hardware with Linux, in a preconfigured, easy-to-use setup for easy adoption by new users," puts you squarely in the Apple business model, but without the iLife apps (hate them if you want, but realize that 'regular' (i.e., non-tech-savvy) users get a lot of mileage out of them - iMovie, iPhoto especially) and iPod/iPad/iPhone support.

    34. Re:wrong OS? by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Informative

      funny slashdotters always talk about gaming when complaining about desktop Linux. most people I know don't even use their PC for games, they have dedicated game appliances. Some of the most popular game appliances in the world don't even run windows, imagine that. A WII, for example, uses customized Linux kernel....

    35. Re:wrong OS? by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      MacOS it's not UNIX, in the sense that the MacOS marketshare and the UNIX marketshare only negligibly overlap. MacOS could be built upon Haiku for all that MacOS users care.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    36. Re:wrong OS? by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      I'd love to know in what ways OS X is less configurable than Windows? I can see that Linux wins hands down in the tweakability front (which is also a weakness - imagine setting up a tech support team for a third-party application to cover all flavours of Linux). Granted, I don't know much about Windows 7, but I've used all prior versions of Windows and I can't see where it beats OS X in configurability. OS X also wins hands down in scripting support - AppleScript is great and really powerful.

    37. Re:wrong OS? by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I can tell you why the Mac interface drives you nuts. Because compared to Windows and Linux, it sucks. For the most part they are all the same, but Macs have idiosyncrasies that you have to overcome. It is things like using a green + to shrink a window. That is just wrong. Things like the red X sometimes closing the application, and other times only closing the UI to the application leaving the to continue running.

      Things like the menu bar being pegged to the top of the primary screen. That made sense when we only had one screen, and resolutions were so low that windows always needed to stack if you had more than one open at a time. Today we have multiple screens, so the 'flick the mouse to the corner' argument no longer applies, and having to figure out what application the menu bar applies to is just annoying and breaks the flow of work.

      The list goes on and on, but Apple doesn't seem to want to admit that many parts of their UI are badly designed in the first place, or have become out of date for use on modern hardware, so they just keep repeating the mantra that Apple has an intuitive UI. I can definitely say that the emperor has no clothes.

    38. Re:wrong OS? by gtall · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should try OS X, it has had a Terminal app since the beginning, unix command lines...go crazy!!

    39. Re:wrong OS? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      Except that OSX requires you to buy in to the hardware to get the software, and the software isn't distributed freely regardless. OSX isn't the answer to the "desktop linux is dead" question because it's a commercial closed source application.

    40. Re:wrong OS? by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      Part of the issue is having the necessary corporate leverage. In an ideal world software would be free, but in the real world people will need Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office, possibly proprietary video editing and audio software. If you took away all of these from OS X, it wouldn't be nearly as attractive a platform. If Ubuntu were suddenly able to natively run the industry-standard packages then it would probably take off rapidly. There are free/open equivalents for many things, but the reality is that when people are heavily invested in a certain way of working, they want the software they're used to. Apple had enough clout when they launched OS X (and also had Classic mode) to make sure that the OS would be a success.

    41. Re:wrong OS? by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I use Linux and OS/X and Windows so I must ask what is hard to do on a Mac?
      Really I have had a very small learning curve and I have not been stopped from doing anything yet. So an example would be nice.
      And no it isn't just major studio games that are lacking.
      A good professional CAD system.
      An office package as good as MS Office. Office is still better than OO.org. It is just that OO,org is a better value.
      Photoshop. Sorry but Gimp is good and even better than Photoshop Elements but it isn't better than Photoshop for high end use.
      A video editor as good as the offerings from Apple, Adobe, and Sony.

      And here is the big one. Device drivers! Linux's hardware support is actually very good but it needs a stable binary device driver interface!
      Companies want to put a simple to install driver on the CD with the devices you buy! They do not want to force customers to install a compiler and Kernel sources!
      Not only that but they do not want to have to wait for the driver to make in to the kernel.

      That is is a killer issue for Linux on the desktop right now. If the hardware you buy isn't supported your in a world of hurt.
      Oh and "checking before you buy" is not so easy. Take wifi for instance. The list of supported devices is by chipset! Boxes often do not list the chipset and they can even change over time.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    42. Re:wrong OS? by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      Too bad those tags don't transfer to the person who submitted the story:

      http://www.slashdot.org/~digitaldc/

      Maybe /. admins could create a new achievement for this.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    43. Re:wrong OS? by bughunter · · Score: 1

      You're still off. It's (troll/2)*(sqrt(-3)±1)^2.

      I work for Trolls. I should know.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    44. Re:wrong OS? by Iburnaga · · Score: 1

      It's Troll, Trolol, Trololol, Trololololol, etc

      --
      iburnaga.blogspot.com
    45. Re:wrong OS? by BlitzTech · · Score: 1

      Not quite. That's for x^3 + x + 1, not x^3 + x^2 + x. Also, that's finding roots, which essentially requires that 'troll' be a variable. We know trolls aren't variable.

      Invariably, they make asinine comments, post things like 'first post'/'frosty piss', and otherwise stir trouble via inflammatory remarks.

    46. Re:wrong OS? by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      "If you use your computer screen as your TV, you are outside of the "norm" and don't count."

      Except the thousand of people watching Hulu at work right now. For a lot of people it is TV.

    47. Re:wrong OS? by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Funny you should mention that, did you know that last September Direct3D 10/11 went native on Linux ?:

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mesa_gallium3d_d3d11

      And they are putting hooks into Wine to use it.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    48. Re:wrong OS? by Lennie · · Score: 1

      You don't need to use a commandline in Ubuntu. There is a GUI for pretty much everything.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    49. Re:wrong OS? by Khisanth+Magus · · Score: 1

      And that right there is the main problem for most users. 90% of computer users don't want to have to do "a little jigging" to get every single thing they want to do to work, let alone know how to do it.

    50. Re:wrong OS? by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Funny, I haven't had any problems with hardware/drivers when I bought the PC pre-installed with Ubuntu.

      This is what Apple does too, so where is the problem ?

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    51. Re:wrong OS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I was a Linux user until OSX. I only used a handful of apps on Linux. When I found I can use them on OSX, Linux lost some luster. I still love Linux, but OSX does what I need. I now use GIMP for post processing my images. Inkscape is great for making SVG images. The terminal is in the dock and is used often.

      OSX killed Linux in this household. I was looking for a Linux laptop, then the iPad came out. A UNIX tablet? Hell yeah.

    52. Re:wrong OS? by Elbows · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they got the desktop part right, too bad they did such a shitty job on the UNIX part.

    53. Re:wrong OS? by Unoriginal_Nickname · · Score: 1

      Put Steam on Linux. Put Office on Linux. Put Photoshop and Visual Studio and 3ds Max on Linux. Put Ubuntu in shiny little lexan cases and display them on the endcaps of every shelf in every Best Buy across the world. Everybody thinks "Linux just needs [x] to win on the desktop!"... give it every [x], and Linux is still going to lose. Linux will always lose because switching to a different operating system is a proactive decision about something normal people don't give a fuck about.

    54. Re:wrong OS? by mcneely.mike · · Score: 1

      How many people don't even know how to install any OS, except the one that came with their computer.

      Those people don't even know how to install THAT OS, they go to Best Buy or whomever, or the geek they know to re-install it. ;-)

      If it didn't come pre-installed and they didn't know someone who COULD install it for them, they'd probably either sit there with their new brick, or wouldn't buy it in the first place.

      Now Linux on a server? That's awesome!

      Linux on a server use to suck: now it is awesome. Linux is starting to gain momentum: soon it will be awesome.

      Microsoft is scared by gnu/Linux for good reason... they wouldn't be spending good money on FUD if linux still sucked. (OpenOffice used to 'suck' too. Now Microsoft is spending good money on letting everyone know how much it sucks? You do not see them spending money on FUD about how much MikeOS sucks do you?)

      gnu/linux will get there, and Microsoft will not be as big as it is now. That is what scares Steve Ballmer... that is why developers are leaving Microsoft.

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    55. Re:wrong OS? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      configurable (is that even a word?)

      gah, meant "configurability", lol

      Yes. That's a word.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    56. Re:wrong OS? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      You don't need to use a commandline in Ubuntu. There is a GUI for pretty much everything.

      Ubuntu is pretty good in that respect, but I think it still has a way to go. Of all the various Linux flavors I've used, I'm going to say that OpenSUSE and Mepis have some of the best GUI utilities for normal configuration purposes. I am using Ubuntu at the moment since a. I'm not afraid of configuration files and b. there seems to be more available software for it, but it could use some more GUI tools. I will say I liked OpenSUSE's NFS client, it was handy since I use NFS for most things on my network.

      The major Linux distros still aren't as convenient, configuration-wise, as they could be although they've certainly come a loooong way in the past few years.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    57. Re:wrong OS? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Apple had it, back in the mid-late-80s. Then lost it in the early-90s. Then (just recently) got it again.

    58. Re:wrong OS? by grahamsz · · Score: 1

      I tried for 6 hours to get my hdtv connected to my macbook and failed dismally. I've been a mac user for 24 years and it utterly let me down.

      However it took about 10 seconds with a displayport to HDMI cable on my linux laptop, no configuration necessary.

    59. Re:wrong OS? by bughunter · · Score: 1

      OK - sorry. I'm still new here.

      (But I'm already tired of billy goats for lunch, every. Damn. Day.)

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    60. Re:wrong OS? by shawb · · Score: 1

      The market for high end editing software is even smaller on Linux than the install base would indicate.
      1)A high proportion of Linux computers are used as a server rather than a desktop.
      2)Linux users have less respect the concept of intellectual property than as most computer users... this means they will be less willing to go through some of the hoops to run commercial level editing software and would rather spend their time working with what is available through open source. This also includes an active aversion to paying money for software. Commercial editing software is quite expensive.
      3)The various "flavors" of Linux add a level of difficulty to software support and attempting to deliver a consistent problem.
      4)Linux users tend to be less traditionally artistically involved. This isn't to say that there are no creative artists on Linux or in the Linux community, but there simply isn't the critical mass of users needed to develop for the platform. Let's just say there may be some Linux enthusiasts that dabble in art, but the number of professional artists who use Linux exclusively isn't enough to pay the costs of migrating to the platform.
      5)Those who are serious enough about dropping the money for professional level editing equipment generally wouldn't have a problem buying a separate computer just to run it. If they Like using Linux, they will run it on another box. I personally know of a few audio engineers who have dedicated computers just for recording music... their studio computer often isn't even hooked up to the internet. This configuration is actually good practice in a world where you are working with someone else's valuable media that they are working on. It also removes some potential unexpected legal liabilities when you are hooked up to CD duplication machines... I imagine RIAA lawyers dream of finding this sort of thing on a potential infringement case.

      Essentially, professional artists/etc don't use Linux exclusively because the necessary software is not available on Linux. Professional art/creation software is not available on Linux because there are not enough users that exclusively use Linux. Which means professional artists don't use Linux exclusively. Hmm... it's still not getting through. we need a car analogy. Maybe something to do with a tow hitch on an Indie car. Or a GPS navigation unit... "Left turn, in one quarter mile. Left turn, in one quarter mile. Left turn, in one quarter mile..."

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    61. Re:wrong OS? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Apple's highest market share peaked at about 16% in 1984 and by 1988 it was back down to less than 1%. ("Cloned" PCs had started to take off by then, and Apple was left in the dust by the sheer volume of them being sold.) Even the Commodore 64 had a 40% market share in the same time Apple was hitting it's peak 16%. (1983-84)

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    62. Re:wrong OS? by mlts · · Score: 1

      Linux on the desktop has one main hurdle, the problem of Joe Sixpack.

      When Joe Sixpack wants a computer, he doesn't think or care about the OS on it. To him, the computer and the software are the same thing, just like the embedded program which gives the basic UI for his TV is. If Word or Windows has an issue, to him it is the same as a hardware problem. Joe won't actively seek out another OS. If he does, it will be because of Apple's ad campaigns.

      Of course, the "default" OS for any PC -- most likely Windows 7. Until Joe Sixpack mentally separates out the OS from the hardware, this problem will be with us.

    63. Re:wrong OS? by shawb · · Score: 1

      If you use your computer screen as your TV, you are outside of the "norm" and don't count

      Then I'm probably really in trouble... I use my TV as a computer screen. HDMI FTW.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    64. Re:wrong OS? by BlitzTech · · Score: 1

      Says the man with a 5-digit UID, who was 94 signups late for a 4-digit UID. ;P

    65. Re:wrong OS? by donscarletti · · Score: 1

      I'm posting from OS10.6.4

      Honestly, this system I think is 70% as good as Ubuntu, it's main drawbacks seem to be 1) lack of pre-installed or easy to install software, for example anything such as reading a spreadsheet or watching a movie is impossible without searching for software on the web or buying it. Sure, photoshop originated on the Mac, meaning it works well, but I simply do not edit enough images to justify that, having a decent port of GIMP would do me much good. 2) Shitty, shitty IME support, something like typing Chinese is a giant pain on OSX, even after downloading QIM, which is 100x better than the default but still awful compared to the pinyin method that ships with Ubuntu or the Google or Sogou IMEs that can be downloaded with Windows. 3) Lack of basic operating system features, like being able to mute a particular app from the sound control rather than trying to find it wherever the app developer decided to put it.

      MacOS X is a good OS for surfing the web, checking emails and watching movies through VLC, which is why I bought this Macbook Pro, which is a lovely device by the way. Linux is a great OS for those things too, especially if you cannot afford my Macbook Pro. MacOS is also good for the imaginary demographic that needs their computer shipped with GarageBand and iMovie rather than say a vector or raster image editor and maybe even a decent quality word processor or text editor. Oh, and OSX also has all your favourite voices from OS7- such as Bad News and Trinoids, now accessible from the console. It also has the lovely Zaphino font, which you can type out to your hearts content in TextEdit. When using OSX, I just can't shake the feeling that I am playing with a product designed to look "hip" rather than be a functional tool. It really does not seem to want to put things that I need where I can just reach for them and click them, the room is too cluttered with toys. But do you think their playfulness would lead to some decent games shipped by default? I can't find anything but chess, which doesn't really appeal to me, so on the long train ride back from getting my Macbook in Hong Kong I was stuck writing my own games in Python, which was not exactly the quick, hip experience Mr Jobs promised me and much more akin to the hardcore Unix of old than today's funpacked linux distros.

      Anyway, sounds like you either got lucky with OSX or really had some bad luck with linux, because your experience sounds so remote to mine.

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    66. Re:wrong OS? by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      I don't know how much this will matter unless there's a compelling reason to buy the Linux version. Windows has the software library, the name recognition, and the comfort factor of using what you're used to going for it. Apple has the smaller but still extensive software library, the name recognition, and the (created by advertising perhaps, but there none-the-less) reputation for service, premium hardware, and stability going for it. What would this new "Diamond Computer" have to make it the choice?

      There's little name recognition for Linux. It wouldn't really be much cheaper (let's fact it, the "Microsoft Tax" is actually a fairly small amount of money, OEMs pay $20-30 for their licenses). You have an extensive software library of software most people have never heard of. Why should I buy this thing instead of spending a couple bucks more and getting a Windows computer like everyone else? Or a couple hundred bucks more to get a Mac with fancier hardware and a lot of momentum?

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    67. Re:wrong OS? by shawb · · Score: 1

      Even the OSX manpages have BSD everywhere in them.

      More telling would be that OSX even has manpages?

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    68. Re:wrong OS? by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      CAD software

      Specifically, the specific CAD programs that people are used to, certified in, and do what they need them to do.

      Good luck getting EG, BOEING to switch away from CATIA for example. (Yes, older versions of CATIA were made for unix workstations, but now the major development platform is win32/win64, and NOT unix.)

      And for smaller shops, good luck getting them away from MasterCAM, or GibbsCam, or Unigraphics, or any other commonly used CAD/CAM package. The functionality that these programs offer is NON TRIVIAL. $Random_GPL_CAD_Offering is unlikely to have the full feature set that they need, and thus is unlikely to be a good fit.

      This means you need to get EG, Dassault to start releasing a linux port of Catia, (etc..)-- Something that dassault has outright said they wouldnt do, and listed some reasons. (namely, the predisposition of most linux distros to fall back onto software openGL rendering using MesaGL when using certain hardware, either because of security issues or because of a clash with a company over open documentation.)

      Until that kind of problem goes away, CAD developers wont want to support the platform, which is really a shame, since linux really is a nice kernel. (The issue with software rendering is probably a thorn in the side of commercial game makers too.)

      *Uses CAD/CAM software at work all the time. Catia in particular; It's intrinsically NURBS modeling, and absurdly powerful. It hungers for GPU acceleration and CPU. Software rendering would kill it dead.

    69. Re:wrong OS? by johnw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Linux users have less respect the concept of intellectual property than as most computer users

      That sentence is so mangled it's hard to be sure what you were trying to say, but it sounds like an assertion that Linux users have less respect for intellectual property than others. If that is indeed what you're saying, then the following part is a total non-sequitur.

      IME, Linux users tend to have rather *more* respect for intellectual property than your average computer user, which is why they stick to using open source software rather than stealing commercial software. I've lost track of the number of times when I've had an average Windows-user-in-the-street asking me for a bootleg copy of Office, Photoshop or indeed Windows itself. Most of them are gobsmacked by the idea that there's something wrong with just copying them.

      I use Open Source software because I respect the rights of creators of software - including their right to make it freely available.

    70. Re:wrong OS? by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      Because Ubuntu is open source, free to install/download/distribute without licensing issues, and not only for distribution with a bundled and licensed PC?

    71. Re:wrong OS? by BlueStraggler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are just used to the idiosyncrasies of different desktop environments to the point that you don't think about them any more.

      It's a bit silly, for instance, to criticize Apple's UI for inconsistency in close/exit behaviour when you click the red X window control, when this button is modal in all other major UIs, with no indication of which mode you are in (hint: it's usually close mode if there is one window open, and exit otherwise).

      The green zoom button always causes grief to new users because they think it's ought to be a minimize/maximize button, which it isn't. This expectation is entirely a consequence of coming from UIs that treat minimize/maximize as a primary UI operation.

      The menu bar pegged to the primary screen is indeed an old and debateable quirk of Mac OSes, but it should be noted that your criticism doesn't really apply to the portable market, which might explain why Apple has so much success there.

      I agree that it is inaccurate to describe Apple's UI as intuitive---parts of it are astonishingly sophisticated. Intuitive suggests that it should be easy for new users, but that is the way of Clippy and Start buttons. Apple doesn't design to be intuitive--that's a leftover meme from 1985. Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

    72. Re:wrong OS? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Plus it's PCWorld article... not even worth using as toilet paper. PCWorld has been irrelevant in ANYTHING PC related for a decade now.

      My wife uses Linux daily for work and school. It's as capable as windows is in every single way, she is an accountant and manages the laptop herself.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    73. Re:wrong OS? by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I think of when I added an HD to my Ubuntu (okay Mythbuntu to be precise) box this last year, versus one I added to a Windows box.

      Ubuntu I (being not an Uber Linux geek) had to do some web searches to remind myself of the best way to identify, format and mount the new drive. Not hard at all, just a little extra reading to get to the "Oh' yea that's right" moment.

      On the windows box I put in the HD and turned on the power. As soon as windows was up, it popped up window saying "Hey I see a new HD want to format it?" A few clicks and the drive is up and running. No need to remember or go find how to format and mount the drive. It's 2010 the OS knows how to detect and guide me through the process automatically. When Linux is as user friendly as Windows and Mac, then it will achieve greater acceptance.

      Until then it's probably not going to make it.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    74. Re:wrong OS? by the_womble · · Score: 1

      Do they need to know, what is a kernel, what is X and such? No, I do not think so.

      Do Linux users need to know what a kernel is etc.? My wife does not, nor my father. My wife does have me around to help, but she asks for less help than she did with Windows (fewer phone calls from my father too).

    75. Re:wrong OS? by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      It is things like using a green + to shrink a window. That is just wrong.

      Perhaps what is wrong is your interpretation. The green + doesn't merely shrink the window. In fact, sometimes it enlarges the window. What it actually does is tries to resize the window to it's optimum information/real estate. What color and symbol would you prefer? I think + is reasonably intuitive and green is often used to indicate something is good or optimum.

      Things like the red X sometimes closing the application, and other times only closing the UI to the application leaving the to continue running.

      Again, this is only confusing if you are confused about the Apple window paradigm. For the most part, Apple leaves the application open if it is document based and there is some probability that you might want to open another document. These days the importance of this is lost, but I remember the old days when I was working on multiple documents in both Windows and on Macs. Many was the day that I cursed Windows for quitting the application and forcing me to wait seconds for it to relaunch with another document. In the Mac OS, if an application is not document based (for instance a utility), it makes sense to close the app when you close the document. And really, if you're serious enough to be concerned about this then your serious enough to learn Command-W and Command-Q.

      ... having to figure out what application the menu bar applies to is just annoying and breaks the flow of work.

      This is only confusing if you're confused about what you're doing. Whatever application you're working in, that's the one the menu applies to. How difficult is that? Having a menu in every window is just a waste of screen real estate (and yes, that still matters).

      The bottom line is that I have yet to find a UI that is perfect. There are some things that I like about the Mac UI and there are some things that I hate. There are some things that I like about the Windows UI and there are some things that I hate. Does that make either one a bad design? No. The designers have to make compromises and you and I will almost never agree with all of those compromises.

    76. Re:wrong OS? by Dagmar+d'Surreal · · Score: 1

      No, it's PCWorld that's brain dead. I know this will probably be about the zillionth time someone's asked this, but it bears repeating until a decent answer shows itself: Why the hell is Slashdot linking to anything written in a rag that's only of interest to bored secretaries and marketing people? ...especially a jackass article like the one being linked. Using their same logic, literacy is dead because most people are functionally illiterate.

    77. Re:wrong OS? by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      Just pointing out the irony of what you wrote:

      I can see that Linux wins hands down in the tweakability front...

      and

      AppleScript is great and really powerful.

      One of the things that makes AppleScript (and Automator) so fantastic is that they allow the savvy user to tweak the system / application interaction in ways that is far beyond what any linux could ever hope to do.

      Also, not to nitpick, but practically any tweak you can do in linux you can do in Mac OS X and more...

    78. Re:wrong OS? by mpfife · · Score: 1

      And here is the big one. Device drivers! Linux's hardware support is actually very good but it needs a stable binary device driver interface! Oh and "checking before you buy" is not so easy.

      Good observation - but I'd argue that if your customer/user even NEEDS to know to check about a 'device driver' then you've completely failed to grasp why Apple wins the customer again and again.
      People want/need/deserve computers and operating systems that work FOR them - not the other way around. There's a real, and big shift going on that I hope we as developers are realizing.
      We're moving to mobile devices increasingly - the desktop is dying in every metric of sales. Heck, even laptops are beginning to be affected by smart phones, ipads, and netbooks. Desktops will always be needed for content creation, laptops also - but the shares of sales are radically changing. In those new mobile environments, the ones that are really winning are the ones that are providing very simple black boxes that get me on the web, email, and watching videos. The user is even willing to pay *more* for crummy DRM'ed content provided that they get Lady Gaga in a really simple interface and can easily play it. To make these things easier in general for the first-time device user, this means you *constrain* the path of purchase/use so that it is easy to work out. Sure it's not configurable and you're locked into one platform - but nobody cares so long as it looks cool, can easily be done, and works on other things in that line. The fact it won't work on another users platform doesn't become a factor until well AFTER the person has plunked down all the money. Yes, this is crummy - but it's the truth.
      Internally, this means we're starting to move back to vertical stacks a la the old 70's Sun/IBM/DEC days. The users of small/mobile devices increasingly want SOLUTIONS not tons of confusing CHOICES that they need to read about/learn about. While choices and options are empirically better - the hidden quality is that people actually value their time/image and the desire NOT to have to learn all kinds of technical details or walk around with stupid looking devices that look like a teenagers tricked out rice rocket. They're willing to pay more NOT to have to know about any of the details.
      What we as nerds forget is there is other currency besides features and ideology. There is time and social stigma - and these are much more important to the end user. If you're in a social situation and you want to buy/play a song or show someone a video; if you have to go "here we go! Oh, wait a second. Ummm, lemmie configure this codec, etc..." vs. "Here's this youtube video....lol" What a difference! That second example shows how you just built social currency and valued the users TIME - the first shot down the whole moment, wasted their time, added frustration, and made the person appear foolish to their friends/business associates. I think we often forget this 'soft' factor is FAR more important to the user than most other factors.
      And after all - we invented computers to do work FOR us, not that we bend ourselves to their needs. That might have been true back in the day, but there's no excuse for having to think the way the computer wants things anymore. It's a big mental shift - but one we as developers better get used too.

    79. Re:wrong OS? by phek · · Score: 1

      what ever happened to 'bsd is not unix'?

    80. Re:wrong OS? by abigor · · Score: 1

      Care to elaborate? Or do you just hate BSD's userland?

    81. Re:wrong OS? by Omestes · · Score: 1

      When I switched away from Macs (long story, but the lack of control over my hardware played a decent part, and the rate of new paid patches, and the Intel thing) the two things I missed the most was Quicksilver and the fact that EVERY application could seamlessly share data with other applications. Well, I also missed the integrated spell-check and dictionary too...

      Quicksilver is one of those rare apps that completely changed how I use a computer. There really hasn't been anything like that since the advent of the GUI (in my experience, I'm sure others will disagree). I loved that it was basically like using the terminal, could could be as simple or complex as you needed it to be. That and doing basic tasks could just turn into muscle memory. To this day, and I haven't used a Mac as a primary computer in almost 5 years now, I still find myself mashing [windows]+[space]+[F] to open a browser, or [windows]+[space]+[S] to pop up Slashdot.

      Quicksilver was the perfect bit of software, it was ridiculously simple, but almost infinitely complex. You could dig down in it and basically do everything you could do in a terminal, or more, or just use it as a quick and dirty launcher. Features like it should be an integral part of every OS. Spotlight doesn't quite cut it, it is too simple, Windows Search doesn't do it either. GnomeDo is nice, but it doesn't quite get there.

      That was one thing I did notice about OS X, its third-party developer community was awesome, even when it came to OSS. They prove that OSS doesn't have to be a kludgy, ugly mess. This is a lesson you wouldn't learn from just using OSS on Windows and Linux.

      I do hate how locked down OS X is though. Its simple because there really isn't any options. When trying to customize it to your work flow, your only option is "grey buttons or rainbow buttons?", and "big dock, or little dock?".

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    82. Re:wrong OS? by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Amen, brother. If Linux supported major games and closed codex's native -- no wine, cedega, vmware, virtualbox, etc in the way -- Windows would be dealt a real hammer blow, even today. After all, what do most people do with their computers? Browse the web, movies, music, youtube, games, and oh, yeah, work. And what is work? An office suite. Sometimes an actual application, but most often it is just email, a spreadsheet, a word processor, or if you are in sales or something presentation ware. Linux has the web and office software well and truly covered -- Open Office and Firefox are arguably better than MS Office and Explorer, and MS Office is still insanely expensive to where a lot of people are using OO and FF even on Windows systems just to avoid having to pay. Linux does decently with at least some codex's these days and can thus play music and many kinds of video (and will probably do better when open HTML 5 starts to replace rather closed Flash, if it ever does. Where it loses hearts and minds is absolutely games. Accelerated video support still sucks in Linux after all of these years (where nearly all other hardware except rare and stupidly designed USB devices is decently supported), and one still can't play World of Warcraft native. I do find it really amusing that an article like this is coming out right when Google is poised to take over the desktop and everything else in the interactive Universe by virtue of simply eliminating operating system dependence altogether, so that it no longer matters whether or not your system is Apple, Linux, BSD, Microsoft. When Google Chrome IS your GUI desktop, when all your primary working software is built in to Chrome or loaded over the network on demand (to be locally saved or not, depending), when there are numerous competitors all providing that same sort of layered independence (including a lot of browser-based games) -- come tell me again how the desktop wars are over.

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    83. Re:wrong OS? by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Trolls count to three just fine and they do have "many", which comes after three and before "lots". Also they can probably count just fine to whatever number should the environment be cool enough...

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    84. Re:wrong OS? by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      I hated MacOS back in the late 80s and early 90s (when I stopped using it completely) as it was "our way or the highway" compared to the world of PCs (before windows 95). But now I prefer it, as my standard operating mode is one hand on the mouse and one hand on the keyboard (for autocad, FormZ, Revit, photoshop, and others). I do prefer having the alternative of closing the window without exiting the application, and command-Q is pretty easy to get used to. Windows is much the same, but (for instance) excel will try to close the application when, even when you have multiple windows open, you close one window with the topmost "X", where word on the other hand will treat that "X" as closing only that document. This inconsistency drives me nuts, and MS seems to be getting worse (another example, when I was working in the pentagon we built a lot of power point presentations about the experimental designs we had for weapons analysis . . . it was really convenient to be able to open two presentations side by side in the slide sorter and move slides back and forth between presentations. Now Power point only lets you have one document view up at a time . . . WTF . . . I don't use MS office on the Mac, and now use indesign rather than power point on all platforms).

    85. Re:wrong OS? by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      You are just used to the idiosyncrasies of different desktop environments to the point that you don't think about them any more.

      It's a bit silly, for instance, to criticize Apple's UI for inconsistency in close/exit behaviour when you click the red X window control, when this button is modal in all other major UIs, with no indication of which mode you are in (hint: it's usually close mode if there is one window open, and exit otherwise).

      The green zoom button always causes grief to new users because they think it's ought to be a minimize/maximize button, which it isn't. This expectation is entirely a consequence of coming from UIs that treat minimize/maximize as a primary UI operation.

      The menu bar pegged to the primary screen is indeed an old and debateable quirk of Mac OSes, but it should be noted that your criticism doesn't really apply to the portable market, which might explain why Apple has so much success there.

      I agree that it is inaccurate to describe Apple's UI as intuitive---parts of it are astonishingly sophisticated. Intuitive suggests that it should be easy for new users, but that is the way of Clippy and Start buttons. Apple doesn't design to be intuitive--that's a leftover meme from 1985. Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

      I never have figured out how those 3 colored buttons work. Always confusing for me. Easy to remember I'm sure, if I bothered, but not intuitive, that's for sure.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    86. Re:wrong OS? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Their numbering system is binary. "One" and "Not One".

    87. Re:wrong OS? by falsified · · Score: 1

      OpenOffice is arguably better than Office 2010? I suppose that statement is technically true - a lot of people will argue with you whenever you say it.

      Office productivity software lives and dies by compatibility. It doesn't matter how good the software itself does unless you're a one-person business with yourself as the only customer. OpenOffice & Thunderbird doesn't have compatibility until I can create a meeting request, have it open something completely compatible with LiveMeeting, and have a recording of the videoconference automatically uploaded to a SharePoint site when I'm done. And until it can be ready to handle the next version of Office the day it's released.

      Or when it can reliably open a five-page document containing a table.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    88. Re:wrong OS? by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      Hopefully Steam will get there and we all be vary happy

      --
      -- dnl
    89. Re:wrong OS? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Your Macbook is broken then.

      Worked in about 10 seconds on my Powerbook G4. Just connect cable between laptop and HDMI port, OS X picks it up right away.

      It could be that your TV was not replying automatically when connected, in which case you can tell OS X to "detect displays" and it will usually pop up then. I can't say I've ever had an issue with a secondary screen not working - especially 6 hours of work trying to get an HDMI-driven TV on OS X. I suspect hardware failure.

    90. Re:wrong OS? by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      Crap. VERY happy. My bad.

      Mmm. The last sentence sounds more funny than I intended.

      --
      -- dnl
    91. Re:wrong OS? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Some of us care. We're not all entirely constrained to the GUI.

    92. Re:wrong OS? by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      I like how the TV industry has rebranded displays so that 1080P is a good thing. That's like a 1990 computer monitor (except for the 4:3 standard back then). How long until the start selling screens with an upcharge because they are "fully interlaced"?

    93. Re:wrong OS? by Bloem · · Score: 1

      That's it, I'm switching to Hurd.
      http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/.

      --
      the use of knowledge is highly overrated
    94. Re:wrong OS? by muridae · · Score: 1

      A Wii can run a customized Linux kernel, if it is installed by the owner of the device. If you happen to have more information that Nintendo is using Linux on it stock, there are many people who would like to hear about that.

    95. Re:wrong OS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

      In other words, Apple designs its products to be productive for people who have never been productive before, but people who are currently productive shouldn't expect to be productive using Apple products?

    96. Re:wrong OS? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      You get used to it. Now I think it's ok to be able to close browser windows and up with none and understand that yes, I've closed them all, and then open a new one (Though restarting the application would probably had brought some memory back.)

      Anyway, if I want to quit, I quit. Use keyboard shortcuts and you know what you're doing. Check the dock if you wonder (don't launch applications through the dock, remove everything and launch them through spotlight or quicksilver, that way your dock will only keep open applications and minimized windows.)

    97. Re:wrong OS? by jimfrost · · Score: 1

      IMO there isn't a whole lot of difference in the basic UI of any of these things anymore. MacOS is easier to use than any of them because it is a whole lot more consistent within and between apps, but realistically things are not so bad anywhere else either.

      Anyway Linux is lacking a whole lot more than just major studio games, and WINE only closes the gap in a few places (and with significant irritations). I use Linux daily, so this is not just idle speculation. Creativity products in particular are nonexistent or weak (I'm looking at you Open Office) with the exception of GIMP (and I still strongly prefer Photoshop). It's a superb programming environment though, I wish I had valgrind for Windows. (I do have Purify. When it works it is great. Most of the time it does not work. Oh well.)

      I use Windows daily too, many things are just not available anywhere else. I find that a pretty good development environment has Windows running native and Linux in a VM. (I'd rather put Linux native, but Windows has plenty of trouble being performant even when it's on the bare hardware. It's gawdawful in VMs. Linux works fine in VMs excepting mediocre network performance.)

      When it comes down to it my favorite desktop environment is the Mac. Excellent applications plus all the goodness that is UNIX, and it's easy enough to run Windows in a VM if I have to (though these days that is a pretty rare exception). I could do without a lot of aspects of His Steveness but I have to weigh that against the huge benefit of how easy it is to keep Macs running even in the hands of naive users.

      --
      jim frost
      jimf@frostbytes.com
    98. Re:wrong OS? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      but they did the desktop RIGHT

      It's not perfect though.
      * It lacks an uninstaller(1).
      * Things like the H.264 acceleration for Flash took forever.
      * Lots of large changes make new application versions incompatible with old OS versions.
      (* It's probably slow in areas such as OpenGL, JAVA and such to.)

      And before anyone complain on (1), it's a disadvantage! Sure just throwing things away is intuitively nice, but it doesn't work! If it launched some sort of clean-up-script or something such then fine. But as is it may leave a bunch of crap lying around. There's plenty of applications which tries to fix this issue but it should be there in the OS from the beginning. Or applications should keep themselves very clean from littering other places.

      Personally I liked how things where on the Amiga, preferably without any installer and managed by oneself so one knew what happened.
      (Put the application in a drawer with things like libs/ fonts/ c/ whatever within the same drawer, eventually assigning say Photoshop: to dh1:applications/Photoshop if it needed to know it's own application drawer, or copy everything in libs, fonts and so on over to sys:fonts or fonts: (later being an assign to the same thing as the first one) and everything else will be able to use them to (works great for libs and datatypes to.)
      One issue could had been versions but either include the version name in the library name if it will change or make future versions backwards compatible, applications such as Directory Opus knew how to tell the library version anyhow so it just said things like You're copying iCrap.library version 3.20 onto libs: but already have iCrap.library version 3.24 do you want to continue?)

      If you copied such things over would removing the directory remove everything? No. But you would most likely only copy rather "system wide" items over that way so it didn't mattered because chances where something else would had wanted to use the same item.

    99. Re:wrong OS? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Doesn't surprise me. Unlike OSX and Linux, Windows seems determined to be inscrutable on a regular basis. I've never found a file in Linux which I couldn't delete, whereas with Windows it's a fairly regular occurrence. Ultimately they do get deleted, but I shouldn't have to use techniques that venture that far out of the paradigm they're using for the entire OS to do it.

    100. Re:wrong OS? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      BSD was never intended as a desktop OS... but if I wanted a remotely administered server I wouldn't consider anything else. BSD rules!

      --
      No sig today...
    101. Re:wrong OS? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      I learned that the hardway on the last Linux box we had around the office. I went to get a PCI wireless card, check the initial specs and all the readings said, "yep, Atheros and works with SuSE just fine". Bring it home, well turns out it was Revision 3 with a marvell chipset which linux didn't support at the time.. I eventually got it to work with a windows driver wrapper after a few hours of banging my head against a wall and remembering this is what made me switch to a mac when OS 10.1 was released.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    102. Re:wrong OS? by shawb · · Score: 1

      Wow... I did mess that up. That's what I get for multitasking before caffeine... now I have to try to unwrap what I said and meant.

      I guess the truth behind what I meant to say is that the trend in the open source community is to have an active distaste for closed source code, not intellectual property in general as I wrote. However, the commercial software in question is exclusively closed. OSS advocates (of which I claim most people with the resources to pay for the commercial media editing software who will not have OSX or Windows available to run the software are OSS advocates) will of course have a much better understanding of what intellectual property is, and the consequences for violating the social agreement behind it. That understanding is essential to forming an opinion in the first place, so that understanding comes almost by definition. The open source advocate will, however, generally try to spend the effort to find or even improve a free alternative rather than spend the money on the mainstream software.

      I'm not against open source. I have...

      Okay, I don't remember where I was going with that last one... while researching my argument I started reading about Ardour and it's integration with Harrison consoles. My personal interest in content creation is with DAWs and related software, so by the time I'm done looking into that and disproving my original main point this topic will be stale. But then again, most audio engineers are just geeks who hang around musicians. Look at the last word in the title "audio engineer" for supporting evidence.

      And thank you for making me research the point...

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    103. Re:wrong OS? by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Apple is doing something extremely correct and keeping their GUI intuative and (I do not know how, but) compatible with older OSs they released

      What are you talking about? Pretty much the only thing the OS X GUI has in common with earlier versions of MacOS is the location of the menu bar. Even the Finder operates on totally different principles.

    104. Re:wrong OS? by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      Launchy isn't as powerful as quicksilver's advanced functions but works well as a nice little multi-tool on windows and linux.

      I use it all of the time as a calculator, and on my work computer, I can't even find half of the programs I use in the start menu since I installed launchy right away.

      --
      Bottles.
    105. Re:wrong OS? by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Market share is not a great metric for Apple. Instead look at market cap and profit margins. The business model at Apple is not about market share, especially when it comes to computers.

    106. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > You are just used to the idiosyncrasies of different desktop environments to the point that you don't think about them any more.

      Yup. And Apple violated their own legacy in this respect.

      If anything, you could think of the "Windows way" as an attempt to ape that earlier Mac standard.

      Apple decided to break with the past and do something freaky. Their own old school fans have plenty to say on this subject.

      However, in general Apple seems to insist on doing things just oddly enough to cause cross-platform headaches and to more isolate Apple users.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    107. Re:wrong OS? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I am not claiming that it is, but the topic of this conversation thread is market share.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    108. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > I gave up on Linux on the desktop years ago, after switching to Mac OS X.
      > I'm not going back. Linux has soooo far to go just to get to where Mac OS
      > X is now that it's not even funny.

      No. Not really. It has a little bit more mindshare because it's been a corporate entity longer but the tech side really isn't terribly impressive.

      The problem with Macs is that you get much the same complaints with it that you would with Linux: "my program X doesn't run".

      If you are interested in using something acquired from some random unknown source then MacOS is a big handicap. Apple's NIH mentality will really get in the way to the point where your Mac desktop will end up looking much more like a Windows or a Linux machine.

      It's primary value for most users is that it supports Apple's own proprietary technology and devices and isn't Windows.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    109. Re:wrong OS? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      But the sad thing is that I really do like Linux the best. I am just not going to try and fool myself.
      Until I can go to a store and there are items that have a little penguin symbol on them that says works with Linux V 2.x and above we are just stuck.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    110. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      I've used OO in corporate environments for years and years without any problems.

      Big Blue is even switching to a variant of it internally.

      Linux can't compete with Windows in terms of running any little obscure app you can think up. Neither can MacOS.

      > I have had people tell me they hate OOo Calc because of pivot tables.

      This was a big Lemming Troll meme for awhile.

      Most people aren't "geeky" enough with spreadsheets to care really.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    111. Re:wrong OS? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      funny slashdotters always talk about gaming when complaining about desktop Linux. most people I know don't even use their PC for games, they have dedicated game appliances. Some of the most popular game appliances in the world don't even run windows, imagine that. A WII, for example, uses customized Linux kernel....

      True, but just because something uses Linux doesn't mean it is Linux. It'd be hard to argue any gaming system is open and modifiable. It's probably about the only case where I actually prefer the system to be closed.

    112. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Are you KIDDING? "a little jigging" is not uncommon for desktop PC games.

      That's why the console market is so much bigger. It avoids all of that nonsense and futzing.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    113. Re:wrong OS? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      Ah, touched a nerve of some Window$ droid did we?

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    114. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > The fact that you can add 3rd party addons to expand or tweak it goes counter to your first statement.

      Once you've turned a Mac into something that looks strangely like a Windows PC or even a Linux desktop, then the point of MacOS kind of evaporates.

      You are basically left with a quirky Windows desktop that runs less stuff but is less malware prone.

      If you don't have some proprietary requirement that is also co-incidentally not a problem for MacOS then it gains you nothing.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    115. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      It's handy too. There are some things that there don't seem to be an obvious way
      to do with the GUI even with a bit of finagle (like you can with GNOME). There's
      also the odd bit of debugging and rescuing you might have to do with the command
      line (like ejecting a disk).

      You know, it's been around for 25+ and it's had this eject problem all of this
      time and you would think by now that Apple would finally get the hint and put
      eject buttons back on their machines.

      Usability indeed...

      The last time I tried that commandline eject hack, the tool in question wasn't
      even acknowledging my internal drive at all. It only wanted to acknowledge the
      external one.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    116. Re:wrong OS? by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      True, market share for Linux, and using Apple as a model or example to use would (for the reason I stated previously) be misguided at best for the Linux world. The MS model is probably more relevant for Linux as a desktop product (ie, get on board with the big computer makers like Dell to get your product out there). Unfortunately, this has not worked very well perhaps becuase of strongarm tactics by Microsoft combined with indifference from the market.

    117. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > 3. MS Office, Photoshop, other "common" software

      That's pretty pathetic actually.

      You have barely gotten past the $600 professional grade prepress/matte artist application and you are already into the "et cetera".

      Your remark if anything really demonstrates my point.

      Your comments about Linux are just plain wrong and your cheerleading for Windows only proves my point. You can't really think of any good reasons to bother with Windows.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    118. Re:wrong OS? by Elbows · · Score: 1

      I do hate BSD's userland (seriously, it's the 21st century, parsing arguments in arbitrary order is not that hard). But I have lots of other complaints, too. :)

      • X11 support is clunky, and Carbon/Cocoa apps can't be run remotely.
      • You have to jump through various hoops to get a sane and useful Emacs installation.
      • In the terminal, many editing shortcuts that I'm used to either don't work, or are bound to some annoying feature in Terminal.app (Alt-Left/Right, Alt-Backspace, Alt-d).
      • launchd seems like a gratuitous reinvention of rc.d init scripts. It must have some cool features, but I don't know what they are because the documentation sucks.

      I could go on, but you get the idea. It's all little things, but they add up. I'd rather run Linux and have the Unix environment exactly the way I want it, even if it takes some fiddling to get the desktop side of things going. But I'm probably not a typical user. ;-)

    119. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Translation: "Yeah, OS X is pretty awesome and is really the only viable desktop Unix, but Linux sort of runs Firefox and webapps are all you need because I said so."

      You know what's conspicuously missing there? What MacOS really has to offer beyond Firefox.

      A video editor that chokes on anything but mp4?
      An image manager with a primitive image manipulation tools?
      An image manager that has no sense of organization?
      A video player that is a mess to deal with if you don't cater to it?

      The only thing a Mac has going for it is official support for Apples ipod variant devices

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    120. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > What the hell does that even, mean "stray from the party line"?

      Try to play an mpeg ps file.

      Try to make a video with a bunch of mpeg files.

      Try to import a bunch of "alien" content into iTunes.

      Video is a big rabbit hole that's going to swallow the average user
      if the apps and system tools don't "Just Work" and "Just Work" with
      whatever you happen to have.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    121. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Good observation - but I'd argue that if your customer/user even
      > NEEDS to know to check about a 'device driver' then you've completely
      > failed to grasp why Apple wins the customer again and again.

      You do realize that Macs don't "support everything" don't you?

      If you don't bother with this sort of thing with a Mac it will bite you in the ass and you will end up with a paperweight.

      The shiny happiness of the Mac does not eliminate this problem.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    122. Re:wrong OS? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Most people don't really need Microsoft Office.

      You're just spreading the FUD and keeping this particular beast alive and scaring old grannies who are trying to peaceably buy a computer that wont root itself.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    123. Re:wrong OS? by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      BSD's not dead of course - look only to the Mach kernel in OS X for verification.

      "BSD's not dead, you can tell because of the non-BSD kernel in this OS !"

      If you want to see how a desktop UNIX-based os should do it right, look at OS X. Say what you will about Apple - I don't care, only own a mac and an iPod (I have a Droid X for my phone) - but they did the desktop RIGHT. It's easy to use, fairly intuitive (passes the grandma test, for the most part), and is oh so easy to support.

      However, almost everything that makes OS X interesting and compelling, has nothing to do with it being a UNIX.

    124. Re:wrong OS? by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      And that right there is the main problem for most users. 90% of computer users don't want to have to do "a little jigging" to get every single thing they want to do to work, let alone know how to do it.

      Ah, but there are programs to make it easy for the other %. Just like, for example, one doesn't need to rely on a command line to program in C++ or write text documents [FULL GUI DRIVEN IDEs & EDITORS EXIST], or even more obscurely, one doesn't need a hex editor to hack popular games when editors do it for you. WHATEVER THE APPLICATION, if there is a demand to make it easier for more people to do it, historically it seems that this demand is always met.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    125. Re:wrong OS? by dr_blurb · · Score: 1

      funny slashdotters always talk about gaming when complaining about desktop Linux.

      minecraft runs on Linux.

      what more do you want?

    126. Re:wrong OS? by drsmithy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's a bit silly, for instance, to criticize Apple's UI for inconsistency in close/exit behaviour when you click the red X window control, when this button is modal in all other major UIs, with no indication of which mode you are in (hint: it's usually close mode if there is one window open, and exit otherwise).

      In other UIs it's irrelevant, because they're window-centric rather than app-centric. You're *always* just closing the window - whether that quits the application as well doesn't matter, because the UI is focused around windows (or "documents", if you prefer) as standalone elements, rather than elements in a child-parent relationship like MacOS does (except when it doesn't).

      The menu bar pegged to the primary screen is indeed an old and debateable quirk of Mac OSes, but it should be noted that your criticism doesn't really apply to the portable market, which might explain why Apple has so much success there.

      Everyone I know with a laptop connects it to a larger screen quite regularly to use a dual-screen setup, at which point the problems with the single menu bar become *very* apparent, as dissimilar screens in a multi-monitor setup exacerbates them badly.

      Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

      Every since OSX 10.0 in 2000, Apple's primary objective with its UI design has been looking cool in demos. Utility has followed a far second.

    127. Re:wrong OS? by dannys42 · · Score: 1

      Agreed... OSX is certainly one of the best desktops I've seen (unix backend or not).

      I'd like to add... one of the big benefits I saw to Linux was the package management interfaces (rpms or dpkg or whatever.. they're all better than any commercial unix I've seen).

      While it was an adjustment for me to come to terms with Apple's .app model, I've grown to see a lot of great benefits to this model. In many cases it really obviates the need to have any sort of complex package management. The added benefit is that even on the command-line, you can see everything that an app uses/needs very easily.

    128. Re:wrong OS? by tknd · · Score: 1

      Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

      So one button mice were productive? Or annoying dock magnification? Or how about the fact that iphone didn't have copy and paste for a long time? Don't bring up the "they were implementing it the right way" bs when everyone claimed "it's easier to use that way!" to justify the lack of copy and paste or the lack of multiple mouse buttons.

      Apple doesn't do that much better of a job with productivity when there are many concepts of productivity they simply refuse to accept. They don't seem to accept productive things if they didn't come up with it first or Steve Jobs just happens to not like it. If macs were really productive, they'd ship with mice that had a second button and a wheel, and windows would be resizable from all edges (even edges with zero pixel borders) not just the bottom right corner.

      If you want a more recent example just look at how annoying popups are on iphone. You could be sitting there trying to type away and then a stupid window pops up saying "open wifi networks blah blah blah" but you think you're typing and accidentally hit the "connect" button when you don't mean to. Meanwhile on android that would never happen because the notification pull down never steals your focus.

    129. Re:wrong OS? by IrquiM · · Score: 1

      Binary trolls?

      --
      This is blinging
    130. Re:wrong OS? by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      Have you been to a store lately? I see them all the time now. I bought a D-Link wifi USB stick over a year ago because it had exactly what you describe on the box.

    131. Re:wrong OS? by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You are just used to the idiosyncrasies of different desktop environments to the point that you don't think about them any more.

      This is what Apple fans like to tell themselves. Sorry, but it isn't true, and sticking your head in the sand doesn't make it so. My computer usage far predates both Windows and Mac.

      It's a bit silly, for instance, to criticize Apple's UI for inconsistency in close/exit behavior when you click the red X window control, when this button is modal in all other major UIs, with no indication of which mode you are in (hint: it's usually close mode if there is one window open, and exit otherwise).

      What are you talking about? One of us is confused about the definition of "Modal". What I can tell you is that the X button on both Linux and Windows is very consistent. It closes the window, and any of the windows children. The only applications I have run across on Windows that do not follow the consistent behavior are bittorrent clients and IM clients. (Inconsistent, but I understand why.) With MacOS, it is all over the board.

      The green zoom button always causes grief to new users because they think it's ought to be a minimize/maximize button, which it isn't. This expectation is entirely a consequence of coming from UIs that treat minimize/maximize as a primary UI operation.

      You sound ridiculous saying this. The reason that the green + button causes grief is because for as long as any of us have been alive, we have agreed that a + symbol means 'add'. I means you are making something more or bigger. Green means go. So, a green + means go bigger. In fact, if the green + button was minimize/maximize, it would still be wrong. A green plus should never shrink a window.

      So, no, it isn't because I am used to other OSes. It is because I am used to being a human who is part of society beyond Mac computers.

      The menu bar pegged to the primary screen is indeed an old and debatable quirk of Mac OSes, but it should be noted that your criticism doesn't really apply to the portable market, which might explain why Apple has so much success there.

      The placement of the menu was debatable back when single monitors where the only setup. Today, it isn't debatable any more. It is now simply a poor design. So, Apple uses a system that is bad for use at a desk and is neutral for a portable instead of using a UI that would work well for both. Notice I did not say "desktop" because when used at a desk, a laptop will often have two monitors hooked to it. It is funny that you use this argument, yet you claim that the OS is designed to be productive. An OS who chooses to make multiple monitors a second class citizen in it's UI design cannot be claimed as one that is designed to be productive.

      I agree that it is inaccurate to describe Apple's UI as intuitive---parts of it are astonishingly sophisticated. Intuitive suggests that it should be easy for new users, but that is the way of Clippy and Start buttons. Apple doesn't design to be intuitive--that's a leftover meme from 1985. Apple designs to be productive, which makes it annoying for people who already have burned in productivity habits from platforms where this is less of a design ethic.

      You are the only one claiming this. The mantra of Apple has been that "It just works" (and when it doesn't, it is the users fault) and is "Intuitive". There is nothing inherently more productive about Apples UI. In fact, it is things like the lack of a maximize button, the fact that to increase window size, you can only do it from the lower right corner, and putting the menu for a program on a different screen that the application, that makes the MacOS UI LESS productive.

      While Clippy was a failed attempt at a better help system, the Start button is useful, productive AND intuitive. MacOS also has a start button of it's own. It is just split between the 'Appli

    132. Re:wrong OS? by bledri · · Score: 1

      Apple is doing something extremely correct and keeping their GUI intuative and (I do not know how, but) compatible with older OSs they released

      What are you talking about? Pretty much the only thing the OS X GUI has in common with earlier versions of MacOS is the location of the menu bar. Even the Finder operates on totally different principles.

      You're right in the jump from OS9 to OS X. I never liked the original MacOS, so I don't know the good bits I missed. But 10 years ago puts him back to about OS X 10.0, and Apple has been evolving the GUI in a pretty "backwards compatible" way there for the basics. the Apple menu still gets you to System Preferences, Log in, Log out, etc... The Application->About, Preferences and Quit are still there. The (x) (-) (+) controls are in the same place, the dock is functionally similar. It's all minor - no more stripes, more brushed metal. iTunes is a bit of a wild card. All while adding Spotlight, Spaces, Expose, standardizing Services, etc... But in the same time frame MS went from Windows 98/2000 clunk, to XP's "My First Computer Playschool" to Windows 7 "Alpha channel is way cooler than being able to read the URL in the browser." But more importantly, while Windows always had the Control Panel, what was in it and what wasn't and how you get there seems to keep moving around.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    133. Re:wrong OS? by bledri · · Score: 1

      BNU?

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    134. Re:wrong OS? by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And there you go. When MacOS does something badly, it must be the users fault. No, green is not used because it is "optimum". If that was the case, it wouldn't be green after you pushed it. It doesn't resize to the document size, Go open iTunes. Click on the green button. (which for some reason is positioned vertically instead of horizontally) One of those screen sizes is not 'optimal'. I would say neither is, but we should all be able to agree that they can't both be the optimal size. Besides, wouldn't you claim that the whole UI is good and optimal? Shouldn't the whole screen be green in that case? Also the plus is NOT intuitive. Plus means Add. It should NEVER shrink the screen. It is the opposite of intuitive.

      As for the menu, when you step away from your computer, and have two copies of RDP open. When you come back, how do you know which one the menu applies to? Don't say, you would just remember. Because that could be the next morning. Asking people to remember what the last window they clicked on the night before when there are perfectly good ways for the UI to tell them is bad UI design. (And no, the amount of space taken by a menu does not matter anymore. That is just a poor excuse for bad UI design.)

    135. Re:wrong OS? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Interestingly lots of people (including my wife and a number of fine arts graduates around her) do not realize that they are using a Unix system behind those shiny buttons and sliders.

      I've seen things even worse than that. We bought a standalone device designed to record conversations on a radio system. The device is basically a computer with a lot of radio related I/O devices. The interface is very windows, and I remember saying to the vendor "Why do you run windows on a system like this?" with great disappointment. His answer? "We don't, it's Linux. We just made it look like windows so customers feel comfortable, look!" and proceeds to open up an xterm.

    136. Re:wrong OS? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Linux users tend to have rather *more* respect for intellectual property than your average computer user,

      Bullshit.

      That may be true of some Linux users, but I doubt that ratio is any different for Windows or any other OS.

      However, Linux does have a MUCH MUCH higher number of leechs that think 'free software' means they don't have to pay for it. The battle cry is always 'free', rarely do you hear open.

      Most Linux users use it because its a free ride, thats just the reality of it, sorry.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    137. Re:wrong OS? by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      My computer usage far predates both Windows and Mac.

      Mine, too, but we're not debating the UI conventions of CP/M vs. VMS.

      What are you talking about? One of us is confused about the definition of "Modal". What I can tell you is that the X button on both Linux and Windows is very consistent. It closes the window, and any of the windows children.

      Modal means it does different things depending on context. Sometimes it quits the app and sometimes it doesn't, depending on what else you have open.

      With MacOS, it is all over the board.

      No, for a given app, the behaviour of the button is always the same. On Windows and Linux the behaviour of the button for a given app changes depending on what else you have open.

      You sound ridiculous saying this. The reason that the green + button causes grief is because for as long as any of us have been alive, we have agreed that a + symbol means 'add'.

      Add 1000 pixels of useless whitespace around my 100-pixel image, you mean. Just because you find that an intuitive and obvious behaviour doesn't make it so. The rest of us think it is retarded that there should be a major UI function for "cover up my entire workspace so I can't drag-and-drop anything anywhere and am forced to use the obvious shortcut of Crtl-C, Ctrl-V to move things around".

      The placement of the menu was debatable back when single monitors where the only setup. Today, it isn't debatable any more.

      Sorry, dude, but we're debating it. Most users these days buy laptops, and most laptops are single display. What's more, with handheld devices, things are trending even more strongly in that direction.

      the Start button is useful, productive AND intuitive.

      ...? What do you even say to ignorant shit like this?

    138. Re:wrong OS? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Most of my friends game on a PC and not on a console. Consoles don't have the input flexibility of a PC, they don't have the graphics and they don't work too well if you want the TV or a film on in addition to your gaming (and I know a couple of dozen people that do).

      I'm not knocking console gaming, a lot of people get a lot of enjoyment out of it, and a Wii or a dancemat is an excellent addition to a party. But for hard core solid gaming I'm always going to switch on my PC.

      I personally would switch to Linux if it supported easily all the games I've been buying on Steam. It doesn't.

    139. Re:wrong OS? by Dausha · · Score: 1

      No, it's additive, not multiplicative. Totally different result.

      --
      What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    140. Re:wrong OS? by seebs · · Score: 1

      The fact remains, most of the things you cited are normal and convenient if you're used to them. I quite like Apple's menu bar. In theory, we may well be in the days of multiple displays, but in practice, I spend well over 99% of my computing time on single displays, and Apple's menu bar remains easier and faster for me to use.

      It's largely a matter of what you're used to; you haven't exactly presented compelling evidence that there's an objective disadvantage to the OS X ways, you've just listed things that don't work the way you're used to them working.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    141. Re:wrong OS? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      has about as good of driver support as is reasonably possible given manufacturer reluctance

      I'm sorry, but "reasonably possible" in this case is irrelevant - it's still not good enough. Of 3 pieces of hardware I've bought within last year, 2 had (and continue to have) problems with two latest Ubuntu releases. Both were bought off the shelf in Best Buy.

      The issue of who's to blame here is a different one, but it's not particularly interesting to the end user who wants stuff to Just Work. Of course, no-one really sells "Just Work", only some approximation of that - but, clearly, Apple is ahead of everyone else in this game, and Linux is lagging far behind.

    142. Re:wrong OS? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      well, there's also the Gaming PC: $2000 Console: $190 argument.

      I'm glad I burned myself out on video/arcade/pc games over twenty five years ago. My PC is a $400 frankenstein

    143. Re:wrong OS? by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      And there you go. When Mac does something different than Windows it must be bad...

      You are right. Green doesn't activate an optimal view, it toggles between your most recent view and an optimal view. I thought it was intuitively obvious, but I said it wrong. My bad.

      For iTunes, the green dot toggles between the most recent user window settings and the mini player. Since most people want to listen to music and are not interested in having their music player hogging a lot of screen real estate, then I would say that the mini player is generally considered optimal.

      So the + is not intuitive for you? Maybe you can suggest an alternative that is more intuitive? Would it help if you thought of + as meaning there's an additional view that you can toggle to?

      I think your RDP scenario may be a fair one, but certainly a special case. I assume there is some reason that you need multiple instances of the application open rather than multiple sessions in one instance... Still, I see three problems with this scenario (1) What is the likelihood that you will walk away from your computer, return much later and the first thing you need to do is perform some menu function? (2) Even if this is a legitimate requirement, given that you've been away for presumably hours, can you not take the extra second to click on the relevant window and ensure your menu bar has the right context? and (3) All of the RDP clients I've ever used have contextual menus in the window, so you effectively have your menu bar in the window you care about anyway.

      I'm sure that if you tried really hard you could come up with an even better example, but my point would be the same - in general, it's not a problem.

      I might agree with the logic of the menu bar per window paradigm if the menu bars only affected the windows that they are associated with, but the Microsoft paradigm is a confused one. Some menus affect the window in focus and some affect windows that are not in focus (at the application level). Also, sometimes when I'm in a hurry, I may accidentally select menus from windows behind the one I'm interested in, sometimes with unpleasant consequences. And yes, I care about wasted screen real estate going to redundant menus, so it still matters to me... and don't even get me started with ribbons. To me, all of that is bad UI design.

      You say poe-TAY-toe, I say poe-TAH-toe... let's call the whole thing off.

    144. Re:wrong OS? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      info is just old coverage of interview: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Updatable-Operating-System-for-Wii-37467.shtml

      note is this quite different from "Linux" to mean a distribution or entire OS, this is just kernel.

    145. Re:wrong OS? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Anyone that has to wait six months for a one line fix in some very expensive closed source software is going to have an active distaste for it on any platform - especially if the workaround takes about half an hour per time the software is used.

    146. Re:wrong OS? by westyvw · · Score: 1

      And these too many apps that dont have counterparts are what?

      The Office debate is just tired. I see it from the other side, MSOffice is the fragile annoying ugly step child. Try writing 3000 page documents with embedded spreadsheets and several database connections with Word. Or try updating all of your presentations using a command line pipe and a for-next script.

      I moved Linux into the office in 2001 and into the home shortly thereafter, mostly due to the limitations of the windows environment.

    147. Re:wrong OS? by westyvw · · Score: 1

      Nope. Companies want to put a big fat 300 megabyte driver/installer/spyware/bloatware/adware/multifunction/multilanguage/application driver on your computer.

      Take a look at my printer interface, and my scanner interface on Linux. It is always basically the same. And its small and lightweight. And I like it that way.

    148. Re:wrong OS? by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      More like:

      Gaming PC: $700 at the most if you have nothing, no hard drive, no optical drives, no power supply+case, nothing you can salvage from an earlier machine save for input devices and a monitor (just as we wouldn't count the TV for a console price), plus it can do all kinds of cool shit that a console (even a whiz-bang media machine like the PS3) can't.

      Console: $280+ for a Wii with one full controller set (it comes with a Wiimote and Nunchuk, but you'll probably want a Classic Controller) plus a controller charger and battery packs (Wiis come incomplete and have DAMNED expensive controllers--it's a hidden cost, and part of how they're so much cheaper, superficially, than their competitors, as I discovered when I bought one--they're also by far the least-portable this generation, which is an odd change after the Gamecube). I'd leave the cost of input devices out, but it's not like you can use a controller you've already got, unless you only want to play Gamecube games on it. This $280 or so will get you a system with a much smaller library than the PC, no HD output (not even for video, like when using Netflix) and poor online multiplayer support; the other two consoles are better, but in one case you have to pay for online multiplayer, and you've still got the much-smaller-library problem, plus both cost more than the Wii. We can talk about local multiplayer, but that's gonna be another $180 or so (minimum, no classic controller or steering wheels or gun frames or any of that crap, and assuming you already have four rechargeable battery packs rather than just one or two) for three more players on the Wii, or $150 on the other two consoles.

      I own a gaming PC and four consoles (and I've owned another four in the past), so it's not like I'm a PC-gaming-or-nothing kind of guy, but PC gaming isn't as bad as it's made out to be, especially when you consider how many extra features you're getting for the money and the fact that many games are best on the PC--and not just genres that are console-unfriendly like RTS, I mean games like Oblivion, which is solidly a 3/5 unmodded but approaches 5/5 territory with the right mods.

    149. Re:wrong OS? by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      I should clarify that by "at the most" for the PC price I mean for a machine that'll play everything out now and for the next couple years at acceptable levels of detail, resolutions, and framerate. Obviously you can spend $2000 if you really want top-end shit, but you're way the hell out of best-bang-for-your-buck territory if you're doing that, and pretty much just pissing away money when you could spend less for a weaker machine+future upgrades. Unless you're a pro gamer, also using the machine for heavy non-game-related processing, or truly in love with computer hardware there's no sense in it.

    150. Re:wrong OS? by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      I'd take issue with the "intuitive" bit, too. Maybe it's just me, but OSX makes no damn sense to me.

      I hated OS9 (come on, it was a piece of shit) and was super-excited the first time I got to use OSX after reading/hearing all the hype about how it was some kind of ultra-easy-to-use OS with the power of BSD under the hood. Didn't get it, nor have I the times I've used it since then. Every time I sit down to use OSX I think it'll click and I'll realize I was just an idiot and it really is the easiest and most powerful UI I've ever seen, but that's never happened.

      I don't not like it, exactly. It just confuses me. I don't think Windowmaker was even this unintuitive, the first couple times I used it. I can never figure out how to do much beyond launching the shit at the bottom of the screen.

      My wife uses them at work, and it seems it's that way for her and pretty much everyone else there, too. Any time they have to do anything remotely out of the ordinary, even if it's simple, it seems like they can't get it figured out.

      Now these people aren't techies, but isn't the whole point that they shouldn't have to be?

      I think for OSX to be intuitive you've got to be used to its (often really unconventional) conventions, which is the opposite of intuitive. I'm not saying it's bad, but it's not intuitive.

    151. Re:wrong OS? by xtracto · · Score: 1

      You raise a really good point.

      Linux still has (and has ALWAYS had) a lot of problems with hardware. A lot of the leading edge stuff does not work. This problem is as old as WinModems if not older (that was the first time I stumbled with a Linux hardware issue)

      In addition as others pointed out, there's really no software in Linux which is equivalent to say iLife and the like. Every time someone mention a Linux (open source) equivalent, said program is 2 or 3 years away (e.g., F-spot, showtell, kino, etc).

      Now, the typical answer to these criticisms is that is that the problem lies within hardware manufacturers or software developers (not providing software/firmware for the Linux platform); nevertheless in reality even if it is not Linux fault, it is still its problem.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    152. Re:wrong OS? by zefrey · · Score: 1

      How is MacOS more difficult to deal with? In what way or in what market?

    153. Re:wrong OS? by gullevek · · Score: 1

      1) It is that way because original the whole thing is application centric and not like it should be for virtual desktops centered around the window. I am glad there is something like spaces, but I hate it that I cannot pin a single window to a screen and only an application. But this will probably never change.

      3) I agree and I HATE it. Just today in chrome, I had to upload a file, but then I forgot where I was (couldn't see the page itself) and wanted to go to the next tab to check, but you can't even do this. The most horrible thing is, not all applications are like that. eg FF with the JS alert box is connected to the top border where in chrome it is floating. This is really annoying ...

      4) Sort of agree but I rather have no borders that take precious space.

      5) I never ever use that, but it would be great if that could be built in. But then again it would be application bound and not window bound which would make it kind of useless

      --
      "Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
    154. Re:wrong OS? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      You hit the answer with the question. Of course, he needed money so he wrote an opinion piece,laced it with some figures, made some authority sounding noise about the way the world works and drew conclusions . We used to do the same thing with music journalism. You can say a little, puff it up to a lot and get paid. Who gives a damn about the reader? Secondary at best to a paycheck. Just entertain them and make them believe they know something. HAHA pour garbage directly into their brains. Associated Press and Reuters put the bread on the table everyday this way. Don't believe what you read. We flush the toilet, the water goes down, the stool goes round and round and it comes out to an editors outbox. Get it?

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    155. Re:wrong OS? by Dilaudid · · Score: 1

      so kind of apple to let me know what is and what is not optimal.

    156. Re:wrong OS? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Your sig aside, isn't that what Canonical was supposed to do? Has done really? That's the problem, when you get down to it. Canonical has done everything right. Ubuntu is easy to install, easy to configure, easy to patch, has about as good of driver support as is reasonably possible given manufacturer reluctance, its package management system is extensive and has a nice front end... There's nothing at all that Canonical did *wrong* to make a great Desktop OS, people just aren't interested.

      Let's see. Apps hang for no reason and no visual feedback of some sort;
      cryptic error messages appear 3 times an hour;
      Java doesn't work properly;
      Flash needs Terminal stuff to work under Firefox;
      Audacious always stutters when playing pretty much any radio stream (and no, it's not a bandwidth issue or resource issue);
      Ubuntu One doesn't work (on one machine it works, on the other errors out at login);
      "global" proxy settings are not carried over to all programs (notably Synaptics Package Manager);
      some Compiz effects work flawlessly (window resize, fade, snap), others mess up horribly (Rain Effect mangles the screen like there's no tomorrow);
      Ubuntu Software Center installations randomly hang forever while installing, can't be canceled and after restart the whole thing doesn't work anymore;
      Java-based form applications start, hang and after that no buttons ever work (not even Shutdown, restart - I had to reset my machine);
      minimize, maximize and close buttons are now on the left side of the window (I know they can be reconfigured, but speaking from an Average Joe's point of view, it sucks);
      some games don't work properly (e.g. Pacman doesn't refresh the window);
      countless clicks not being recognized by the system (you click but nothing happens; you click again and it works);
      mouse scroll button works when it wants, randomly stops working, then starts again;
      different machines yield totally different OS experience; a VM installation acts completely different from a Desktop installation, and I don't mean performance (the only difference is 3D Acceleration missing on the VM);
      VMWare VM Bridged network ceased working under Ubuntu after a shutdown; I had to switch to NAS to make it work; all other VMs work with bridged LAN settings;

      All those after 3 days of using Ubuntu. And yes, I am interested, I badly want to switch, mainly because I want Linux-based OS to succeed; I want Microsoft to have competition; I want Apple to have competition. But right now... the added level of frustration caused by the OS's inconsistency in behavior has yet again left me with a bitter taste. I still have both instances running and slowly make my way through kludging them here and there until I get fed up with it. But let me reiterate this: right now, Desktop Linux experience is still way behind what both Windows and MacOS offer.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    157. Re:wrong OS? by Urkki · · Score: 1

      Sorry, dude, but we're debating it. Most users these days buy laptops, and most laptops are single display. What's more, with handheld devices, things are trending even more strongly in that direction.

      Sorry to cut in, so you admit that Mac OS menu at the top of the screen is not ideal for serious desktop use with large screen, and rather a horrible concept with multiple screen setups?

      I mean seriously, does Mac really put the menu bar of an application to a different display than the application itself on multi-monitor setup, like somebody above said? Seriously? What was Steve smoking when he approved that?

    158. Re:wrong OS? by Dr_Terminus · · Score: 1

      I dont know what Mac you've been using, but to minimize the window on my Mac, I click the orange - button.

    159. Re:wrong OS? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The fact remains, most of the things you cited are normal and convenient if you're used to them.

      Sure, you can get used to the unintuitive interface of the MacOS UI. Your statement is telling of the UI though. It is something you have to get used to because, contrary to the urban myth, the Mac's UI is not intuitive.

    160. Re:wrong OS? by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      I agree with most of this post, cept Games. Takes more effort but you can. But I still love my Xbox on HD!!

    161. Re:wrong OS? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      well, the guy sitting next to me has a $2500 laptop for gaming

      I see these "gaming PC" with 8 - 12 GB RAM, quad or six core, good motherboard, going for $1400 and up without the monitor

    162. Re:wrong OS? by bandmassa · · Score: 1

      > but I still prefer the configurability of my desktop Linux systems



      You still have that, it's called Terminal and it's located in Applications/Utilies/

      --
      "I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
  2. three million by xzvf · · Score: 4, Informative

    A 1-2% usage rate equals ~three million desktop users in the United States.

    1. Re:three million by cindyann · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If 2% == 3M, which doesn't seem unreasonable, then 98% == 147M.

      I know a VC or two. They aren't investing in companies producing software that has a target market of 3M customers when they could be investing in companies who are writing for those other 147M.

      Just look at how long it took Apple to gain traction, and they still have what, 10% of the market? At least what Apple had going for it was a superior user experience over the next best thing at the time. Gnome and KDE have come a long way and they're pretty decent now, but they're not "killer app" better experiences than what you get on Mac and Windows these days.

    2. Re:three million by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Yeah but some of us have 4-5 computers - or more! Of course not all of mine run Winders either but still I'm helping make up for the have-nots :-P

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    3. Re:three million by A+Friendly+Troll · · Score: 1

      A 1-2% usage rate equals ~three million desktop users in the United States.

      I just wish web "developers" had the same mindset as you.

      "Oh, Safari and Opera have low marketshare, and Chrome is too new, so we'll just write for IE and Fx - screw everyone else."

      3 million in the US and vast millions worldwide is a HUGE number. Sure, it's relatively smaller than the number of Windows users, but it's still HUGE, and it needs to be bigger.

    4. Re:three million by hvm2hvm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But it's the percent of the people who actually come to your site that's important. If you make a site that has about 50000 users per day, taking care of the x% which use opera will yield a low number that doesn't seem important. Yes, if you had visitors from virtually all computers every day (e.g. facebook) you might want to think it as "3million lost users" but that's usually not the case. Not that I'm not advocating against standard compliant sites but you have to realise why some site maintainers don't provide compatibility with a browser.

      --
      ics
    5. Re:three million by costas · · Score: 1

      More like a 3rd of that, unless you assume that every man, woman and child regardless of age, owns and operates a PC.

      Desktop Linux a marginal market niche of enthusiasts who will continue to consume it regardless of competitive advantage (i.e. either because of politics or because they need a commodity Unix-like OS on their desktops). That means that as a commercial alternative Linux is dead, unless your target market is that same enthusiast market --after all people still sell software for the Amiga.

      The larger question that I don't see debated anywhere is: is for-profit open-source software development dead? Exclude the service providers (like RedHat) and 1-2 politically motivated success stories (Firefox; more of an ad service than a software vendor anyway), and who are the software vendors who are making money off of open source?

    6. Re:three million by clemfoley · · Score: 1

      It still equals 1-2%.

      --
      Instant Karma's gonna get you - John Lennon
    7. Re:three million by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just one query about that percentage, where exactly do dual boots end up. Do dual boots just disappear to favour the company paying for the most adds, surely the choice to dual boot should outweigh 'we are a monopoly and we are going to force manufacturers to supply you a cheap version of the OS'. You got the software as an OEM and you use it to play games but does that really count as a desktop or just a game console and the OS you boot to do work, really counts as your desktop of choice.

      Why exactly does a dual boot windows and Linux machine only get counted as a windows box. Why does a dual boot Linux and Apple machine only get counted as a Apple machine. I would bet a windows and apple dual boot gets counted twice to fluff up the numbers. Why does a box without an OS get counted as nothing. Why doesn't Android count as it is a fork of Linux and elements of the code base will merge.

      Desktop Linux is dead, WTF, yet another journalist that fails grasp open source or real choice, there is only one company who can give real statistics of Linux and that is Google, those privacy invasive buggers can quite readily even count the dual booters out there.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:three million by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Dude, 1-2% of users probably think their computer is a magical sno-cone holder

      To their credit, about half of them are running the highly experimental Ubuntu: sno-cone-holding salamander.

    9. Re:three million by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you want a "killer app", Left 4 Dead 2 launched on the Mac a few weeks ago.

    10. Re:three million by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      1-2% of users probably think their computer is a magical sno-cone holder.

      What do you mean? It's not?!

    11. Re:three million by TheLink · · Score: 1

      At least what Apple had going for it was a superior user experience over the next best thing at the time.

      And Steve Job's "Reality Distortion Field" :).

      I don't find OSX really much easier to use but I'm not their target market (harder for me to manage 30+ open windows, Expose is just slower for me - multiple clicks vs just one click to bring up the window I want). Two of my friends use OSX, but when I ask, turns out they are using screen for "window management"- so the OSX GUI is basically managing "screen" and a browser! And two of my colleagues were swearing _at_ (not swearing by) the Macs when they were trying to use them- the glossy screen gave one of them severe eye strain or something (heh, I "helpfully" suggested she wear sunglasses... Talk about glare ;) ).

      But the ones who like it seem to be in love with it.

      FWIW, Windows 2K/XP in classic mode works well for me, there's still much room for improvement of course. Windows 7's application grouping thingy is good and so is the individual sound control. But the other Win7 stuff isn't that helpful for me. The start menu search thingy probably helps noobs a lot (except someone today just didn't seem to understand the concept while being supposedly an "IT worker". Doh... ).

      --
    12. Re:three million by mayberry42 · · Score: 1

      A 1-2% usage rate equals ~three million desktop users in the United States.

      I actually read just recently (wish i could remember the source) that Linux has about a 4.5% market share this year, with a steady growth from about 2% just 8 years ago with the highest adoption rate being around 2004 onwards (Ubuntu?), if i recall correctly. Either way, it's a slow and steady improvement.

      Desktop Linux may not be alive and well, but it certainly isn't dead.

    13. Re:three million by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      And what Linux really does is to replace the old Unix servers in the data centers and it's also nibbling away at services provided by Microsoft servers.

      The slow mode for Microsoft on the desktop is more due to the lack of major productivity software packages. OpenOffice exists, but it's not easy for it to compete with products from Microsoft for a variety of reasons.

      The somewhat quirky look&feel on the Linux desktop is also contributing. For an experienced user this is just a small problem, but for the general user some of the quirkiness is a major obstacle.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    14. Re:three million by grahamm · · Score: 1

      And does the PC which was supplied with Windows pre-installed but whose HD has been reformatted and Linux (or *BSD or any other OS) installed get counted as a windows box because it was sold with a windows licence?

    15. Re:three million by mayberry42 · · Score: 1

      Ah, i knew i had the link somewhere!. It averaged out at about 4.64% not bad, actually. True, these are far from perfect statistics, but non the less an indication that linux is definitely moving in the right direction.

      One more point to mention: I'm actually VERY unimpressed with the Mac OSX numbers - I'm wondering how much publicity and fame they have (and how much money spent behind it), yet their market share is still under 10% (less than twice that of linux). Sorry fanboys :-p

    16. Re:three million by Intron · · Score: 1

      I think VM outweighs dual boot these days. Most of the people at work with a Mac can bring up a virtual machine running Linux.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    17. Re:three million by fwarren · · Score: 1

      There is a major difference. If someone came over to my place and saw my cool Mac, and said they like how it looks and works, what do the need to do to get one? I tell them the need to throw away their current PC and spend another $1,200 to $1,800 to get a cool Mac like mine. Growth comes at a hefty price for Apple.

      On the other hand, when I show someone my cool linux desktop and mention how it does not have a problem with spyware, adware, viruses, or needing to keep antivirus software up to date. AND I offter to install it on their computer and show them how to use it. Let's just say that between me and my bother we are converting at least one computer a month to Linux.

      Is it going to overtake Windows tomorrow? No. Will it ever overtake Windows? Who knows? I do see a day where Linux comfortably sets atop a 20% desktop share in the US, more than 30% in Europe, more than 60% in may developing nations, and pretty much rules the roost in the server market.

      3 years ago, I was the only person I knew who ran Linux. Now, I know at least 10 or 15 others. And some of them have become even more hard core than I am about running Linux and only Linux on their hardware.

      I think rumors of Desktop Linux death are greatly exaggerated.

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
    18. Re:three million by arivanov · · Score: 1

      More.

      An average Linux user is a nerd.

      I have in total of 10+:

      1. Four active (in use) desktops all with Debian. Shared MacMiniPPC, my wife's Athlon, my son's P4 and 2-3 in my office out of which I use one.

      2. Three active (in-use) laptops, all with Debian: a 1GHz PPC TiBook (my roadwarrior machine), a PentiumM (shared), and a Athom Netbook (shared ultraportable).

      3. Three active (in use) media centers: one in the sitting room, one portable made out of a 2003 laptop for the kitchen, car and holidays and one old thin client based for the guest room.

      That is a total of: 10 linux desktops in use in _ONE_ household and I am by no means the worst offender out of the other linux desktop users I know.

      Typing this on a Linux Desktop. A very fragmented one.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    19. Re:three million by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Killer apps only count when they're exclusive, or at least a better experience. Left 4 Dead 2 has been out for a year on PC and 360 (and probably PS3, though I don't pay much attention to the PS3). Mac users getting one game a year after everyone else (while 99% of games don't ever get there) is not going to sell the platform to gamers.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    20. Re:three million by Vyse+of+Arcadia · · Score: 1

      I beg to differ. I vastly prefer KDE to any other interface. And yes, I've used Mac OS 10.2 - 10.5 pretty extensively. The plasmoids, the kioslaves, the applications, the sheer customizablility... I see no reason to use anything else on decent hardware.

    21. Re:three million by smpoole7 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, I know several people who were hard-core Linux users who have given up and switched back to Windows. One of them was a gunslinger who started out years ago compiling Slack from source. He's the one who introduced me to Linux. I'm still with it, but ironically, he's not.

      I think there are reasons for this. I'll just pass on the ones that they've given to me:

      1. Updates break things. You'll finally get video and sound working the way you like (which can be a pain in the butt to start with); in comes a kernel update and it breaks. I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me. As I write this, in fact, every time I browse to a Web site with Flash (Firefox on Fedora 13), I get the old, "The Flash Plugin has crashed." I've been trying for a week to get it working again to no avail. Apparently, something weird on my hardware (a Compaq/HP desktop) just doesn't like something else that has changed.

      2. Fundamentalist-religious-fervor on the part of Free Software advocates. When faced with facts, they are as recalcitrant as any Young Earth Creationist. Fact: manufacturers WILL NOT reveal the inner details of how their hardware works. Fact: many of these manufacturers will at least, grudgingly, provide a "binary blob" that allows me to use their stuff under Linux ... but THIS is why the stuff breaks after a kernel update. It would be painfully simply to provide a simple, *unchanging* interface for drivers (for example, DKMS improved and made a required standard for all serious distros).

      Oh, and it doesn't help that, instead of THANKING these manufacturers for bothering to provide at least that "binary blob" to the Linux community, the manufacturer is excoriated and called names by the True Believers In Free Software for not agreeing to provide all of the intimate details of their hardware, without NDAs or other encumbrances, so that the community can develop the driver. Que vicious cycle, yadda yadda. Nuff said.

      As an aside, it annoys me to no end that I am a Linux lover: I use Fedora on this laptop, but I prefer OpenSuse on my desktop PC ... and *I* suffer some of that same excoriation *MYSELF* for using it! (Something about OpenSuse not being a "pure F/OSS" distro, har, har). I'm not being true to the revolution, according to the Free Software Purists(tm)(r)(c)(sm). I am also scolded by the Purists because I prefer Adobe's Acrobat Reader to all of the free alternatives. How DARE I, say the purists?

      Linux is FREE - both as in speech and beer. The fact that it hasn't taken over the computing world begs us to figure out why. It's FREE. What gives?

      Well ... I've just listed a few of many reasons.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    22. Re:three million by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      Hmmm.. The article includes no cited data AT ALL about known or estimated usage rates.

    23. Re:three million by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      In summary.
      147M 90 year olds tell 3M 20 year olds they won't live forever, then wonder why they laugh.

      _________
      This is the same mentality as those fidiots claiming the desktop is dead, as more and more users come online with mobile (mostly Android - Linux) phones. Its the kind of tunnel vision that makes it hard to reply, sorry, the world doesn't end at your front door, it just begins, get out more.

      ->Because of a lack of critical content.
      I hate to break this to you, but malware is not "critical content".

    24. Re:three million by dogzilla · · Score: 1

      It's just this stupid obsession with binary outcomes: either you're successful to the point of excluding everything else or you're a failure. Apparently, a nice little sustainable business is never enough anymore. You *must* eat the world or die. Hopefully the relevant people will ignore this kind of infantile BS and just get on with keeping the excellent products up to date and innovating where it makes sense.

      --
      The crimes of eBay are a disgrace to it's pig latin heritage!
    25. Re:three million by aperion · · Score: 1

      And for me it works great in wine. Only possible glitch has been stuttering when I first enter the game, but for all I know it happens in windows as well, but I've never played it in windows.

    26. Re:three million by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      "Gamers aren't going to buy a Mac because paying $2500 for a computer with a mid-range graphics card from two generations ago with zero support for end-user upgrades is patently retarded."

      $2499
      One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
      3GB (3x1GB)
      1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
      ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
      One 18x SuperDrive

      It is a year old right now, Apple can be slow at upgrading their lines, but it's not two generations old

      http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446.html

    27. Re:three million by Lennie · · Score: 1

      I've found Ubuntu comes much closer to 'just works', Fedora feels more like a technology preview to me.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    28. Re:three million by arth1 · · Score: 1

      If 2% == 3M, which doesn't seem unreasonable, then 98% == 147M.

      I know a VC or two. They aren't investing in companies producing software that has a target market of 3M customers when they could be investing in companies who are writing for those other 147M.

      That depends on the competition. Cornering the 3 M market should be far more attractive than being one of a legion fighting for the 147 M market. Quite a few companies have gambled on being able to get a share of a big competitive market, and failed.

      It makes more sense (to me, but I don't have a BS degree) to first conquer the small market, and then go for the big one. If you already have a million customers, you have a lot more clout than attacking the big pie with no customers to back you up.

    29. Re:three million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      woosh

    30. Re:three million by Skreems · · Score: 1

      Just look at how long it took Apple to gain traction, and they still have what, 10% of the market?

      Yeah, but Apple also requires custom hardware. Custom hardware which is often more expensive than the equivalent which runs Windows/Linux/Whatever.

      I'm of the opinion that "Linux vs Windows on the desktop" has become a nonsensical argument, though. Five years ago, sure, there's competition. You had to decide which one to boot, and it took a couple minutes to switch. Now anyone with a halfway decent machine can install VirtualBox and run both at once. It's no longer "do you use Linux or Windows". I have Windows on the hardware because I play games, and I use Ubuntu in a VM for coding, running servers, and other things that it does better than Windows. I browse in Windows just because it's faster to be closer to the metal, but I could easily use the VM for that without much hassle.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    31. Re:three million by nschubach · · Score: 1

      Desktop Linux is dead, WTF, yet another journalist that fails grasp open source...

      Stopping you there because that's all you had to say.

      I wonder if this guy thinks that if he posts that article, it will suddenly go away. I read it and he tries to sound apologetic, but it's still pretty sensational writing in assuming that these past three years were it's last hope for ever becoming mainstream.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    32. Re:three million by ADRA · · Score: 1

      Youch, that's one expensive PC. I would spec that out for maybe $800 today... in fact I did for a friend of mine the other week (san monitor). Oh, and that included Windows which was something like $130. Mind you, if anyone was going to drop 2500 bucks on a PC, it'd be a PC gamer OR whomever buys Mac's.

      --
      Bye!
    33. Re:three million by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      The poster went for a 2500 dollar PC, so I found a 2500 Mac.

      You could do a Nehalem for $800 total? The CPU is $1300 for a retail box CPU

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100008494%2050001157%20600048526&IsNodeId=1&name=Nehalem
      Intel Xeon X5560 Nehalem 2.8GHz LGA 1366 95W Quad-Core Server Processor - $1372

    34. Re:three million by guacamole · · Score: 1

      3M sounds about right. And many of them was probably corporate developer or engineer machines. The number of desktop users who use the OS for non-development purposes is even smaller.

    35. Re:three million by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I must have missed his reply due to the loud sound of crickets chirping.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    36. Re:three million by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      The really funny/sad part of that statement is that a lot of people don't know how true it is. Let's face it if some group got together and made tons of high quality games available for Linux then it would very quickly assume a large market share.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    37. Re:three million by Draek · · Score: 1

      1. Updates break things. You'll finally get video and sound working the way you like (which can be a pain in the butt to start with); in comes a kernel update and it breaks. I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me.

      I can't tell you either, because it's never happened to me. Broken Flash? sure, but Flash works like shit on Linux, Windows, OSX and every other OS that piece of trash has been ported to, no surprises there.

      Fact: many of these manufacturers will at least, grudgingly, provide a "binary blob" that allows me to use their stuff under Linux ... but THIS is why the stuff breaks after a kernel update.

      That, and the fact that most of those "binary blobs" were written in a week by an unpaid intern working on the company basement with no other documentation than the 3-years-old Windows binary driver.

      Oh, and it doesn't help that, instead of THANKING these manufacturers for bothering to provide at least that "binary blob" to the Linux community, the manufacturer is excoriated and called names by the True Believers In Free Software for not agreeing to provide all of the intimate details of their hardware, without NDAs or other encumbrances, so that the community can develop the driver.

      Thanking them would make them believe that a) we appreciate such "gestures" and b) they are sufficient to keep us satisfied. Fact is, not only most of those blobs still suck when they're (allegedly) running properly, but they're a pain in the arse to get to run in the first place. Different architecture? sucks to be you. Patched kernel? sucks to be you. Different version of the library their l337 (and completely unnecessary) GUI config utility was compiled against? sucks to be you. And for all those problems you can do nothing but beg the manufacturer to get another intern to fix the problem sometime during the next century *because* it's a goddamned blob.

      The stigma of closed-source drivers on Linux isn't because of some religious zeal or anything of the sorts (if it were, we'd see the same for closed apps such as Oracle, don't you think?) but rather of simple practicality: being unable to port, debug and modify the OS' drivers creates far more problems than it solves, and makes you dependant on a company that, chances are, doesn't give a fuck about you and any problem you may have. So hell yeah I want the documentation instead.

      I am also scolded by the Purists because I prefer Adobe's Acrobat Reader to all of the free alternatives. How DARE I, say the purists?

      That's not because it's closed source, that's because it sucks. You'd face the same stigma on Windows for not using Foxit, in spite of it being closed-source payware. It's like somebody using IE5.5 to browse the web: anything, *anything* would be far better than that attrocity, so you using it out of your own, free will is... perplexing, to say the least.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    38. Re:three million by zefrey · · Score: 1

      Unless Linux goes bankrupt, I don't understand how it will die. I don't understand how it will go bankrupt either. Time to develop Linux further, is all it takes. It's not working with the typical for profit business model, so the VC stuff doesn't apply. So what if it doesn't achieve world dominance. Those days are over, and the perspective is immature at best to consider that to be a reasonable outcome for anything. What is reasonable however, is that Linux or any other OS, simply becomes a part of a large ecosystem, providing niche solutions for various needs. Most news is nothing but hype. So what. I'm going to be installing Ubuntu on 3 towers in the next couple of days in my condo. One as a dev server, the other two..not sure yet.

    39. Re:three million by Dilaudid · · Score: 1

      Sorry for picking on your comment - but I wanted to say - I feel the same way as this PC Mag guy. He's not a troll. I've seen a huge migration of users (like 30%) from XP to windows 7, completely bypassing linux which has not gained any market share above its 1% level. I had hoped that we would see linux overtake Mac - on the desktop PC. I know linux will win out on the tablet, smartphone etc, that a mac is BSD anyway - but I hoped to see linux get a decent marketshare on the desktop too. I think a lot of people who matter (IT people) must still be using windows, which bewilders me. Anyway...

    40. Re:three million by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      If 2% == 3M, which doesn't seem unreasonable, then 98% == 147M.

      I know a VC or two. They aren't investing in companies producing software that has a target market of 3M customers when they could be investing in companies who are writing for those other 147M.

      Oh dang. I guess we'll just have to keep making better software ourselves, like we've been doing for twenty years.

      Gnome and KDE have come a long way and they're pretty decent now, but they're not "killer app" better experiences than what you get on Mac and Windows these days.

      I completely disagree, and would call it a case in point for my previous statement. The free desktops have been superior to anything you can buy for money for years now. OS X is still stuck in poor design choices they made at the beginning of the last decade and show no signs of even wanting to start digging their way out of that, let alone being able to. Windows 7 was a big step forward, almost bringing it to feature parity with Gnome, which only leaves it about three years behind KDE.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    41. Re:three million by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      I use Linux in my home computer and have no problems with it. And I'd use it at work if they allowed me to. This article is stupid FUD.

  3. Not dead on my desktop by denshao2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have been using Linux for the past 5 years and I have no plans to abandon it.

    1. Re:Not dead on my desktop by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      I have been using GNU/Linux (not that I always called it that) for an even longer period of time, but unfortunately, I have seen the movement really suffer these past few years. For me, the reason why is entirely clear: we spent too many years attacking Microsoft and Microsoft Windows. Apple swooped in, took advantage among some of the anti-Microsoft sentiment that developed, and even recycled some old Linux-vs.-Windows arguments. It has gotten to the point where people sometimes show up at LUG meetings with Apple products running Mac OS X.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Skater · · Score: 1

      This is a great point. I used to go to LUG meetings frequently, but my current laptop is an Apple with Snow Leopard, and if I went to a LUG meeting that's what I'd have with me.

      I bought my first Apple computer, a Macbook Pro, about a year ago. I chose it because I didn't want another Windows laptop, and none of the Linux laptops for sale were what I wanted in terms of size, weight, battery life, processor power (no netbooks), and so on. I figured if I didn't like OS X, I could always run Linux on it. After getting used to OS X, I decided that it's everything I wish Linux and KDE or Gnome would be.

      I still run Linux on my desktop machine and love it, and it runs on my home server and works great (by which I mean, "it just works"). I even use it on a server or two at work. I want to use Linux, but the polish of OS X is tempting. Still, I've run into a few of those annoying proprietary walls, like discovering the manufacturer of my older scanner doesn't make drivers for Snow Leopard for it... (I was saved by VueScan in that instance, fortunately).

    3. Re:Not dead on my desktop by rwa2 · · Score: 1

      I've been using Linux on the desktop for the past 10 years, but finally dropped it due to NVidia and Valve :-P

      NVidia for making an awesome cheap ION platform, so I finally moved all my Linux stuff off my desktop/server to a tiny quiet dedicated server. And then my main desktop machine would be running Linux too, except Valve failed to release a port of Steam for Linux, and these days I'm too lazy to dick around with getting L4D2 working in WINE :-P

      But one of these days... I'm getting tired of the weak Windows analogues to of a lot of the Linux apps I'm accustomed to :-/

    4. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Solidblu · · Score: 1

      There are three big problems I've noticed two stated by the original poster:

      1. Fragmentation. Do you release a tar.gz? Do you release an RPM? Do you Release a .deb?

      And how do you support them all? What really should happen is one of two things. 1 Package manager for all distros.(Not going to happen any time soon). The other is a 2nd compatable package management system which is compatible/an add-on to the existing Package Management systems. This way as a corparate developer I can just make and maintain one package instead of three. List the library requirements and if your distro can't go up to the proper version you can try to force it (like if your distro back ports a feature/fix).

      2.

      Rabid hatred of DRM. You know what though I would love to be able to watch Netflix on my Linux desktop so I don't have to fight with my roommates/watch the Jersey Shore marathon while waiting for the PS3.

      3. GAMES GAMES GAMES:

      Being able to play games native/ minimal emulation would be amazing. I know there is Wine and Cedega and CrossOffice, but they are just band aids to the real problem.
       

    5. Re:Not dead on my desktop by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I started running FreeBSD and Linux at home in the 8th grade. Now I'm 26, and frankly, am more than happy to just let my *BSD and Linux machines sit in a server room and out of my way. I'll interact with them via SSH from my MacBook Pro. It's Unix enough to allow me to do what I want to do, and I have VMWare images of FreeBSD 8-STABLE, OpenBSD 4.7, Fedora 13 with the CERT data forensics tools, and WIndows 7 Professional, if I need to do something on a "real" BSD, Linux or Windows system locally.

      But, I can close the lid of my laptop and it goes to sleep, open it and it wakes up. I don't have to write wpa-supplicant files by hand, worry about wireless drivers, or anything else. I can watch my DVDs, I can watch internet videos if I want to (as much as I bitch about youtube culture and whatnot, there are occasionally things worth watching that happen to live inside of an embedded flash player), my battery life doesn't suck and I spend a lot less time beating my head against the wall due to "not quite 100% compatible" issues.

      There are enough little idiosyncrasies in OS X to occasionally make me face palm, but I'm about 95% happy with it. I have a supermicro 1u running FreeBSD at home, a CentOS VPS living at the hosting company I used to admin for, and currently work in a BSD shop, where they provided me with a new iMac as a workstation, which is a pretty nice step up from the crummy Dell running Fedora I was stuck with at my last job.

      Frankly, I don't think I'm alone in a rather large section of professional Unix people who want at least one personal machine that they don't have to fight with all the time. Apple products aren't that rare of a scene at BSD conferences either, then again, Apple did hire a bunch of BSD people like Jordan Hubbard to help make OS X as kick-ass as it is under the hood.

    6. Re:Not dead on my desktop by catmistake · · Score: 1

      It's demise has been greatly exaggerated. I don't use it... but I just this past weekend, sick and tired of my father wanting me to fix his old windows box, I installed Lucid Lynx on it. It boots in less than a minute now instead of almost four minutes. He can't hardly tell the difference that it isn't Windows. Yes, it looks different. But it's all desktop, icons, menus and clicking. I don't understand why businesses with hundreds and sometimes thousands of desktop business users don't just switch. It would save any medium or large corporations so much money it's ridiculous. Internal Windows application developers are some of the biggest babies I have never met... "the app doesn't work unless the user is operating as administrator, so all our users operate as administrator" and yet the Windows admins really believe their networks are tight. It must be nice to be in network operations and basically sleep all day because everyone thinks it's magic and incomprehensible that Brazilian or Russian hackers could sneak in past their unfirewalled and wide open remote desktop ports. It's true that Mac users seem to be lulled into false security, but with so many fortresses and ways to attack, why would hackers ever bother trying to pwn an unsecured Mac? It is the silly self-taught Windows administrators (not all, just most, and not the true Microsoft specialty guys that are well trained) that are arrogantly lulled into false security. At least that is my experience... .they think Windows is hardended out of the box, or they think admins at upper levels are on top of things. I, for one, think that the sky is falling.

    7. Re:Not dead on my desktop by esarjeant · · Score: 1

      I've been seeing this trend in our local LUG as well, and while I certainly don't think desktop Linux is dead there are a good percentage of users who are considering a Mac at the same time they look at new Linux alternatives.

      Honestly, RedHat did a disservice with Fedora, not only did they leave corporate users in the lurch but they also ballooned the OS in the process -- which was frustrating. I think Ubuntu has been doing great things to commercialize the desktop Linux market but they have taken a UI approach that is alienating for many users. The added quandary of ubuntu-restricted-extras tends to confuse newbies, it's just not something they are use to...

      I think Apple is going to continue to cannibalize the PC market by taking away sales for Linux/Solaris workstations, and of course every so often a Windows PC will get poached. Linux definitely has demonstrated how capable it is in a server environment and I don't think it will be going away anytime soon, getting to the desktop is going to require a PC vendor who is able (willing) to sell it.

      --

      Eric Sarjeant
      eric[@]sarjeant.com

    8. Re:Not dead on my desktop by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      Apple swooped in, took advantage among some of the anti-Microsoft sentiment that developed...

      What Apple did was swoop in and offer media consumption devices which offered candy to those who never really needed a computer in the first place. I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing. Apple's laptops are still useful to me because I can use them in pretty much exactly the same way as I use my Linux boxes.

      I have, of course, considered throwing out OS X and installing Linux on my freebie MacBook, but OS X works "well enough" (with a few features that are actually excellent) that such a gesture would rightly be considered to be making a point to nobody in particular.

    9. Re:Not dead on my desktop by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      My desktop is linux-only, displaced first macosx, and later windows on intel, since the days of debian 2.4. But I am a geek so it doesn't count.

      Now for a lil' askslashdot.

      There's this demonstration with a hundred people people involved and local newspapers covering it.
      A small but unavoidable part of the demo involves using a webapp with a webcam. The webapp LAMP stack is neatly packaged in a virtualbox VM since the demo must perform with no guarantee of internet connection and my organization got a shiny new laptop with win7 preinstalled for the demo.

      Is it advisable that I install a debian unstable variant called aptosid (it's my fave) on such that new hardware and use a bash script for the webcam, or that I keep the default desktop, and try the default apps shipped with the cam? I have only a couple days to test it all.

      Well askslashdot time is over since I already chose the linux desktop path, demo already happened and went well :P

      The main reason for the choice being that when win7 starts, the usual popup for upgrades/ AV notices begins and I feared something like that might have disrupted the demo and confuse the operator. Also, the bash script (a 2 liner actually) had an UI simplicity advantage over the full featured webcam app in win7.

      Anyway my real question is: in the age of global communication how many dedicated people you need to keep something alive? do such people exist for desktop linux? Googling around and trying stuff out might give you the answer.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    10. Re:Not dead on my desktop by bsDaemon · · Score: 1, Troll

      Maybe you had better hardware than I was working with. The last "PC" laptop I had would only get about an hour and a half running Windows, and was much worse with either Linux (tried slackware, fedora, centos, and ubuntu) or FreeBSD (also including PC-BSD). When I get a new job that payed more, I rewarded myself with a Macbook Pro and quite frankly, have no reason to ever really want to go back. I can always just go into VMWare if I have to.

    11. Re:Not dead on my desktop by koiransuklaa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can close the lid of my laptop and it goes to sleep, open it and it wakes up. I don't have to write wpa-supplicant files by hand, worry about wireless drivers, or anything else. I can watch my DVDs, I can watch internet videos if I want to

      Random (and especially cheap) hardware may still have problems, but seriously: buy good hardware and you get all that with linux -- at least that's my experience. My last three X-series Thinkpads have all done the above without any tweaking...

    12. Re:Not dead on my desktop by dmmiller2k · · Score: 1

      I have been using Linux for the past 5 years and I have no plans to abandon it.

      Since you're on Slashdot, by definition you are tech-savvy and therefore NOT among those generally referred to as "users."

      That group means generally refers to "real" users: people who don't necessarily understand that mail in their GMail/Yahoomail/Hotmail inbox is not actually on their own computer.

      --

      "No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up." -- Lily Tomlin

    13. Re:Not dead on my desktop by sledges · · Score: 1

      I have been using Linux for the past 5 years and I have no plans to abandon it.

      We should make a survey: what do people do (and normally expect) from a Desktop? The point Linux hits the wall is when people start using "applied" applications! Means, 97-98% of people are using applied applications, *CAD, Electronics, PCB Design, Music/Video//Generic MMedia managers, ..., silly smileys which only the app users can see and be malwared/spywared at the same time, ..., -- everything everything where we have a FAIL in winehq , and there's nothing we can do to fetch up with that. Tell me if I'm wrong, because then I will be very happy knowing that we CAN DO REANIMATE Linux!

    14. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Stalus · · Score: 1

      But, I can close the lid of my laptop and it goes to sleep, open it and it wakes up. I don't have to write wpa-supplicant files by hand, worry about wireless drivers, or anything else. I can watch my DVDs, I can watch internet videos if I want to (as much as I bitch about youtube culture and whatnot, there are occasionally things worth watching that happen to live inside of an embedded flash player), my battery life doesn't suck and I spend a lot less time beating my head against the wall due to "not quite 100% compatible" issues.

      Same here. I run Fedora, and I haven't had trouble with any of the above in years - it just works (though I don't watch many DVDs on my laptop, so, to be fair, I can't comment there). Fedora has come a long way in terms of networking and video, and I've heard that Ubuntu has as well. In fact, I've found that some of my cellphone videos play fine on my Fedora laptop, but don't work at all on my wife's Windows 7 laptop. When I moved away from Windows, I piloted with a Mac for awhile, and while the UI was pretty, it drove me absolutely nuts. The editing keys and shortcuts were different for every application. Also, Apple has no concept of a true docking station/port replicator, so every time I had a meeting, I had to unplug and re-plug ten different cables. I also had to carry around a bunch of extra accessories, like a dongle just to connect to a projector. It was so frustrating that when I was told that I had to choose, I happily sent the Mac packing and have used Fedora ever since.

      It would be nice if I could get Quicken and Word for Linux, but I found that Word on Mac converts strangely to Windows also, and in some cases worse that OpenOffice, so I didn't see that as a worthy advantage.

    15. Re:Not dead on my desktop by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

      Simple your father had you. Without you your father would have:
      a) kept using same box - (marketshare for windows)
      b) took it to a computer store or god forbid geeks squad to do reinstall - (marketshare for windows)
      c) found and used "system restore" discs - (marketshare for windows)
      d) threw it out and bought a new windows which will come w/ windows 7 - (marketshare for windows)

      windows is relatively cheap. It is good ENOUGH and cheap ENOUGH. It does the job and most people don't really care about alternatives.

      For a business it isn't free to use another OS. It requires training, ensuring applications are supported, dealing w/ incompatibilities (partners & suppliers sending files in excel or god forbid access). When you look at the TCO for a desktop seat (hardware, software, training, repairs, electricity, lost productivity in downtime, etc) in a large company the $30 it costs for a windows license is a rounding error.

    16. Re:Not dead on my desktop by onionman · · Score: 1

      Same here.

      I was running Linux back in the early 1990's and even submitting bug reports and fixes for the kernel. Over the course of my career I've admined numerous *nix boxes of all flavors. I'd always dreamed of the great and glorious future where the Linux desktop would reign supreme. I used to make fun of Macs and declare them "worse than Windows".

      Then OS X came out. It was what I had envisioned for the Linux desktop, and for most of my needs it just worked without me having to spend hours reading poorly written man pages, struggling to find device drivers, or fixing code myself. I was willing to pay the premium to have that tedious work done for me.

      Now, all my servers and big number-crunching machines are running Linux, but my desktop (and laptop) is a Mac. Pretty to look at, easy to use, and I can drop to a *nix environment anytime.

    17. Re:Not dead on my desktop by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      I wasn't trolling. It was a Toshiba laptop that was the one in question. I'd had a pretty nice Dell before that, but I gave it to my sister and bought the Toshiba because the Aetheros wireless card would mean I didn't have to keep fucking with Broadcom stuff. However, the battery life was atrocious among other issues. That hard wasn't even good with Windows, let alone any *nix I tried putting on it. I ended up selling the Toshiba for $300 less than a year after I bought it for $650, giving away an EeePC which also bothered me regardless of whether I had Windows or *nix on it, and consolidating on a 13" MBP, which I find to be more portable (its much thinner, even if it has a larger area) than the EeePC and more capable than the Toshiba.

      Oh, but I guess the fact a guy who's nickname indicates he's never really been much of fan of Linux not singing the praises of Linux counts as a troll. --- maybe that part is trolling, but whatever. I have stated facts with regards to battery life. The hardware was bad, and the ACPI support in both Linux and FreeBSD was not good enough on that machine to get even the maximum that I could under Windows, which was still terrible at an hour and a half.

    18. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Lennie · · Score: 1

      1. I'm not sure how soon that will happen. I do see some things, but nothing which will take away that problem soon. But I can tell you, having a Windows 7 64-bit on my desk at work is a total software-compatibilty nightmare as well. There is a lot of stuff which just doesn't want to work. There is other stuff which doesn't want to work on Windows 7/Vista in general and there is stuff which doesn't run on Windows 2000 or XP anymore. So yet there is fragmentation on Linux, but Windows isn't doing so well either.

      2. It's actually a 2 way street. The creators of these systems don't seem to be interrested in releasing their products for Linux.

      3. That could be changing soon, because Linux recently got native Direct3D 10/11 support:

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mesa_gallium3d_d3d11

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    19. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Finally the last few hardware manufactures have joint the Linux game. Like the wifi-drivers by Broadcom ( http://lwn.net/Articles/404248/ ) and the last printer-manufacturer also finally released something (I think it was brother).

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    20. Re:Not dead on my desktop by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      My laptop has Linux on it.

      You know what? Your entire bitch paragraph below applies 100% to me AS WELL.

      But, I can close the lid of my laptop and it goes to sleep, open it and it wakes up. I don't have to write wpa-supplicant files by hand, worry about wireless drivers, or anything else. I can watch my DVDs, I can watch internet videos if I want to (as much as I bitch about youtube culture and whatnot, there are occasionally things worth watching that happen to live inside of an embedded flash player), my battery life doesn't suck and I spend a lot less time beating my head against the wall due to "not quite 100% compatible" issues.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    21. Re:Not dead on my desktop by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 1

      I've been using Linux since 1995, and love it. I'm currently using Fedora on my main machines, and Ubuntu on an old IBM Thinkpad which is a little too slow and weak for Fedora.

      Happily for me, "Desktop" Linux and "Server" Linux are two aspects of the same thing, separated only by context. Choose one set of packages and you get a desktop workstation; choose another and you get a server O/S. Mix and match to suit your needs. Lovely, really.

      People who say things like "Desktop Linux is Dead" are demonstrating their cluelessness. They think market share among noobs matters. It does not.

      Linux is, was, and ever shall be a tool for technically sophisticated people to get real work done. It is an elite tool not unlike a scientific calculator: it requires a certain amount of knowledge to be used properly. Does every Tom, Dick, and Harry need a scientific calculator? Of course not. But you don't see articles on the web moaning about the imminent demise of scientific calculators, do you?

      Same thing.

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
    22. Re:Not dead on my desktop by nschubach · · Score: 1

      But, I can close the lid of my laptop and it goes to sleep, open it and it wakes up. I don't have to write wpa-supplicant files by hand, worry about wireless drivers, or anything else. I can watch my DVDs, I can watch internet videos if I want to (as much as I bitch about youtube culture and whatnot, there are occasionally things worth watching that happen to live inside of an embedded flash player), my battery life doesn't suck and I spend a lot less time beating my head against the wall due to "not quite 100% compatible" issues.

      Frankly, I don't think I'm alone in a rather large section of professional Unix people who want at least one personal machine that they don't have to fight with all the time.

      I don't fight with my Ubuntu laptop at all and I do all that you just said. (Wake/Sleep/DVDs/Wifi/Youtube/battery life)

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    23. Re:Not dead on my desktop by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      I can frankly say that I have the same experience as you have with OS X on a MacBook, but with Ubuntu 10.10 on my Thinkpad T42(with "broken" video drivers)...

    24. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Hand-editing wpa_supp files because you didn't even glance at the package manager? That's not laziness, that's stupidity and ignorance.

      OS X's padded cell walls are a perfect fit for you, since you seem hell-bent on ignoring the solutions everyone else on a given OS uses and heading straight for the most retarded action possible. Either that or you're incredibly gullible and believe every piece of FUD you read.

    25. Re:Not dead on my desktop by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      I find with desktop Linux, either you get lucky and everything works, or its hell and a half and you have to tweak some obscure thing if you're ever going to get it to work at all. Same with FreeBSD. As servers and workstations, they're fine. But I don't want to have to tweak sysctls to get my crystal usb speakers to work, even though they're allegedly supported. No such work is necessary in Windows or on the Mac.

      When I was 14, I was happy to dig around dealing with obscure stuff to get things that should be easy to work. Getting a server set up right is one thing, that's work. I don't want to have to fuss like that when I'm at home, except perhaps on a test machine. I have an older, spare supermicro I liberated from work to experiment with, but I'm not sitting at it to actually use it. It's off in its own area with my home Cisco lab, and I can ssh to it when I want to use it for something.

      If all your hardware works fine, and you don't have to futz around to get your desktop the way you want, it then bonzai for you. I won't begrudge you that. But don't begrudge me my choice to not want to mess with it anymore. I'm happy with my current set up, you're happy with yours, and we can all go one with our lives.

    26. Re:Not dead on my desktop by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      No, I don't believe every piece of FUD I read. In one of my other posts I explain more details about the hardware issues I was facing. Most of my issues were hardware related, not software related. I'm perfectly well able to make the software work as well as the hardware was going to let it. However, when I got into a position to be able to afford not to have anymore, I decided to go with it. If using Linux or BSD on your desktop works for you, then great. It worked for me, more or less, when I had nothing to do outside of school but play around on my home computers, but I don't really want to do that anymore and have chosen the path of least resistance.

    27. Re:Not dead on my desktop by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      You obviously haven't come across the 'OMG it doesn't look right so I am just going to complain till my bosses ears bleed' scenario yet. I assure you it is quite a large phenomena. On top of that most MSCE's couldn't use VIM's advanced 'd$' type keystrokes as it is so much easier and intuitive for them to just press END then backspace 62 times. So what chance do they have if they have to use some complex non gui syntax like adduser or userdel?
      I used VIM in my example as eMacs has been known to make MSCE's heads spontaneously combust. So for someone or other's sake please don't start a Vi vs eMacs war.


      PS: I may have stuck this in the wrong thread but in my defense I am using WinXP at the local library.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    28. Re:Not dead on my desktop by Skater · · Score: 1

      I got modded Troll, but that certainly wasn't what I intended. I love the Microsoft supporters here. lol Anyway, I can't think of any reason Slackware wouldn't boot on that machine, except possibly the SATA driver - I'm not sure when they made it into the kernel. I have the disc at home, maybe sometime when I'm bored I'll try it.

      But even if it didn't boot, I should be able to get it working far enough to fix the problem. Unfortunately that isn't the case with XP so far. There's no reason XP shouldn't run on a 64-bit computer; I'm doing it right now as a matter of fact (at work).

  4. So...? by ByOhTek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While everything mentioned is a big detractor, that doesn't mean that Linux on the Desktop is dead. At some point, someone could come up with a way to make it work. Ubuntu was certainly more of a leap than a step in the right direction. It's moving closer every year. Of course, the desktop seems to be moving away every year too, it's a catch-up race with MS and Apple in the lead. Overall, it does seem Linux is gaining ground, just slowly.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    1. Re:So...? by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu is actually pretty damned easy to load and use and IMO the easiest desktop Linux to live with. for surfing and general desktop work it's really all most would need. However I play games and am more comfortable in Winders so it's my primary but Linux is installed on several servers, a PBX, and a couple of HTPC and I can get around in it pretty good. Linux IS getting better and when someone asks me what to put on their computer my automatic answer is no longer Windows. I don't know what Linux will ever "take over" but it's becoming more and more viable - far from "dead" IMO.

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    2. Re:So...? by narrowhouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I almost agree with the premise of the article, just based on the fact that I think the DESKTOP is dying. Between phones and tablets I expect typical Desktop OS installations to become the minority in less than 5 years, though the desktop will live on in business, which doesn't leave time for Linux to "catch up", it will just be a player in a new game.

      --


      Insert pithy comment here.
    3. Re:So...? by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Who says I'm hoping for it or waiting for it? I honestly don't care.

      Actually, given my past experiences with Linux on my desktop, I want it there like I want angry fire ants on my scrotum. It's the whole once bitten, twice shy, or at this time, 8-10 times bitten, 16-20 times shy.

      That doesn't mean that I can't recognize the growth and improvement of the OS in that field.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    4. Re:So...? by psbrogna · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Looking at it as a desktop issue is fast becoming irrelevant. Linux already has it's beachhead - it's called Android. Didn't it recently beat out iPhone in cell phone market share? I'd wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happens in the tablet world once they get them out there. I believe convenient new form factors and safe "walled gardens" (ie. app markets with free/cheap downloadables that are pseudo-repudiated by somebody or at least peer-reviewed) is going to drive the market for the next few years.

    5. Re:So...? by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Oh, they don't think linux is gaining ground? :-P

      Seriously, they are the exception, not the rule. What makes an OS useable for them does NOT make is usable for the rest of the potential userbase. Actually, while not mutually exclusive, what makes the OS usable for that crowd, tends to drive it away from what a normal user wants. Given the number of geeks and normals that use MacOS, there is proof that the two can coexist, to an extent.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    6. Re:So...? by bhartman34 · · Score: 1

      I think the biggest problem is that the Linux community didn't make a move on usability until it was very late in the game. Fro a long time, the attitude seems to have been, "If you want to use Linux, you'd better be willing to do your research." I can't tell you how many times, back in the late 90's, I'd log on to a forum for Red Hat (5, at the time) and see newbies receiving answers like "RTFM" and "man ". There was an elitism to those days that was definitely off-putting. If you're going to rely on user-based support, those users'd better be friendly.

      Another problem is refusing to let commercial software in on the party. For a long time, Linux purists have looked askance at commercial software -- particularly if it was closed source. Thankfully, Ubuntu is starting to change that. I hope it's not too late, but on the desktop, it might be.

    7. Re:So...? by cgenman · · Score: 1

      The initial article says that "the dream" of desktop Linux is dead. Not that desktop Linux itself is dead.

      And I have to agree. After ten years of watching the thing flounder, the actual grandma usability of desktop Linux is still beyond miserable. Ubuntu was a great step forward, but it basically went from Godawful to just awful. While Windows has the problem of 6 different redundant interfaces to do everything, Ubuntu and desktop Linux has the problem of 6 different configuration centers each doing something similar but different. And yes, you still have to drop to editing config files. Even if it did manage to be easier to use and more stable than Windows, it still has to be significantly better or different to get over the overhead of switching. That significant difference, aside from server performance and command-line systems, never arose.

      And we are seeing the next generation of desktop challengers emerge. Windows is still in it, as is OSX. But iOS and Android are coming out as strong competitors in the not-quite-a-phone-not-quite-a-laptop area, and will probably drift into full laptops soon. Chrome may actually be a competitor as well, or at least for niche applications.

      So let desktop Linux be what desktop Linux is: a handy environment to get stuff done on your servers, a great way to keep old computers useful, and the best rescue / hacking tools you can find. But don't expect it to take over the world. If that happens, it's not going to happen because people were trying to get it to take over the world. That will happen while people are busy doing other things.

    8. Re:So...? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You just don't understand. The Desktop is dead as a major market. Compare Android sales, however, and you get a rather different picture. Unfortunately, the screens are too small, and the systems tend to be too locked down, to do anything decent with them, but they are linux user interfaces.

      OTOH, I'm not sanguine. KDE4 was a tremendous step backwards from KDE3 in terms of anything but eye-candy. The news coming out about Gnome3 isn't making me very happy either...but that could be misleading. It seems (to me) like the developers forgot about the users. And a lot of the changes benefit either those with very large screens, or very small screens. (Both are legitimate causes, but that's not my situation. I could fit in a 21" screen, if I went to a flat-panel, but currently I'm limited to a 19" screen. And my eyes aren't quite what they were a couple of years ago, so higher resolution doesn't solve the problem.)

      I think KDE3 pretty much hit the sweet spot in utility. You could fancy up the eye-candy without hurting functionality, but changing the menu layout was a bad mistake. (And, no, KDE4's "classical menus" didn't solve the problem. That was only a half-step back toward where they had just taken 3 giant steps from.)

      It doesn't matter much anymore anyway. The desktop is not the major market. That's laptops, netbooks, and phones. Linux is sufficiently dominant in phones that I don't have to worry about my ability to connect being sabotaged. That was the only reason I ever really cared, and a few years ago it was a valid worry. And if Gnome3 is as big a disappointment as KDE4, then there's always LXDE. (It was almost good enough the last time I looked, and I'm sure it's been polished since then.) Or failing that xfce.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:So...? by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      While everything mentioned is a big detractor, that doesn't mean that Linux on the Desktop is dead. At some point, someone could come up with a way to make it work. Ubuntu was certainly more of a leap than a step in the right direction. It's moving closer every year. Of course, the desktop seems to be moving away every year too, it's a catch-up race with MS and Apple in the lead. Overall, it does seem Linux is gaining ground, just slowly.

      I agree. What about the current state of linux says anything about the race being over?

      I have always imagined that in 10 or 20 years, microsoft will lose popularity, and linux will creep up just ready to take over.

      More specifically, with all these new mobile devices trying out new interfaces, I imagine that today's youth will be much more likely to pick up a new interface. That means they won't have the same aversion to something new as people who have, say, only used windows or mac os for the last 15 years.

      So some day, linux will get there. Just don't keep thinking it's next year.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    10. Re:So...? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      What do you mean, "make it work"? It's working now - it is a success today. 1-2% of the market is huge. Yes it can be improved, but the point of Linux is not to be a market leader.

  5. Fuck by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Funny

    I upgraded to Ubuntu Maverick Meetkat last week.

    It's the best desktop I ever used. And now its dead. :(

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    1. Re:Fuck by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Don't beat a dead Meerkat.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    2. Re:Fuck by abigsmurf · · Score: 5, Funny

      I upgraded to Maverick Meerkat last week. I was most disappointed when it failed to give me cheap deals on my car insurance.

      Too obscure?

    3. Re:Fuck by uradu · · Score: 1

      Same here, although the installer glitched out on me and wiped out my previous Ubuntu AND my Windows partitions, replacing both with 10.10 instead. After an initial F*****CK moment I realized I could actually live without whatever I'd had on that Windows partition and 10.10 is actually quite nice. The only issue so far is that Firefox totally chokes on flash sites, and they don't even have to be particularly flash heavy--scrolling slows down to a total crawl.

    4. Re:Fuck by muckracer · · Score: 2, Funny

      > I upgraded to Ubuntu Maverick Meetkat last week.

      > It's the best desktop I ever used. And now its dead. :(

      Well...if you just look AT your box it's both alive and dead. Whereas if you look inside, it's either/or. Therefore we can conclude with certainty, that the rumours of the death of Linux on the desktop box are between 0 - 100% wrong...depending on your entanglement with the Maverick Meerkat. :-)

    5. Re:Fuck by deroby · · Score: 1

      Cats have 9 lives anyway, you're still good until v14.10 something...

      --
      If there is one thing to be learned on slashdot, it has to be sarcasm.
    6. Re:Fuck by xtracto · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was Dead on Arrival...

      Really, each Ubuntu upgrade is shittier than the previous one.

      They should extend their "beta" period in 2 months (or call it "gamma" period) so that they have the chance to fix all the bugs they supply in the release CD.

      Seriously, for each new upgrade I have to download like 300MB of patches just a month after it is released. WTF

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    7. Re:Fuck by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Funny

      I upgraded to Maverick Meerkat last week. I was most disappointed when it failed to give me cheap deals on my car insurance.

      Too obscure?

      I didn't know Maverick Meerkat did that. Now, if you'd said Dealing Duck or Gibbering Gecko, then it'd make sense.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    8. Re:Fuck by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They're related, but not the same. Maverick Meerkat starred in an adaptation of a feature film about homosexual fighter pilots.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    9. Re:Fuck by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu Relegated Roadkill, anyone?

    10. Re:Fuck by war4peace · · Score: 1

      You know, this is funny. I installed Ubuntu 10.10 on a virtual machine at home and liked it so much that I also installed it on my desktop at work. Despite some issues with basic configuration (that damn Java thing still ain't working right!), it seems to be working pretty fine.
      What I think might drive new users away is the enormous amount of "small issues" which are not critical but lead to dangerous frustration buildups. Examples:
      - streamtuner + Audacious combination is unreliable; upon testing radio stations, most of them heavily skip if I do something else on the machine (dual core, 2 gigs of RAM) - NOT an issue if using the same radio stations from Windows. Also, more than once I have seen Audacious hang when changing radio stations. - screenshot feast: print screen works fine, but when trying to copy a screenshot to clipboard and paste in Gimp, Gimp says there's no image in the clipboard. No shit. Then why I can copy from Ubuntu and paste the image to Windows 7 (when running Ubuntu off a VM)?
      - At one point, I inadvertedly pressed ctrl+r in the Ubuntu VM (honestly, didn't know where the focus was) - managed to somehow restart the whole VM (no questions asked or warnings displayed).
      - Ubuntu Software Center managed to mangle an application installation (never finished even after 2h of waiting, no error displayed) - so badly that it wouldn't install anything anymore, also Synaptic Package Manager was erroring out at start, saying dpkg was somehow messed up. I followed some Internet tutorial and got it fixed, point is it shouldn't have behaved this way.
      All in all, an interesting experience (I have a lot of fun with Compiz), but plagued with small inconsistencies that slowly pile up, up to the point where one would say "wtf is this shit, I'm tired of it!". Just sayin'...
      And no, I am not yet tired of it :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    11. Re:Fuck by havana9 · · Score: 1

      Nope, if you are in the 2D beam.

    12. Re:Fuck by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      I understand the feeling.

      I'm gonna pass on the Meerkat though since I need to buckle down and do some serious work and the LTS Lynx provides everything I need for that. I've been using Ubuntu for about 4 years and it is now an excellent desktop. It is also great on my Acer netbook. The improvements between the Lynx and the Meerkat would not affect my work so why should I upgrade? I'll wait another six months or maybe longer.

      I mention this because I think this shows why Linux and FOSS will eventually dominate the desktop world. Microsoft and Apple are now past the peak penetration of their desktop markets: for both companies, successfully selling a new desktop OS means mostly convincing their users that it is time to upgrade. But the desktop software is now so mature there is little need for anyone using a 10 year old OS like WinXP to give it up. Upgrades are being done to meet marginal demands like better entertainment experiences. Meanwhile, Linux and FOSS have now caught up with the proprietaries in desktop apps... but Linux and FOSS apps don't care whether you ever upgrade. You can if it suits your needs, but you don't have to and you won't be pressured to.

      Also, as far as old Windows machines are concerned, Linux and FOSS apps run better on the old hardware than Windows ever did. Linux is a lot more efficient in its use of hardware, making old machines behave as if they were younger and faster. The migration path is going to become obvious to a lot of users: when WinXP/Vista/Win7 no longer does the job, set up a dual boot with Ubuntu and easily move your workflows over to FOSS, and then take the money you would have spent on a new computer and buy a decent purpose-specific entertainment center.

      Linux is going to win out on the desktop because the FOSS approach allows it to reach optimum user experience and then just sit there. While the need to support a revenue stream forces Microsoft and Apple to somehow push their users beyond the optimum user experience. Sooner or later even the least savvy user is going to realize that having umpteen dozen more widgets that he'll never use does not make for a better desktop.

      --
      Will
    13. Re:Fuck by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

      Same here, although the installer glitched out on me and wiped out my previous Ubuntu AND my Windows partitions, replacing both with 10.10 instead.

      Methinks the glitch was with the user, rather than the installer... be sure to pay attention when clicking through those screens! :)

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    14. Re:Fuck by IICV · · Score: 1

      They're related, but not the same. Maverick Meerkat starred in an adaptation of a feature film about homosexual fighter pilots.

      Tops and Guns?

    15. Re:Fuck by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 1

      Get FLASH-AID. That should fix it.

    16. Re:Fuck by Lennie · · Score: 1
      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    17. Re:Fuck by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except for the fact that X crashes if you try to use KDE or any Qt based software if you have more than one monitor. Of course, you can work around this by using Gnome writing a script to wrap any Qt software into its own Xnest or Xephyr session.

      Has Linux on the desktop come a long way? Yes. It's a great 'engineer's desktop,' i.e. a desktop for powerusers highly familiar with the system. But even Ubuntu isn't ready for the average user's desktop. But that's fine, it has its own niche.

    18. Re:Fuck by pacinpm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I had Ubuntu installed through Wubi inside Win7 NTFS partition. After upgrade to Maverick Meetkat I no longer can log into it, it resets before I can even see kernel messages. So I am giving up on desktop Linux for another couple of years. It wasn't the only problem with Linux I had but it was last nail to the coffin.

      It's a shame because I am big OSS fan and I am using a lot of free programs on desktop. I also use exclusively Linux on server. I hoped I could replace windows completely.

    19. Re:Fuck by llamapater · · Score: 1

      that meerkat was a maveric you knew it was bound to die young =/

    20. Re:Fuck by mikechant · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I had Ubuntu installed through Wubi inside Win7 NTFS partition.

      Seems a shame to give up on it because of a Wubi problem. In my (and many other people's) opinion wubi is really only for initially trying Ubuntu out without repartitioning, not a good permanant option.
      Why don't you give a *proper* install another chance?

    21. Re:Fuck by pacinpm · · Score: 1

      Why don't you give a *proper* install another chance?

      Because unfortunately I have it on Lenovo laptop. It has no Windows DVD install but hidden recovery partition instead. There is no easy way to reduce the size of main system partition.

      I liked Wubi because it was really easy way to install Linux. I tried many different distros (Slackware, RH, Debian) through couple of years and I had many problems with install script making Windows unbootable.

      Wubi worked so far flawlessly without serious performance issues.

  6. On the contrary by COMON$ · · Score: 1, Troll
    Linux desktop is very much alive...on thinclients :)

    However, what is up with the obvious story troll? Are the /. numbers low today?

    --
    CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
    1. Re:On the contrary by jxs2151 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux desktop is very much alive...on thinclients :)

      However, what is up with the obvious story troll? Are the /. numbers low today?

      "...what is up with the obvious story troll?"

      This is what the author was referring to when he mentioned "...the fierce ideology of the open-source community...". Dismissing non-believers as heretics/trolls makes you an ideologue and renders the platform unattractive to regular users. Your natural reaction to this will be to dismiss regular users as not worthy of Linux but nobody wants to adopt a platform that gets them trashed by smelly, overbearing, slogan-yelling hippies.

      Thanks asshole.

    2. Re:On the contrary by Fnkmaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dude, this morning has been one troll story after another. Look at the last 3-4 stories - Microsoft is dead, Linux is dead, now we just need a Mac is dead story and we'll complete the troll trifecta.

    3. Re:On the contrary by Kludge · · Score: 1

      what is up with the obvious story troll?

      Apparently the story posters have not been reading /. today:
      http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/10/18/0321200/Why-Microsoft-Is-So-Scared-of-OpenOffice

    4. Re:On the contrary by Apatharch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know whether it was an editor* or the author of the article himself (my bet's on the latter), but whoever chose the title "Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead" was undoubtedly trolling. (*At PCWorld, I mean, not /.)

    5. Re:On the contrary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You should look up what "troll" means. It does not mean "lie", it means the article was written to garner attention. Which it was.

      While you're at it, look up what "ideologue" means. It doesn't mean fanatic.

    6. Re:On the contrary by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Or a "Mac r00lz" article, and we can start with the marketing/brainwashing conspiracy theories :)

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    7. Re:On the contrary by beschra · · Score: 4, Funny

      Troll Trifecta. I like the sound of that. I don't care about the meaning just the sound. Troll Trifecta. Troll Trifecta. Troll Trifecta.

      --
      It is unwise to ascribe motive
    8. Re:On the contrary by etymxris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it's trolling because it'd be like posting a story on a Christian site titled "God is dead". Regardless of whether it's true or not, the story is designed to piss off the primary viewership of the site.

    9. Re:On the contrary by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > Linux desktop is very much alive...

      Same here. Mine even snores at night. Or my HARD DRIVE IS DYING... :-/

    10. Re:On the contrary by Masterofpsi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux desktop is very much alive...on thinclients :)

      However, what is up with the obvious story troll? Are the /. numbers low today?

      "...what is up with the obvious story troll?"

      This is what the author was referring to when he mentioned "...the fierce ideology of the open-source community...". Dismissing non-believers as heretics/trolls makes you an ideologue and renders the platform unattractive to regular users. Your natural reaction to this will be to dismiss regular users as not worthy of Linux but nobody wants to adopt a platform that gets them trashed by smelly, overbearing, slogan-yelling hippies.

      Thanks asshole.

      It's not a troll because it asserts that Linux is dead.

      It's a troll because it asserts that Linux is dead ON /.

      Come on, now.

    11. Re:On the contrary by hkfczrqj · · Score: 1

      Dismissing non-believers as heretics/trolls makes you an ideologue and renders the platform unattractive to regular users.

      yet, for some reason, Apple has succeeded despite its users.

    12. Re:On the contrary by ocdscouter · · Score: 1

      Trollfecta?

    13. Re:On the contrary by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      It's fair and equal coverage, just like Fox News provides.
          [/sarcasm]

          Microsoft and Apple won't ever die, when Mac Fanbois who can't afford their favorite toys continue buy copies of OS/X and install it on store bought PC's that were shipped with Windows on them. :)

          Long live the Hackintosh, for those who want *nix without admitting they are using *nix. :)

          Well, until licensing verification gets good enough where they can't be hacked around. Windows did a good job with 7, it wasn't cracked until 85 days before the official launch. :) OS/X 10.4.4 was cracked in 35 days, and subsequent fixes took about 2 weeks on each update.

          *Linux and *BSD on the other hand still haven't had any activation hacks written, nor intentional attempts by the publisher to disable your machine remotely to make you pay for a license.

          Note: I say "make you pay for a license", because some valid copies of other products have run into activation and continued use problems, which suggest that end users pay for their license again. Oh and dear god don't forget to make the restore CD from the vendor, which they put on the hard drive, so when the drive dies, you're stuck waiting for a mail order replacement or purchasing a new full copy locally.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    14. Re:On the contrary by jxs2151 · · Score: 1
      You call Apple's market share "success"?

      And BTW, Apple started succeeding when it pushed it's fanboi's to the background and thus became mainstream enough to be accepted.

    15. Re:On the contrary by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I'm confused are you talking about Linux or OS X?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    16. Re:On the contrary by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Funny you should say that...
      Back in the days I was trying to get accustomed with... gentoo (yeah I know, horrible learning curve and all that, but I was brave). It all went to shit after I joined several LUG discussion lists and started asking questions. I know I was a noob and maybe my expectations were high on the help I could've received, but between "RTFM", "you dumb shit" and continuous never ending everyone-arguing-with-everyone-else story, I kind of gave up in disgust.
      I think the community's attitude and willingness to help newbies counts more than the OS itself. The OS might have a gazillion issues, but if the community is great and helpful, people will trust there's someone out there ready to help them resolve whatever popped up. Then again, the OS might be great, but with weird and shady support methods (yeah, tons of documentations but people don't know where to look in the first place) there's not going to be a large amount of people switching.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    17. Re:On the contrary by imric · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yup because being reasonable means agreeing with obvious trolls (and here is what a troll is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) It doesn't mean 'to disagree', btw).

      What you are calling for is 'fair and balanced' meaning that you must give equal weight to opponents even if their position is untenable - IOW, if you don't agree with the validity of the obvious troll's point, that means by disagreeing you (the "smelly, overbearing, slogan-yelling hippies" - your words) are 'trashing' the poor victim, the troll. Right?

      And as a real treat, your ending statements are a 'strawman' ("Your natural reaction to this will be to dismiss regular users as not worthy of Linux"), of course hoping to demolish your strawman later and cry victory. (what, you don't know what a strawman is either? Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_argument )

      So why should anyone listen to your gems of wisdom, again?

      --
      Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
    18. Re:On the contrary by Kyont · · Score: 1

      At last... my new prog-rock power trio has a suitable band name. Thanks!

      --
      You shall see a cow on the roof of a cotton house.
    19. Re:On the contrary by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      nobody wants to adopt a platform that gets them trashed by smelly, overbearing, slogan-yelling hippies.

      However, the success of the iPhone indicates that you need only eliminate the "smelly" in order to win.

    20. Re:On the contrary by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Will Canonical use that as the code name for Ubuntu 14.4?

    21. Re:On the contrary by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      Dude, this morning has been one troll story after another. Look at the last 3-4 stories - Microsoft is dead, Linux is dead, now we just need a Mac is dead story and we'll complete the troll trifecta.

      Dude, not necessary, the Mac is dead story has been told in the comments. Particularly this thread http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1826490&cid=33931850

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    22. Re:On the contrary by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Dismissing non-believers as heretics/trolls makes you an ideologue

      I don't think he said that.

      Your natural reaction to this will be to dismiss regular users as not worthy of Linux

      I don't think he said that either.

      nobody wants to adopt a platform that gets them trashed by smelly, overbearing, slogan-yelling hippies.

      Oh, you're just a douchebag. I get it now.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  7. huh... why now? by someonestolecc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... i dont get it.. why now? why at all? i've been using it for years so for me it's great ..

    1. Re:huh... why now? by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      And there's new people adopting it at least as often as before. Do your MS running friends a favour and show them what you can do with a Linux desktop these days. They'll (hopefully) thank you for it, especially if they're the 'virus prone' sort of folks.

    2. Re:huh... why now? by maztuhblastah · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... i dont get it.. why now? why at all?

      Because Mr. Strohmeyer needed an article, and PCWorld needs their advertising revenue.

    3. Re:huh... why now? by Lennie · · Score: 1

      I read the article, but blocked the ads.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  8. trolling trolling trolling by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Funny

    This entire "story" must be summed up by the following:

    Rawhide
    I owe you $200 and you boys drank $300 worth of beer

    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling

    Rawhide

    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Though the streams are swollen
    Keep them doggies trolling
    Rawhide

    Rain and wind and weather
    Hell bent for leather
    Wishing my gal was by my side

    All the things I'm missin'
    Good vittels, lovin', kissin'
    Are waiting at the end of my ride

    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Head 'em up, move' em on
    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Rawhide

    Cut 'em out, ride 'em in
    Ride 'em in, cut 'em out
    Call 'em out, ride 'em in
    Rawhide

    Keep moving, moving, moving
    Though they're disapproving
    Keep them doggies moving
    Rawhide

    Don't try to understand 'em
    Just rope, throw and brand 'em
    Soon we'll be living high and wide

    My heart calculatin'
    My true love will be waitin'
    Be waiting at the end of my ride
    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Head 'em up, move' em on
    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Rawhide

    Cut 'em out, ride 'em in
    Ride 'em in, cut 'em out
    Call 'em out, ride 'em in
    Rawhide

    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Head 'em up, move' em on
    Move 'em on, head' em up
    Rawhide

    Cut 'em out, ride 'em in
    Ride 'em in, cut 'em out
    Call 'em out, ride 'em in
    Rawhide

    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Trolling, trolling, trolling
    Rawhide

    Rawhide

    1. Re:trolling trolling trolling by vintagepc · · Score: 1

      My hat is off to you, good sir. Your post is composed entirely of WIN. That said, Desktop Linux is indeed far from dead. I've given it the "mother" test and it passes fairly well for general internet use and e-mail; the only discrepancies are with the naming/placement/sequence of various actions. Desktop linux is not dead. The MINDSET of people realizing that it is NOT Windows/OS X and not supposed to be identical in every way is what is dying. That is by far the biggest problem I hear - "it's not like Windows...". Well, DUH. If it was, it would have a $200 price tag and say Microsoft on the box, wouldn't it?

      --
      Evolution - Est. 4500000000 B.C. Don't piss in the gene pool.
    2. Re:trolling trolling trolling by jessjesseeee · · Score: 1

      I like where you're going with this but I have to say I prefer this version better

  9. Games by Laz10 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All I need is games.

    I need nothing, absolutly nothing exception playable games.
    WINE doesn't cut it, and I don't think that it ever will, I try it out regulary and it just sucks for the games I play.

    Since 2004 I have been dual-booting between Ubuntu, where I do all serious and not so serious stuff, and Windows where I keep my FPS addiction alive (currently MW2)

    1. Re:Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      starcraft 2 works flawlessly with wine out of the box. Been playing it solely on ubuntu over 100 games played and including online games without drops or lag. Seems almost as if they tested it on wine before shipping the game.... just amazing that it works so well.

    2. Re:Games by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for all games of course but Team Fortress 2, which wasn't TOO old at the time I tried it in Wine, ran pretty much perfectly. When did you last try Wine?

    3. Re:Games by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      I need nothing, abshttp://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/10/18/1312214/Desktop-Linux-Is-Dead#olutly nothing exception playable games.

      Dude, you need a proportional font and a grammar/spell-checker.

    4. Re:Games by somersault · · Score: 1

      Team Fortress 2 runs on the HL2 engine, which had been out for a good while when TF2 came out. By that time I think I'd already bought a PS3 though.

      Side rant: I really, really dislike how they brought out the whole Orange Box for PS3, but not CS. It must be trivially easy to get it running on PS3 if the Source engine is working. Yes it's not as good a port as the Xbox version, yada yada, but I'd still have played it a hell of a lot if they brought it out. I'd even pay for it, again.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:Games by Laz10 · · Score: 1

      Ok, so it was about half a year ago I last tried WINE.
      At that time (I think it was wine 1.2rc1) was able to run MW2, which is pretty amazing, if you think of all the work that takes.
      The bad news is that it was like 10 fps in 800x600, low quality vs. fluent in 1600x1200 high quality.
      I might have improved, I am sure it has, but now it is too late.

      November 9., Black Ops will be available and I am sure that THAT won't work for another 1/2-1 year.

      I am not saying that wine is bad or that they are doing a bad job.
      They are doing an amazing job.

      It's just mission impossible, since they are trying to hit a moving target.

    6. Re:Games by Laz10 · · Score: 1

      I changed the font, but I can't change the fact that my first language isn't english.

      But rest assured that I'll ready to correct you, should you ever attempt to write a sentence in danish :-P

    7. Re:Games by xtracto · · Score: 1

      So...
      What games does your typewriter comes with?

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    8. Re:Games by imakemusic · · Score: 3, Funny

      That and decent music creating software. I've said it before but I'll say it again: while it is possible to create music on Linux it is by no means easy or enjoyable. Get me Ableton Live on Linux and I'll be happy.

      Oh, and Photoshop.

      and a pony.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    9. Re:Games by BassMan449 · · Score: 1

      The version of the Source engine that TF2 ran on and the version that CSS ran on were not the same until about a month ago. Valve released several changes to the Source engine to go along with the Orange Box. CSS wasn't updated to run on that version of the engine until recently. Benefit the changes were probably not to drastic so the port work to either update CSS or port the old engine shouldn' t have been to extreme, but it would not be trivial.

    10. Re:Games by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      My apologies, it was meant as a joke. Your English is unquestionably far better than my Danish will ever be.

    11. Re:Games by Laz10 · · Score: 1

      Actually Photoshop is platinium rated at winhq:
      http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=1336

      But you might need to pull a few geek tricks to get it installed ..

    12. Re:Games by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      The version of the Source engine that TF2 ran on and the version that CSS ran on were not the same until about a month ago. Valve released several changes to the Source engine to go along with the Orange Box. CSS wasn't updated to run on that version of the engine until recently. Benefit the changes were probably not to drastic so the port work to either update CSS or port the old engine shouldn' t have been to extreme, but it would not be trivial.

      The version HL2 ran on until 6 months ago was the same as the one CS:S ran on, and that one runs just fine on the PS3.

      No, the real reason is because Valve hated the PS3. Valve's CEO Gabe Newell said that the PS3 is "a total disaster" in 2007. Orange Box PS3 was ported from the 360 version by EA.

      Valve changed its tune at E3 2010, announcing that their first official PS3 game is Portal 2, due out in February*.

      *June or July if you take Valve Time into account.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    13. Re:Games by Laxori666 · · Score: 1

      What do you need besides nethack?

    14. Re:Games by tepples · · Score: 1

      That and decent music creating software.

      Modplug Tracker works in Wine on my Dell Mini 10 running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS.

    15. Re:Games by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking the work to update the actual mod should have been very trivial, though I admit I don't know what the differences were between those versions of the Source engine. I can't really imagine anything that would make it difficult. Any large changes to stuff like networking would be handled automatically by the game engine and have no relevance to mods. Silly little things like map format changes for HDR lighting wouldn't matter, they could just leave HDR disabled, and convert the rest of the map, etc. I was thinking more that MS just paid a lot of money to have CS as an exclusive. It's the sort of thing that would have made me get an XBox over a PS3, were it not a Microsoft Product..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    16. Re:Games by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 1

      Well as a 64bit person, i have had problems with wine too. However i am also getting older. So i just don't boot to windows at all anymore because my wife and I are happy enough with quake3 (quake live has some issues for me). I like RTSs, and finally got taspring to compile and work on my slack boxes.

      These days, a game is just not enough to boot to windows. I don't even really know how to use windows anymore.

      But i do miss battle for middle earth 2.. nothing like 5+ attack trolls laying waste to some nancy boy elf's... especially when they are my wifes elf's.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    17. Re:Games by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 1

      Since quite a few of the 3d software folks have started supporting Linux, i was expecting adobe to as well. Its really not that hard even with a existing code base. Something like photoshop on linux would a pretty big deal for some graphics shops i know.

      However sound the sound api on linux has not been... well. I can understand why sound apps tend to support a single OS.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    18. Re:Games by keester · · Score: 1

      Wine works for me since I'm still playing warcraft 3.. actually, I prefer the mouse movement in wine vs. windows. Difficult to explain, but it is much more precise for me.

      --
      Take it easy? I'll take it anyway I can get it . . .
    19. Re:Games by chammy · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I'd rather play classic Playstation roms and my gigantic MAME collection than the kind of Windows games that don't run in Wine (especially DRM-laden works like MW2)

    20. Re:Games by imakemusic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well version 7 that you link to is Platinum rated but that came out in 2002 and is a little bit dated. There have been 5 major versions released since then. Two of these are rated platinum, the rest are silver. And a lot of them say "does not install" or "installs, with workarounds".

      Going by that I am going to assume that you haven't actually tried this yourself, you just went and looked it up as an attempt to counter my argument.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    21. Re:Games by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      That looks interesting. I haven't tried it before and I'll give it a go once I've got internet working in my house.

      Though, to be honest, looking at the screenshots I very much doubt that it will match the usability of Ableton Live or even Logic.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    22. Re:Games by snadrus · · Score: 1

      The web overtook the casual & social games markets. HTML5, WebGL, & canvas are a platform for realtime, networked games. They're taking shape now while the standard is pushed to browsers. And all Linuxes will play them.

      --
      Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
    23. Re:Games by Hatta · · Score: 1

      I need nothing, absolutly nothing exception playable games.

      There are tons of playable games available on Linux. What you probably mean is that you need recently released high-budget blockbuster games. They're not the same thing.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    24. Re:Games by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      You miss the point. "Games" aren't like apps where you just need something to get a job done. They're entertainment, and you need variety. You don't just stroll up to a pot of "game" and throw some on your plate and walk off happy because you have some "game" to tie you over for a bit. You want specific games, and of a decent quality. Now, I don't have to have EVERY game available to be happy, but you need at least a good selection (ie, I play mostly on an Xbox360 - there are some good games out for PS3 that I can't play, but the selection on 360 is good enough that I don't complain). Linux currently doesn't have that.

      Look, I totally think that the article is bologna. I use Ubuntu for my primary desktop OS, but you just can't claim it to be adequate in the gaming department. I keep Windows around on a 2nd computer solely for playing WoW, Starcraft 2, and a few other misc games.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    25. Re:Games by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Linux has an excellent selection of games available if you're willing to look past the newest blockbuster games. Look past the last two console generations and you have just about ever game available through emulation. Just about every doujin shooter I've tried runs through Wine. There are fantastic adventure games with ScummVM. There's Nethack.

      Yes, you have to adjust your expectations a bit. Personally I never run out of things to play on my Linux box. I don't miss Modern Warfare or Starcraft 2 at all. I'm too busy with Dodonpachi and Rome Total War right now. Yeah they're old but they're new to me, and that's what matters.

      Also, it's easier to adjust your expectations as to what is fun (which is purely subjective) than your expectations as to what is useful (which is emperical). If Windows is more fun, but has less useful tools it's harder to adjust to that than Linux which might be less fun but has more useful tools.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    26. Re:Games by Laz10 · · Score: 1

      I am now guilty of the same crime as the other helpful guys in this thread.
      I whined that MW2 doesn't really work on Wine, and got prompt replies that Team Fortress 2, Starcraft 2 and Quake 3 runs just fine.

      And you get this in all "Linux sucks" threads. Really infuriating imho.

      Hope you can accept my apology.

    27. Re:Games by Laz10 · · Score: 1

      Good luck with selling that point to all the games that wants to buy the latest blockbusters along with their friends.

      But IF you get the world to accept your argument, I just happen to have the blueprints for the 1985 Yugo.
      I am sure that you would be an excellent salesman. "We have an excellent collection of cars. You just have to be able to look past the newer models. Yes, you just have to adjust your expectations a bit." ;-)

    28. Re:Games by Hatta · · Score: 1

      I don't really care about the gamers who just want to buy the latest blockbusters. They don't even really love games, any more than the person who only wants to watch the latest blockbuster movie really loves movies, or the person who only wants to listen to the latest top 40 hits really loves music.

      Like music or movies, once you scratch the surface there's a whole world down there. Any movie buff knows there are hundreds of black and white movies, or foreign movies that are better in many, many ways than the high budget shit we see every day. Any music lover knows that great music was made before Autotune, hell, even before amplification.

      Likewise, anyone who really loves games knows that it's not the budget that counts. It's not the special effects. It's the gameplay, and there's loads of that available on Linux. If your interests are too shallow to find it, then use Windows, that's what its for.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    29. Re:Games by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Did you know that last September Direct3D 10/11 went native on Linux ?:

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mesa_gallium3d_d3d11

      And they are putting hooks into Wine to use it.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    30. Re:Games by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Maybe CS4 would be a better one to point to:

      http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=14318

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    31. Re:Games by Lennie · · Score: 1
      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    32. Re:Games by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      Yes, I mentioned that.

      There have been 5 major versions released since then. Two of these are rated platinum, the rest are silver.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    33. Re:Games by BassMan449 · · Score: 1

      Valve changed its tune at E3 2010, announcing that their first official PS3 game is Portal 2, due out in February*.

      *June or July if you take Valve Time into account.

      If you think June or July you obviously don't have enough experience with Valve. Christmas may be a long shot.

    34. Re:Games by melikamp · · Score: 1

      Nicely said. It looks more and more like Windows and OS X are systems for people stupid and impulsive enough to just go with whatever is in the ads.

    35. Re:Games by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Mod up, up, up. The only reason I boot to Windows either is to play games that won't run under wine.

    36. Re:Games by Adm.Wiggin · · Score: 1

      What really happened is that they got the Beta and worked out all the kinks before release. :)

    37. Re:Games by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      However, graphics editing and music-creation software can generally be run perfectly well in a VM (though I guess YMMV if you use fancy peripherals). Games are the exceptional case that really do often force people to dual-boot, and can therefore ultimately make Linux seem more trouble than it's worth.

    38. Re:Games by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      I think that's a legitimate response -- you asked for "playable games", and there are many, many examples of games that either work well under Wine, or have native ports. Maybe I'm weird, but I actually have at least a few good, quality, DRM-free Indie games I've bought for Linux, and simply haven't had the time to play.

      I keep a Windows install around for the exceptions, but they really are the exceptions these days, and I avoid buying new games that don't work on Linux.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    39. Re:Games by dbIII · · Score: 1

      WoW works on linux. Get sucked in enough and there are no other games.

    40. Re:Games by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Then you should keep using Windows. I say that as a Linux user, evangelist, and professional. Keep using Windows. I keep a Windows partition around to play Civ 4 even though it'll theoretically run in Wine (or so some people keep trying to tell me) just because it's not worth the aggravation to me.

      If you want to play Playstation games, you need to have a Playstation. You can't put them in a Wii. Sure, with Linux we have Wine, and given the mountain they're trying to climb, it's a goddamn miracle it works at all. I say that in total sincerity, I don't use it for anything, but my hat is totally off to those folks. But for the most part, if you want to Playstation games you need a Playstation, and if you want to play Windows games you need Windows.

      So it's a hierarchy of wants. Do you want to play Windows games more than you want to not have Windows? If the answer is yes, then great, do that. And seriously, I'm as vocal a free software believer as you'll talk to. But for all that, I don't see any difference between having a Windows gaming console and a Playstation gaming console. That's what they both are, after all. "Windows: At Least We've Still Got Games!"

      As for me, I'm pretty close to cutting the cord. I'm still playing Civ 4, like I said, but if I can't run Civ 5 on XP (which I think you can although I haven't looked into it much) and on my current hardware (which I'm pretty sure I can't) I'm probably not going to buy it, and I'll most certainly send Firaxis a letter telling them why they just lost a customer who has bought every new version and every new expansion pack of Civilization since Civ 2. I'd also settle for running in Wine on the new machine I'm buying on Black Friday. But for damn sure I'm not buying a new box to put Windows on it, and that's the bottom line, and if that means Firaxis lost a customer, that's what it means.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  10. Long live The Desktop Linux! by rvw · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Desktop Linux is dead! Long live the Desktop Linux! (You may shout out and dance around.)

    1. Re:Long live The Desktop Linux! by Psicopatico · · Score: 1

      Hey! That fits on a Tweet too!

      Thanks dude.

      --
      Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
    2. Re:Long live The Desktop Linux! by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      Depends what you mean by Desktop Linux - If you mean at home or on your own PC then it isn't ...

      If you mean (as I think they mean) on the Business desktop - Then normally 2 people in each company make the choice and they choose the simpler option which is what they have already and they know works (for certain values of 'works') - the vast majority of people in business never have an option ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  11. Long live Linux on the Desktop by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as I can download and install a free OS for my computer from any number of sources I consider Linux (on the Desktop) alive and kicking. News of its demise has luckily not reached my Desktop and it is chugging along just fine.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    1. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by BStroms · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the summary says that "the dream of Linux as a major desktop OS is now pretty much dead." So the argument wouldn't have anything to do with how good the OS is, or how well it works for you. It comes down entirely to what it's chances are of taking a significant share of the desktop OS market.

    2. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      When people show up to LUG meetings with Apple laptops running Mac OS X, I think it is fair to say that the movement to GNU/Linux on the desktop has a few problems...

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by muckracer · · Score: 1, Funny

      > Another Linux users with his head firmly rammed up his own ass. Motherfucker, you are obsessed with yourself. For the huge, overwhelming, majority of people on this fucking planet,
      > Linux is a fucking pile of retarded donkey shit. All you can focus on is yourself. "ohhh, it's not dead on *MY* desktop." Congradufuckinglations, except the article wasn't about your
      > life or lack thereof. Fuck you.

      Hey...Outlook failed to pop up the reminder, that it's time to renew your meds. :-)

    4. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Another Linux users with his head firmly rammed up his own ass.

      Not at all. Linux continues to develop and evolve and companies like Nvidia and Hauppauge continue to give us the time of day.

      That means that Linux can go toe to toe in certain areas and best anybody.

      The situation is not nearly as dire as the Fanboys and Lemmings would lead you to believe.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by neumayr · · Score: 1

      There are still LUG meetings? That alone should throw serious doubt on its adoption as a mainstream desktop OS any time soon..

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    6. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      What is wrong with the mods lately? This is a funny attempt at defusing a rant.

    7. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      When Linux is still more widely deployed than Mac OS X (*), it think it is fair to say the problems are overrated.

      * Ok, I admit that is counting servers, and that Mac Desktop with it's 2% world wide has more users than Linux with its 1.6% world wide, but seriously.. It's not that big a difference.. Outside of the US ofcourse.

    8. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by Lorien_the_first_one · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear! I totally agree with you on that one.

      --
      The diversity and expression of human opinion is essential to human survival.
    9. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      Why?

      Perhaps their interest in Linux is for servers. Or their other laptop. Or their work machines.

      Being a member of a LUG doesn't require you to use Linux for all computers, just enough that you're interested in joining the LUG.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    10. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      True, although often I find that the people who do that believe that the point is to combat Microsoft, and that by using Apple products they are "fighting the good fight..."

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    11. Re:Long live Linux on the Desktop by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      To much money spent on his M$ to afford the doc! So he dose not need meds!! :) Typed on Linux! For Linux!!!

  12. Good timing by lotec85 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I got on board the Linux bandwagon just as the wheels fell off!

    1. Re:Good timing by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

      don't worry, they'll reinvent the wheel

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:Good timing by zill · · Score: 1

      and copyleft it this time

    3. Re:Good timing by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Wheels? Wheels are for roads and where we're going, we don't need roads.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    4. Re:Good timing by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

      Or at the very least add "%wheel ALL = (ALL) ALL" to /etc/sudoers.

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
    5. Re:Good timing by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      at least twice

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    6. Re:Good timing by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

      You need to download the latest Ubuntu patch that permits wheelless computing.that ushers in the era of flying carpet computing. Just look at the demographics, the world is going muslim, so it was bound to happen sooner or later.

  13. Mobilize the mob by zill · · Score: 3, Funny

    and the fierce ideology of the open-source community at large

    Linux troll! M$ minion! He needs to be hanged, drawn and quartered.

    1. Re:Mobilize the mob by zolf13 · · Score: 1

      Hold your horses! High Treason cannot by applied as he does not come from the right Kingdom. That leaves us with boring hanging.

    2. Re:Mobilize the mob by Notquitecajun · · Score: 1

      For some here, that would still be too good for him.

    3. Re:Mobilize the mob by mickwd · · Score: 1

      We'd love to draw him, but it's too difficult using the GIMP.

      ..........I kid! I kid!

    4. Re:Mobilize the mob by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      But that would prematurely end his suffering... He must suffer death by a thousand paper cuts while listening to a montage of Windows start up sounds on an endless loop!

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:Mobilize the mob by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      Burn the heretic!

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
    6. Re:Mobilize the mob by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      I get the humor however in this case you're probably right.

      Robert Storhmeyer has written for Official Xbox magazine, Windows XP Magazine and Windows Vista Magazine.

      I'm not saying he has a conflict of interest, just that his mindset is already turned on to "linux sucks". I wouldn't be surprised if the guy has never even tried a distro out.

  14. Haven't we heard this before? by whizbang77045 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Funny, I thought I heard this about the Mac several years ago. I have faith in Microsoft. They could alienate anyone.

    1. Re:Haven't we heard this before? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I don't think anybody really knew how good OSX was going to be. Well that and I don't think anybody knew how long it was going to take MS to release their follow up to XP.

      Most of MS' problems stem from arrogance and a lack of competent leadership. Rather than focusing on making things stable and reliable during the late 90s, they spent a lot of resources trying to reinvent the desktop, when really they weren't doing a particularly good job with the basics.

      I'd seriously like to know what they were thinking with Clippy and the active desktop.

  15. I hate to say this but... by leachim6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think a lot of linux fans don't mind it being an "indie os" y'know?

    --
    This comment was laboriously planned and extremely well thought out by Mike Donaghy @ http://mikedonaghy.org
    1. Re:I hate to say this but... by leachim6 · · Score: 1

      It is what it is, there is no "label".
      People have shoved labels on it since the beginning and it just exists.

      well one thing is for sure, it's not going away anytime soon

      --
      This comment was laboriously planned and extremely well thought out by Mike Donaghy @ http://mikedonaghy.org
    2. Re:I hate to say this but... by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      as long as I can install whatever OS I want on my computer, and its well supported by my hardware, the masses can use whatever POS operating system they want.

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
  16. I personally thought Xandros was decent. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

    I thought it's what ASUS did to their customized Xandros that really screwed it up.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  17. linux is for smart people by mihauKw · · Score: 1, Insightful

    looks like there are only 1-2% of us..

    1. Re:linux is for smart people by Seriousity · · Score: 1

      Excuse me good sir, your subject line and post appear to imply that you are a linux user, and, as such, one of the "smart people".
      Now, normally this would be all fine and dandy, but a great incongruity has arisen from a slight mathematical technicality.

      You see, if you are referring to linux users and "smart people", applying a percentage to this specific group does not in fact represent the proportion of "smart people" to the mass herds of sheeple; in fact, it effectively implies that there are only 1-2% of linux users and "smart people" as previously.

      If this were true, linux on the desktop would truly be dead...
      Hang on a minute! I see your reverse psychology! M$ SHILL!!!1

      --
      This post was made in complete sincere seriousity; as such any attempts to derive humour are doomed to instant failure.
    2. Re:linux is for smart people by mihauKw · · Score: 1

      You're right, rest of us are only talking and reading new yorker..

  18. One other thing by btcoal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Linux is also the only major OS that cannot advertise. Ubuntu 10.10 has great copy on its website extolling the benefits and showing that you can do pretty much anything on Ubuntu that you can on a Mac or Windows based PC. But...you only see that if you're already on the Ubuntu landing page. Linux also doesnt come pre-installed on the vast majority of new PC's either.

    1. Re:One other thing by xtracto · · Score: 1

      So true.

      Remember when Mozilla organized to publish an ad in a news paper? I think Canonical should organize something like that (what about a video on the superbowl!). I would certainly donate!

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:One other thing by nyctopterus · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu 10.10 has great copy on its website extolling the benefits and showing that you can do pretty much anything on Ubuntu that you can on a Mac or Windows based PC.

      Pretty much anything... so, why do I want an OS that doesn't do as much as it's competition? This is a big problem, Linux evangelists don't play to it's strengths, they're too defensive. Advertise your killer features, first among them being: built-in fucking app store. Shoulda been playing that up a few years ago, because I suspect Mac OS is about to get just that.

    3. Re:One other thing by DrXym · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Linux is also the only major OS that cannot advertise.

      Yes it can. Novell, IBM, Red Hat et al have sunk millions of dollars into advertising. Unfortunately they're advertising to people who buy servers and such like, not deploying desktops. I expect these companies realise it's kind of futile and high risk to chase the consumer market when Microsoft have it sewn up.

      Ubuntu 10.10 has great copy on its website extolling the benefits and showing that you can do pretty much anything on Ubuntu that you can on a Mac or Windows based PC. But...you only see that if you're already on the Ubuntu landing page. Linux also doesnt come pre-installed on the vast majority of new PC's either.

      Therein lies the problem. People who have Windows or OS X are not going to be convinced to undergo the trauma of switching operating systems for one which can "do pretty much anything ... that you can do on a Mac or Windows PC". So I switch dist and I'm almost but not quite where I was when I started, what was the point of that?

      I believe it would be more productive to deemphasize the OS and promote things like Firefox, OpenOffice etc. that run on top of it. If an OS runs all the apps a user is used then they're far less likely to care what is running underneath the next time they switch.

    4. Re:One other thing by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Even then, it still requires effort to make the switch. If you go to Best Buy (and while geeks here don't do that, plenty of people do) to buy a desktop, it will come with Windows, whether you like it or not. Since Linux is striving to be able to do all that Windows can do, then since you've already paid for Windows, it's already installed for you and it's what you're familiar with, then why exactly bother switching?

      The only possible reason that would make people switch would be for Linux, whatever the distribution, became better in a very recognizable fashion. Being less affected by malware is not enough; your common layperson probably knows a geek who'll fix it for them for free, or they'll actually think it's normal "wear and tear" and that after a few years, a computer has gone "slow" and needs to be replaced, while in fact it's just their bad computer hygiene screwing up their OS. Since no big advertising is done and since a great majority of people behave that way, there's no real reason that would ever change.

      Remember, humans are creatures of habit.

    5. Re:One other thing by houghi · · Score: 1
      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    6. Re:One other thing by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 1

      s/can't/doesn't

      Canonical could take an ad out during the Superbowl if they wanted to. Mass marketing like that isn't their way in, yet.

    7. Re:One other thing by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Thank you. The real problem: pre-installations. M$ owns because they are a monopoly and have basically forced brick and mortars to sell Windows. That is the problem everyone should be talking about and becoming upset about. There should be a massive lawsuit against Microsoft for their anti-competitive business tactics in that area as well as government procurement procedures not considering open source software.

      If consumers could do X, Y, and Z, but just not very much G (games), many if not most would still choose the Linux option, especially in the area of cheaper laptops/desktops/etc. The real problem is the option is never presented to them. If it were, you can safely bet the problem of a lack of software on Linux (at least in comparison) would drastically change very quickly.

      Oh, and also the resulting huge focus on cross-distro Linux packaging/installing standards by all the companies wanting to get onto Linux suddenly would eliminate that problem as well as they focused on one of the solutions that exist but aren't getting much light yet.

      Everyone should care about this, too. Not just geeks. Everyone who buys a computer or pays taxes should be very concerned that their money is being wasted by a convicted monopolist.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    8. Re:One other thing by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      I believe it would be more productive to deemphasize the OS and promote things like Firefox, OpenOffice etc. that run on top of it. If an OS runs all the apps a user is used then they're far less likely to care what is running underneath the next time they switch.

      Exactly. Making migration easier is the way to go.

      That said, I would go further and say that they have to lay stress on what the other OSs flat out can't do or can't do as well as Ubuntu does it.

      For instance, I own an old Asus A6Vc (Pentium M 725, 1GB RAM, Geforce Go 6200) laptop, and neither Windows XP nor Windows Seven are good choices for me. XP supports my laptop's hardware, but its interface is miles behind newer OSs' in terms of usability and looks (can't go back to XP fonts, no sir). Conversely, Seven's interface lets me navigate in a nice and smooth way, but my CPU isn't supported (stays at max clock and voltage 24/24) and I have to look for modded drivers for the GPU. And that's without even mentioning how slow Seven is on that laptop of mine. With Ubuntu, I have the best of both world — every piece of hardware works out of the box. As a bonus, I can even undervolt my CPU I know, I know... Most people won't bother with that, but still... that's pretty cool in my book.

      There are so many aspects they could lay emphasis on, like the fact that you can compile stuff yourself but you sure as hell don't have to do so when using Ubuntu, showing that you don't have to be a geek to use a Linux distribution. Things like operating system-wide update manager could make it look better versus Windows too.

      They just have to avoid mentioning sound. :P

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    9. Re:One other thing by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 1

      Perhaps a free ad campaign is in order? I know I'd be willing to donate space on my personal site. My boss could possibly be talked into donating space...

      --
      Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
  19. Mass market games by asicsolutions · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only reason I run windows on my computer at home and my kids computer is games. Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Civ5, Steam. If all of those were available under Linux _At the same time_ as the PC counterparts, I would wipe windows off my PC tonight. I am writing this on my work laptop HP DV8t running opensuse 11.3.

    1. Re:Mass market games by djd20 · · Score: 1

      For many of these wine actually works quite well out of the box - I find that for most games I don't have any trouble running them in wine. Steam works well too. Nevertheless, I appreciate that not having to fiddle and just be able to play what you've bought. That's why I own a ps3... Oh, and Ubuntu is an awesome desktop environment. Run it on a few machines which are used for work.

    2. Re:Mass market games by somersault · · Score: 1

      This is why I bought a console. Consoles are "good enough" for me these days, and the hardware lifecycle is lasting a bit longer this generation, which is nice.

      The price of my PS3 2 years ago is probably a lot less than I would have spent on upgrades had I stuck with my PC gaming. And now that I can't fiddle around with the graphics settings in games, I have stopped over-analysing the graphics settings and and constantly tweaking as I always used to do. I now just get on and enjoy the game as it is :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:Mass market games by DrXym · · Score: 1
      The only reason I run windows on my computer at home and my kids computer is games.

      I concur this is a major impediment to Linux adoption. The funny part is Linux can support most Windows games. We already know that Cedega / Transgaming offer commercial game support through on Wine derived products. Most OS X ports are actually just the Win32 codebase linked to an OS X version of Wine called Cider.

      What I would hope is that either Transgaming or Cedega strikes up a deal with Valve so that people can officially install Steam and download & play their PC games over Linux. Valve could give a cut of the purchase profits or a flat fee to these companies to provide that support.

      That's the kind of boost that remove a major hurdle to using Linux fulltime for many people.

    4. Re:Mass market games by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      "Anyway...games...if you want video games just use a game console and live an happier life."

      Except, I can't play Civ 5, Total War, or WoW on a farking console.

      Even if I could, there would be no mouse or keyboard support on a console, and a 360 or PS3 isn't mobile, ie I can't take the game with me to work and play it during lunch, nor on a plane flight (Rome and Empire Total War are installed in on my Win 7 partition just for flights).

    5. Re:Mass market games by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Consoles are perfect as long as you're a fan of console gaming. But they aren't a drop-in replacement. The games GP mentioned are Civ5, which is a PC exclusive like many strategy titles, and Fallout 3, which is greatly inferior on consoles due to the PC-exclusive modding capability. If that's the kind of game you want to play, consoles are unlikely to be a satisfying alternative.

    6. Re:Mass market games by somersault · · Score: 1

      Fallout 3 seemed to play fine to me on a console, as did Oblivion (which I played far more as I enjoy the game world more). I used to be a PC gaming only guy until a couple of years ago. There are some gaps in console gaming's arsenal, but I'm happy to miss out on a few exclusives for the sake of being free of Windows :) I'd be happy just replaying Civ 1 sometime in the next few years, I haven't ever played any of the sequels - the last time I played it was on my Amiga!

      --
      which is totally what she said
  20. wait... by polle404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But I thought this was the year of the linux desktop?

    seriously, are we starting the troll posts and flamebaits in the articles now?

    --

    ~men are from earth. women are from earth. deal with it.~
  21. TFA written by a Windows magazine editor? by bl8n8r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I figured microsoft had more to worry about right now than FUD'ing up the linux arena with Paid-for blogging*, but meh.

    Desktop Linux works for me, and has been since 1997. If you don't like it, don't use it. Be thankful you have alternatives. If it weren't for *nix, you probably wouldn't.

    [*] - http://www.blogger.com/profile/5530582
                http://www.flickr.com/photos/strohmy/315871552/

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:TFA written by a Windows magazine editor? by somersault · · Score: 1

      Well, the previous 4 articles were all pretty heavily anti-MS, so I guess they had to do something. Maybe Taco made a few bucks out of it, or just felt like watching some nerd rage.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:TFA written by a Windows magazine editor? by blarkon · · Score: 1

      Well it ain't as though there is any money in the kitty for Linux "Paid-for" blogging. Even if you wanted to try to earn a quid writing about Linux, everyone running Linux runs with advertisement blockers so it doesn't matter how many page views you get, you aren't going to end up with any click-thrus that actually allow you to earn a quid. Point this out and you are told that you should be selling T-Shirts as a method of making money from your writing.

    3. Re:TFA written by a Windows magazine editor? by Torodung · · Score: 1

      So, in the fine FTFY tradition what this "Vista Magazine" guy really is saying is:

      "It kills me to say this: The dream of Vista as a major desktop OS is now pretty much dead."

      Figures. Looks like he bet on the wrong horse, and the jury is still out on Seven. He'd better hope that succeeds, or he's out of a job.

      --
      Toro

    4. Re:TFA written by a Windows magazine editor? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Desktop Linux works for me, and has been since 1997.

      Since 1997 eh? I was running a Linux desktop around then, I'm pretty sure you must have an entirely different definition of 'works' than I and most every one else in the world does.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  22. no need for Tux to look sad by yyxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Linux is very much alive on the desktop; it is very widely used inside corporations and universities. These "1% market share" figures are meaningless; they are usually based on device sales or web site statistics of popular web sites, neither of which tell you much about "desktop" Linux.

    Linux hasn't grabbed much of the general purpose consumer desktop market, but that market is pretty much stagnant in itself. The new consumer market is tablets, netbooks, and smartphones, and Linux is grabbing a large chunk of that with Android and (in the near future) MeeGo and Chrome.

    No need for Tux to look sad.

    1. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CdBee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I run Linux myself - and tel all my friends why its great. Most of them are interested up 'til the point where they ask if they can run out the lates MS Office on it, and Photoshop CS for their camera, and iTunes for their iPod/iPhone, and the official Yahoo and MSN Messenger releases.

      When I tell them that some of the above work but buggily under API emulation, and the rest don't, they arent interesting in hearing about other, similar apps that can do the same thing. You can talk 'til you;re blue in the face about OpenOffice and aMSN / Pidgin (not mentioning GIMP, far too silly name) - but at that point you've already lost.

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    2. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > up 'til the point where they ask if they can run [...] iTunes for their iPod/iPhone

      Speaking of which:

      Never got music loading of an iPod Touch to work under Ubuntu. Did install the fuse package etc., but only ever see the graphics/camera part of it. Anyone know if there's a way at all and mind telling me how, if so? Much appreciated!

    3. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by yyxx · · Score: 1

      Well, obviously, you should first convince them to switch to OpenOffice, Pidgin, and Gimp and then convince them to switch to Linux; the other way around is silly.

      And given how crappy MS Office, Photoshop and iTunes are, it shouldn't be difficult to get them to switch.

    4. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by yyxx · · Score: 2, Informative

      On an Ubuntu 10.4 system, I plug in my iPod Touch and it just shows up in Rhythmbox, allowing music to be transferred both ways. It works both on my laptop and my desktop; I didn't do anything special.

      Have you tried starting up Rhythmbox?

    5. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > On an Ubuntu 10.4 system, I plug in my iPod Touch and it just shows up in Rhythmbox, allowing music to be transferred both ways.
      > It works both on my laptop and my desktop; I didn't do anything special.
      > Have you tried starting up Rhythmbox?

      Hmm...ok, it's still Ubuntu 9.10 (GF's computer). She hates upgrades :-D
      Alright...I'll try it. If that would work, it'd be a significant way towards "Yes honey, please do the thing you do so well..." :-)

      Of course, if it doesn't work afterwards and I get put in the dog-house, I'll hold you personally responsible! ;-)

    6. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I remember going into a computer lab once in school, years ago. Windows 2000 was still the most common desktop OS.

      I sat down at a workstation and opened the browser. Odd, I thought: the pixels didn't quite line up. Looking closer (at the browsers user agent string) I noticed it was actually Linux, and in all likelihood a themed ICEWM. THe workstation had Open Office (StarOffice, I think) and Mozilla, and that was about it - it was transparent enough and similar enough to a locked down w2k workstation that I'm sure the common user could not tell the difference.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    7. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by neumayr · · Score: 1

      And they are right. Why do you waste your energy? If you actually need MS Office, chances are OpenOffice won't be able to do what you want it to do (see the discussion about that video MS made), if you need Photoshop CS, GIMP won't cut it, if you need iTunes... as far as I know, there is nothing that comes even close to what iTunes does.
      The only way to get people to use Linux is when they need something Linux, and only Linux provides. And that isn't much.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    8. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by yyxx · · Score: 1

      It also works for me under 10.10, so you might want to consider just upgrading to the latest version.

    9. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by sdguero · · Score: 1

      My last 3 laptops (one was a netbook) came with windows pre-installed. I either wiped the drive and installed Linux, or made the machine dual boot (with Linux being my default/primary OS) within two months on all of them. I'm sure the "research" that went into this story would count my last three notebooks as running Windows since that is what came pre-installed.

      A much more interesting data point would be what people are installing themselves. Of course it's a small number of users, less than 5% I assume. But the trend in that segment would be much more telling to me about what OSes are coming up and which ones are not as popular as they used to be with the aftermarket crowd..

      Of course we are talking about PC magazine, a publication that I have actively avoided since 1993.

    10. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by bmajik · · Score: 1

      You should tell them that in all of your years of using linux and F/OSS software, you have never once gotten the sense that the people working on linux are trying to fuck you over.

      I'm looking at the printers and scanners I have that don't work on modern 64 bit windows machines and that work just peachy on modern 64 bit linux machines.

      When I come across something in Linux that doesn't work, I have the optimism that, eventually, it will get better. I've been using linux off and on for various things since kernel 0.98, and I've certainly had my waning periods of hate, but I always come back for some task or problem and things are always a bit different but always moving forward.

      I don't think this is something you can say with commercial software vendors. Pick any commercial application or operating system and you'll find somebody who says "they broke that because they are assholes", and they'll more or less be correct.

      I'm irate that my ubuntu machine doesn't know WTF to do with my clip-on ipod shuffle. But not so irate that I'll actually infest a machine with iTunes. iTunes actively tries to fuck me and work against my preferences. So in this case, I'll settle for software that doesn't or hardly works because it isn't done yet, over software that tries to condition me to some far away master's desires.

      This notion that linux will "never" acheive $goal is silly. I used linux as my main desktop back in the 486 days, when it was much less mature, much less user friendly, and much less straightforward and compatible than it is now. I've been using windows for the last 8 years, and not because linux has gotten worse, but because windows finally got good enough, and for a home email/web machine the tradeoffs for my usage profile favor windows, for now.

      The idea that linux hasn't "arrived" until it displaces Mac OS or Windows on "the desktop" is dumb. Linux is a credible alternative to just about any other operating system out there for nearly any computing domain. That's astounding.

      At some point in everyones life, they have a moment of "I wish I could tell the assholes that made this how much I hate their decision". That is when people will understand the value of linux and other f/oss software. I'm sure you can find a 5:1 ratio of posts where i criticize RMS to where i extoll his virtues, but software freedom is a real issue, and RMS got it _Exactly Right_, and when that understanding awakens in a person, Linux will be there waiting, better than the last time they tried it, more readily adapted to what they want to do.

      I don't give a shit if you or your friends or your mom think linux is ready for making their breakfast. I care that it can solve problems for me, today, and that it will be solving more problems for me tomorrow.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    11. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CdBee · · Score: 1

      Modern iPods and iPhones have an encrypted internal library file which means that they actually cannot be managed with anything other than iTunes. Even if I could talk people out of using software that they are comfortable with and have already paid for (in the case of P.CS and MSO) - how do you get around the app that has no possible replacement?

      even if Rhythmbox did work with all modern iPods/iPhones, software updates etc would be impossible.

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    12. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      IBM offers an installable 'client for eBusiness' OS image based on RHEL for the last 3-4 years for employees. It comes with Lotus Notes, Sametime and whatever other IBM software is used internally, and is supported by the IT team as well. Some people I know dual boot this along with XP on their company laptops.

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    13. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CdBee · · Score: 1

      if google was named after an obscure sexual fetish it would never have got off the ground. In the UK, everyone knows what a Gimp is and most would be baffled at least by my bringing the matter up.

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    14. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CdBee · · Score: 1

      Your answer kinda defines the difference between us and them. I won't debate your points, as I know why you believe them and to a large degree i concur - but faced with people who have gone out and bought hardware that all works together (with bundled proprietary licences) and that have got proprietary software that does what they want to, linux is a hard sell.

      Poeple look at a computer and think "I can do all this! I am a God!" in a very XKCD-ish sense. People like us wnder how we could do it better. I'm unconvinced that we are a majority

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    15. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

      Windows users still get viruses. Most of them still use XP, and are leery about switching to anything else, especially if they have to buy a new computer in order to run it smoothly. I don't go out of my way to promote linux, but when I'm reinstalling XP for my friends I let them know that if this is going to be a repeating problem, they're getting ubuntu instead. Honestly, most people I know are using their smartphones to do everything except web browsing; no one cares whether photoshop runs on anything if they can get Angry Birds on it instead.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    16. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      OpenOffice and aMSN / Pidgin (not mentioning GIMP, fa

      Thats because you're trying to get people to replace apps they know and use with apps that are inferior in every meaningful way except 'free'.

      GIMP has the worst UI on the planet, everyone knows it, doesn't matter if its the worlds most awesomeest code, it fucking sucks to use. OpenOffice? Seriously? Its like Office ... except even less reliable, slower, and incompatible in the sense that it will actually create and edit documents that will then actually look like they are supposed to when opened by everyone else in the world by the real MS Office. aMSN/Pidgin ... both shitty apps, not that Windows comes with a good one, but iChat is certainly better than both according to the majority of the population.

      You're talking till your blue in the face ... because YOU think these things rock ... everything you're telling them though is stuff they don't give a shit about.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    17. Re:no need for Tux to look sad by CdBee · · Score: 1

      No, I don't think they rock. I prefer linux but I think the apps have a long way to go. That was the point really.

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  23. Right... okay... by Sylak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, by citing many unrelated facts, and some things which the average user doesn't know enough about to care, he has proved that Desktop Linux is dead. Okay, i buy that.

    1. Re:Right... okay... by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      There was also a lot of hype about web apps and cloud computing by reps of major vendors of same. I wonder if that was some of the incentive for the story... stealth-astroturfing as it were... or astroturfing-by-proxy. And in that respect, I would rather have my apps on my local machine. Internet/network disruption happens in business and shouldn't shut down someone from working, and if I were a business I wouldn't trust my proprietary data in a 'cloud' somewhere.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    2. Re:Right... okay... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Desktop Linux isn't dead. The author laments that it never became as popular as he thought it would be. There's a slight difference.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Right... okay... by Sylak · · Score: 1

      I was making an attempt at sarcasm, which, unfortunately is hard to communicate written.

  24. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Who the fuck writes this garbage, and even better, why the fuck is it showing up on slashdot?

    Repeat after me: Linux exists BECAUSE of the fierce ideology of the FREE SOFTWARE COMMUNITY. Open source has no ideology, fierce or otherwise.

    Taco, you should know better.

  25. WTF? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Okay Taco, I know you're desperate for page views, but posting this is just trolling for them. What a pathetic way to start off a slow news day. How many sharks have you jumped now?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  26. Linux will continue to fail till the games come. by Jartan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone always thinks the point of games is biased but the reality is a large portion of nerds/geeks/hackers/etc are gamers. These people are not in any way large compared to the market as a whole but they make up a huge chunk of the people that can easily switch and might want to switch. Without these people leading the way for others to switch I suspect Linux will always be stuck.

    Clearly Microsoft knows what it's doing too. This is probably the main reason they don't just outright 100% abandon their PC game market in favor of the Xbox.

  27. Troll Article... by Spicerun · · Score: 1

    Gee, another article declaring Linux dead again from a magazine that has years of pushing WIndows on their reading public. I have a feeling that 90% of their readers are exclusively Windows Users....the rest of us find magazines that actually write articles about our preferred OS without comparison to Windows.

    1. Re:Troll Article... by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Yup, besides the obvious trolling of the article, I could very obviously write about the reverse. Of the hundreds of computers I have nearby at work and in the family, I have never even seen Vista or Win7 (is that even the correct name?). We have a majority of Ubuntu and other Linuxes, some Macs and quite a bit of aging XPs. Not a SINGLE post XP. So I have no clue what 'lack of content' this article refers to. Or maybeTaco posted it to get us geeks warmed up in a good flame war on a cold monday morning...

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  28. Evil Twin day? by zwei2stein · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What is going on today on /.?

    Linux Destop is Dead, Top 10 Reasons to Work for Micsoroft, Pirated Software Making Anti Teorist Drones Fail, MS Donating Software to Charity, Why We Should Use Dell and Forget Custom Desktops, Earth Shortage...

    Did ... did it finally grow up? Sell out? Get brainwashed? Recieved ms-paid escort service? All of it in one hectic night?

    --
    -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    1. Re:Evil Twin day? by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      Neh, just standard dumb-editor day.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    2. Re:Evil Twin day? by sootman · · Score: 1

      I think there might be some crap on your screen obstructing your view. Here are four consecutive stories I can see right now:

      • Pirated Software Could Bring Down Predator Drones
      • Linux To Take Over Microsoft In Enterprises
      • Why Microsoft Is So Scared of OpenOffice
      • MS Gives Free Licenses To Oppressed Nonprofits

      So I'd say yes, Slashdot is becoming more grown up: they're actually striking a nice balance now, instead of giving us nothing but "victory in imminent!" like we've had for the last dozen years.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    3. Re:Evil Twin day? by neumayr · · Score: 1

      That must have been one night.. Kinda makes me jealous, though the comedown must be a bitch..

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
  29. I agree with one thing: fragmentation by fgaliegue · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For goodness' sake, since Qt had gone LGPL (thanks no Nokia, admittedly), why does Gnome still exist at all??

    KDE has proven superior for many years, freedesktop.org has started unifying some desktop components, but the progress is SLOW. Why tens of sound APIs? Why tens of imaging APIs? Why tens of video APIs? Why less than ten, but still more than one, packaging format?

    Choice is good - until a certain extent. And as far as the desktop is concerned, non open source application developers will want ONE api to work with ALL Linux distros out there. That's a fact. Live with it.

    1. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by fgaliegue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I should add: whoever modded parent (mine, OK) as troll should have a reality check. Honestly.

    2. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by Thumper_SVX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wish I had mod points here, and that you hadn't been tagged as a troll. Although your KDE-specific evangelism IS a bit of a problem, your core point is actually very valid and correct. It's the APIs and programming interfaces that make Linux on the desktop almost unusable for the average user. If there weren't 20 different ways of doing everything then we'd have some more traction and a more usable desktop.

      I'll relate one of my most recent experiences... just this weekend in fact. I upgraded my Kubuntu 10.04 to Kubuntu 10.10 on Friday. I then spent an hour on Saturday trying to fathom how in hell to control my sound inputs so that I could make Skype use the microphone on my headset instead of the built in one on my laptop. An hour. And you know what the fix was? To install a different mixer for PulseAudio instead of the deafult KDE one so I could select my microphone inputs. Even then it was opaque as hell and took some experimentation using Audacity in monitor mode (which I had installed already but isn't installed by default) to determine which one worked and setting the appropriate input level. I mean WTF? A normal user would have given up at the point of clicking on the KDE Mixer and not finding any functions there to switch inputs. A middling-experience user would maybe have poked around in System Settings (of which there are NONE!) before giving up and installing Windows.

      This is a huge problem. I have been working as a systems analyst for years, run Linux since 1993 as a side project, spent several years from 1999 to 2004 running it as my primary OS before switching to Mac. I have only recently returned to trying to use it as my primary OS, and while I'm incredibly impressed with Kubuntu 10.10, the lack of some critical applications and the incredible inconsistency between APIs and interfaces is making me think maybe a new Mac laptop is in my future. I really want to give Linux the shot because I recently got an awesome laptop to run it on and I am definitely on-board with the whole FOSS thing. Even I had trouble and had to resort to some rather opaque Google searches. This is not the way to win users at home OR in the Enterprise. Trust me; enterprise desktop tech support don't have time for this crap either and would rather just install Windows 7 on the hardware.

    3. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by Mojo66 · · Score: 1
      I totally agree, fragmentation is the biggest problem.

      Currently, we have two desktop environments that don't work, half a dozen video drivers for NVIDIA of which neither one really works, half a dozen ATI drivers of which neither one really works, 50 video players, of which neither one really works, 200 MP3 players of which neither one really works, etc etc etc

      If all the hackers would focus on one working desktop environment, one working NVIDIA driver, one working ATI driver, one working video player, one working MP3 player etc....then we would see accenptance rise. Instead, every hacker is programming his own mp3 player and all of them suck.

    4. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      It's like evolution: survival of the fittest.
      If you think about it, maybe it's not that bad: it certainly gets around the mythical man month problem. (Especially that devs don't live close to each other, so you get slower communication than in fulltime teams.)

    5. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by neumayr · · Score: 1

      Hehe, "Troll".
      Fragmentation is a fact of live for anything born out of a community that upholds freedom of choice. Nothing to be done about it, and if it keeps a project back in one area, like the desktop, so be it. In turn, it lets the project shine in other areas.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    6. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The short version: Qt is an excellent toolkit. KDE is a not equally great as a DE. Many people simply prefer GNOME and would need a GNOME/Qt to switch. Since GNOME is C and KDE is C++ there is a holy war and a lot of work do be done to merge it into one system where "KDE" or "GNOME" is simply a set of user preferences.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by fgaliegue · · Score: 1

      The short version: Qt is an excellent toolkit. KDE is a not equally great as a DE. Many people simply prefer GNOME and would need a GNOME/Qt to switch. Since GNOME is C and KDE is C++ there is a holy war and a lot of work do be done to merge it into one system where "KDE" or "GNOME" is simply a set of user preferences.

      No, this is not the short version. If anything, this is a short-*sighted* version.

      Look: had I been convinced by Gnome, the first part of my discourse would have argued against the very existence of KDE. As to the language? C, C++, ocaml, LISP, forth, you name it... This barely has any importance - you can do Qt in C, you can do GTK in C++.

      What I really mean, and WANT, is: have ONE API, whether it be for widgets, sound, video, input device management, packaging (not the least of things, that), and... Name something desktop related here.

      And if you think about it, provided you have achieved this, you can then phase X out. That dreaded X, which has caused so many headaches just to program basic toolkits, which prompted the Unix Haters Handbook to say: "Programming X Windows [sic] is like figuring out the decimals of pi using Roman numerals".

    8. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by dslbrian · · Score: 1

      This is the same problem I've had with Linux also. For some reason the devs find it impossible to create a standard subsystem and then stick with it. There is this incessant drive to refactor the APIs, thereby breaking large numbers of what would otherwise be working apps. Ubuntu is notorious for shoehorning in some half-baked bleeding-edge code as part of their standard release (PulseAudio being a recent example).

      Personally I got tired of "upgrading" an Ubuntu release only to have it left in a half-broken state. A couple years ago I switched to Arch linux using their rolling-release model, and that seems to have helped quite a bit. Another possible workaround I've used in the past is to build up a set of apps I need by static compiling them and dumping them in a /usr/local tree (that prevents a certain degree of "upgrade" breakage), but it's a hassle to maintain.

      I do agree with other commenters that games represent a large part of the justification of keeping a Windows box, and I can't wait for the day Steam finally makes it to Linux.

    9. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      KDE has proven superior for many years

      [citation needed]

      I say this as someone who uses KDE. But I wouldn't wish it on anyone else. The desktop is nicely designed, and I like Plasma, but most of the utilities have absolutely terrible interfaces, with nightmarish menus and inscrutable toolbars scattered all over the place. I can only put up with it because frankly I spend most of my time in emacs, xterm, and Firefox.

    10. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Qt 4.x is awesome. KDE 4.x is horrible.

      I really wish there was a sane, solid DE (without all that "we're going to revolutionize the desktop! forget about bugfixes" crap that KDE 4 seems to be all about) that would build on Qt.

    11. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by Kjella · · Score: 1

      What I really mean, and WANT, is: have ONE API, whether it be for widgets, sound, video, input device management, packaging (not the least of things, that), and... Name something desktop related here.

      Why advocate a) Qt and b) common APIs when you can't use a) to write b)? You can not use any part of Qt with GNOME because they will not take anything C++, even a C++ library with C bindings. The few attempts at unification like DBus have to be written in C and be entirely unlike any code you'd normally write for Qt or with Qt. That is what you don't seem to "get", the APIs aren't different just to be different, they're different because they have to come from two different code bases and the way you'd write an API with Qt (C++ and MOC) is entirely different than you would or could write with C.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:I agree with one thing: fragmentation by riondluz · · Score: 1

      try E17 if you can get it. Enlightenment is by far the best WM out there. All new dev is making it lighter weight for mobile use.
      I've been using it (1st as E16 with gnome now E17 exclusively) for 10 years now and it works beautifully.

      --
      resist propaganda
  30. Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There aren't any business databases available for either OS. And I mean databases like dBaseIII or Paradox for DOS, and NOT the useless piece of shit Windows versions. No database, no deal. Many are using Access but if you've ever used anything well designed you don't like it.

    The PHP/Javascript/MyPostrgressSQL combo is an abortion. We need something that those who know the business rules can use to implement said rules, and do it easily.

    If it ever happens, the publisher will make billions overnight. I'm still selling PDoxDOS apps. Hey stupid, they work.

    Oh Dr. Pauker, where art thou?

    1. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Culture20 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There aren't any business databases available for either OS. And I mean databases like dBaseIII or Paradox for DOS, and NOT the useless piece of shit Windows versions. No database, no deal. Many are using Access but if you've ever used anything well designed you don't like it.

      The PHP/Javascript/MyPostrgressSQL combo is an abortion. We need something that those who know the business rules can use to implement said rules, and do it easily.

      If it ever happens, the publisher will make billions overnight. I'm still selling PDoxDOS apps. Hey stupid, they work.

      Oh Dr. Pauker, where art thou?

      Do they work in DosBox?

    2. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by TheSpoom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please elaborate: What features do you feel that MySQL (purely as a database, not counting what language is used to interface with it since it can be interfaced with practically anything) is missing? Same question for PostgreSQL.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    3. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There aren't any business databases available for either OS.

      There's nothing wrong with PostgreSQL, and even then: Oracle, Sybase, DB2 & Informix run fine on Linux.

    4. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by xtracto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There aren't any business databases available for either OS.

      Oough...
      these guys beg to differ with you.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    5. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Databases? Like, Oracle, DB2, Pervasive, Sybase? There are a lot of modern enterprise DBMS solutions that run on Linux. I'm tempted to say more than Windows, but that's just a hunch. But since you seem to think that DOS is still relevant in a modern enterprise, I can say conclusively that more modern enterprise DBMS solutions run on Linux than DOS.

      Mainly because no modern enterprise DBMS solution runs on DOS.

    6. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by fusiongyro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What they're missing is the built-in idiot-easy form designing.

      I'm speaking as a major PostgreSQL believer. One of my best friends was a beltway bandit in the 70's-90's. He calls GUI application development "the programmer's guaranteed employment act." He's definitely a fossil, and he made all his money on dBase and FoxPro. Neither of these tools are particularly amazing, but they do make it easy to write fairly simple databases with fairly simple visual forms (think ncurses).

      There is a strong tendency in our profession to break systems down into a set of components and then elaborate those components. I am a web developer with a strong RDBMS background. I find that I can offload a great deal of the work to the database and it's not much effort for me. I find that, on the web, I only need a designer's input for a fraction of the time I would if I were doing a GUI application. This is because we've elaborated these components. FoxPro gives you a pretty stripped down, procedural way of dealing with the database. I haven't seen what its GUI frameworks are like but I'm willing to bet they're also fairly also stripped down and procedural. I have web developer friends who are not conversant in SQL. They are very excited about the "NoSQL" "databases." I think this largely has to do with the fact that when you misuse RDBMSes, they aren't that fast, and the kind of people NoSQL appeals to are already doing that work in their application. For them, it's not taking on a burden they don't already have. To my friend the FoxPro user, NoSQL just looks like even more work he didn't used to have to do.

      The people who were brought up in simpler times find simpler tools better because they have to learn less and they can just sort of dive in and start getting shit done. But for me, I already have learned these tools and can use them deftly. To me, using FoxPro is a bunch of tedious manual labor because I can make a complicated SQL statement. Also, to make a nice application now is a lot more work than it was twenty or thirty years ago. It has to look nice and have a good metaphor as well as do its job quickly and well. My friend can certainly bang out a FoxPro application quickly, even quicker than me most of the time, but it won't be the app you want to use, because it also looks like it came out of that era.

      As far as I can tell, there will always be a market for every kind of software developer. We've reached a critical mass where pretty much every technology now has an installed base of users for whom that technology is essential. My friend could certainly find work in FoxPro, though most of it seems to be on the east coast. But demand is low enough that he would have to relocate, which isn't the case for me as a web developer. It's the same thing with MUMPS. If you know it, you can get a job working for some hospital or medical company, but you are unlikely to find a company in your zip code that needs it.

      To return to your point, MySQL and PostgreSQL aren't missing anything from a database perspective. From a FoxPro perspective they're simply missing simplicity. But simplicity isn't something you can just drop in.

    7. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      The GP was talking about things that resmble more MS Access than what you thing as a database. With the added caveat that he was talking about some software that actualy works, not Access.

      Now, that is a very important ninche, that isn't very well filled by software available for Linux (nor Windows). I'd sugest he try the Libre Office database, I don't know it, but it is intented to supply such thing. Very few people know it, tough.

    8. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Every here of a little database called Oracle? No. Trust me, it runs on Linux.

      *looks at the Oracle database on one of his servers, puts a gun to his head, thinks a moment and puts it back down*

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    9. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by fwarren · · Score: 1

      Yes, Paradox for DOS works quite well. I still use it on a regular basis for various tasks. I can concentrate on working with my data, not manipulating windows.

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
    10. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Pinball+Wizard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Open Office Base does have a form builder. It's not as slick as MS Access, but it does work. The main issue I had with Base the last time I used it was that the query designer only supported select queries - no inserts, updates, or deletes. So you could use the form builder, but you'd still have to hand code the SQL for most of the work you'd be using forms for. Not particularly a big deal to me, but if you're used to the Microsoft drag and drop sort of programming, I guess it could be an issue.

      --

      No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?

    11. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by jc42 · · Score: 1

      What features do you feel that [DB X] is missing? Same question for [DB Y]

      When reading such questions, we should always be aware of the standard game that is played to show that a particular brand is needed. For any comparison of X vs Y, there is always some feature that X has that Y either doesn't have or does in some very slightly different way. This is always used by supporters of X as proof that X is absolutely needed, and Y simply can't do the job. Reverse X and Y is you're a supporter of X.

      We mostly see this as the explanation of why Microsoft software is absolutely needed, and nothing else can do what is needed. But the same reasoning can be and is used to say that anything else is irreplacable.

      In this case, if you're using MySQL and find that it's doing everything you need, then it's the perfect system. All other DBs either do things wrong, or don't have some feature implemented exactly as your software expects, or is too slow because of features that you never use. And we see exactly this reasoning from the PostgreSQL folks for why MySQL is crap and only PostgreSQL can do the job right. And, of course, both are ridiculed by the users of Oracle as toy systems that lack certain invaluable features that every real DB absolutely must have (in exactly the Oracle form). Meanwhile, the users of IIS are snickering at it all, because of course their DB has everything exactly right, Oracle is a weird "non-standard" DB, and everything else is just a toy.

      This is fairly visible as most of the basis of the "on the Desktop" discussion, but comparing GUI platforms rather than DBs.

      And, of course, if you use the phrase "in business", you know that most of the business community never have and never will consider anything not from the IBM/Microsoft axis to be real computer systems. Competing for their attention is ultimately pointless, because without the right logos, they won't even try your stuff. They already know that your stuff is inferior and will cost too much for their people to learn to use. And the "on the Desktop" discussion always seems to be about business environments, so it's ultimately pointless. Until Microsoft or IBM starts pushing linux, it won't be noticed by "business" people. (Yes, IBM supports linux, but try finding it at ibm.com. They support it, but it's hidden in a back closet where most customers will never think to look. ;-).

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    12. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by CarpetShark · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Paradox for DOS works quite well. I still use it on a regular basis for various tasks. I can concentrate on working with my data"

      Such as which floppy disk contains which PCX file? ;)

    13. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by arth1 · · Score: 1

      What features do you feel that MySQL (purely as a database, not counting what language is used to interface with it since it can be interfaced with practically anything) is missing?

      A non-corporate owner?

    14. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by aureus620 · · Score: 1

      In all fairness, try finding -anything- specific at ibm.com. I've wasted entire days trying to find a download link for specific versions of websphere.

    15. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

      There aren't any business databases available for either OS

      Oracle?

    16. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In all fairness, try finding -anything- specific at ibm.com.

      Ain't that the truth. Though, again in all fairness, it's hardly anything unique to IBM. Commercial web sites are often annoyingly short of detailed information about their products. They go for the flash, but you and I are too dumb to be given details.

      Recently, I've been looking around at high-quality DSLR cameras. I've gotten tired of my old one whose manual focus is so complex that by the time I've got it to work, the cute critter I'm trying to photograph has moved on or flown off. If I use the automatic focus, most of the time it's the twigs in front of the critter or the grass in the background that's in focus, not the critter. So I want to know how the manual focus works. This in formation is incredibly difficult to find in the companies' sales info, even the so-called specs. They merely say that they have a manual focus setting, and then go into a flowery description of the marvels of their multi-point automagic focus system.

      With one camera, I finally hunted down the details, and it turned out that the camera didn't have the claimed manual focus at all. It had a list of 7 "preset" focal lengths that you could choose from. I wasted a lot of hours hunting down the info that made me cross that one off my list. A lot of cameras' lenses have what looks like focus rings, but if I can find one in a store to test, I find that it's a dummy that doesn't turn; it's just a sort of grip and shock absorber, not a focus mechanism.

      The same sort of approach is used with all sorts of products. You and I don't need the details; we just need to buy their product. Even if it turns out not to be what we were looking for, and won't work for our intended applications.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    17. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by L7_ · · Score: 1

      Couchdb is a good start. http://couchdb.apache.org/docs/overview.html

      > sudo apt-get install couchdb
      > firefox -url http://127.0.0.1:5984/_utils/

      Then see how close a MS access database that is (but I haven't used Access in a long, long time).

    18. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by ADRA · · Score: 1

      One, MySQL's get a horribly primitive stored procedure system. I was trying to re-implement some SP's from our company's Oracle system, and there are just things that aren't supported through My at all. Was it return values? I forget, but I realized early on that it was a lot easier to just use Oracle Express so that I could leverage the know how and breadth of a fully fleshed out language than to use a half-baked SP solution with -specific- use cases. Of course this has little to do with 'business user' use of databases.

      Frankly, Access is taught in high schools so that once you go to mega-corp XYZ and start working as an accountant, or finance, or whatever, you are either expected to know enough about the products to muddle your way through getting work done on them. If you wanted to perform the same types of activities with MySQL/PostgreSQL, the minimum you're going to have to do is spend a lot of time and energy training all relevant employees to do the same things that are part of the north American business environment right now. Maybe someone will invent a drop-dead simple way of getting these technologies to seamlessly work so that the learning curve is reduced, or maybe an act of anti-monopolistic zeal will make academia drop the MS suite from the high school curriculum.

      --
      Bye!
    19. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. The PCX is on the floppy in Drive #2.

      Now get off my lawn!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    20. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "My friend can certainly bang out a FoxPro application quickly, even quicker than me most of the time, but it won't be the app you want to use, because it also looks like it came out of that era."

      This may be a dumb question (IANA database person) but couldn't someone throw together a front end that would fit over the top of stuff like that DOS-era-looking FoxPro app, to make it more usable for young moderns?? seems to me even if that's custom work, there's a market niche there.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    21. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      That's the "paradox"....

    22. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What bizarro world of DSLRs are you looking at? All of the major systems (Canon, Nikon, Sony, and if you're looking at high-quality DSLRs you should be looking at those) use lenses with a manual focus switch and manual focus rings. It's not surprising you can't find manual focus specs listed for camera bodies tho - that's a feature of the lens not the body. And I've never heard of a first-party lens that had a 'dummy' focus ring; in fact, I can't think of one lens that *doesn't* have a focus ring. Really, this is on the level of not finding specs about the presence order of the pedals on cars - they don't mention them because every car has pedals, and in the same order.

    23. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by kitgerrits · · Score: 1

      Take a look at the manuals on Ken Rockwell's site.
      It tells you exactly what you need to know to operate your camera.

      --
      "I was in love with a beautiful blonde once, dear. She drove me to drink. It's the one thing I am indebted to her for."
    24. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by cheesybagel · · Score: 1
      That is what Ruby on Rails and Django are supposed to be about. There is no GUI builder but the code is pretty minimal. Also there are plenty of databases more lightweight than MySQL. If you just want to embed a database into a desktop app you can use SQLite.

      I also have to admit that MS manages to make pretty good tools for developing these sorts of business apps. C# is pretty good at it.

    25. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by AncientPC · · Score: 1

      What DSLRs are you looking at?

      I've mostly had Nikon experience from low to enthusiast end, and the MF details are always stated in the manual.

      Also, you might want to look into spot focus for get more accurate AF shots.

      I used to work at IBM and there was a running joke that you had to always use Google to find anything off ibm.com because the search engine was so bad you had to manually use boolean AND's and OR's.

    26. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by toddestan · · Score: 1

      What works really good in cases like this, is to go to the manufacturer's website, go to the tech support section, and download the user's manual for the device in question. In the case with your cameras, the manual will certainly tell you just how convenient and capable the manual focus ability of the camera is to use and how to activate it. I almost always read the user's manual for any expensive device (like a camera) that I'm considering buying before actually making the purchase.

    27. Re:Linux has the same drag as Mac in business by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      I was going to make the same snarky comments others had made because I didn't notice that they were already there. Instead I'll just say that I assume you're talking about the "super-zoom" style point-and-shoot cameras. I've never owned one myself (been using DSLRs for years) but have used those belonging to others, and your complaints are similar to my experience there, also just based off of what I've heard about them.

      Anyway, while the manuals are usually obtainable as others noted, the best thing to do is to look at review sites. There are tons of them for cameras, and they'll all mention usability factors such as how well the manual controls work. For actual DSLRs this may not be as big of a focus (heh), since these kinds of things are standard and are presumed to exist as usual, so unless there's something spectacularly good or bad it may go unmentioned. For superzooms and other non-DSLRs, they'll generally always mention controls like that. If you look at reviews of lenses, they'll mention how well it auto-focuses, how the manual focus feels, etc.

      I'm sure you didn't need another reply, so sorry - I rarely look at replies to my posts myself though, maybe you won't even read this ;)

  31. So.... by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1, Informative

    Linux is dead
    Microsoft is seriously ill
    But Linux is going to succeed, at least in the enterprise battlefield
    Time to stop reading Slashdot, and moving to do something better.

    1. Re:So.... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, the stories often suck, but once you filter out the trolls and complete morons, there's actually a great community of bright and interesting people who post comments here. You know, the people who've been around since the earlier era of the internet, the people who know an awful lot about science, technology and computing. That's what keeps me coming back - it's certainly not the brilliant editorial insights of the staff (guffaw).

    2. Re:So.... by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      going to succeed, at least in the enterprise battlefield ... Time to stop reading Slashdot

      We can read it on the command line.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    3. Re:So.... by psionski · · Score: 1

      Mod parent funny, made me LOL (even if true).

    4. Re:So.... by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 1

      Time to stop reading Slashdot, and moving to do something better.

      Any suggestions? I keep tring, but as much as /. sucks sometime with a perfectly average slice of the internet... the competition is worse....

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    5. Re:So.... by Chad+Birch · · Score: 1

      I know it's used as a meme around here, but I honestly can't even remember the last time I actually read one of the articles themselves. I always just go straight to the comments, I consider the articles to basically be a "topic suggestion".

      --
      Sturgeon was an optimist.
    6. Re:So.... by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Don't post stuff like that - I've been burning karma for a few months saying the same thing. :-) Oddly enough, the post I reply to gets an "Insightful", and I get "off topic". Still...

      All this place needs is an editor. If we had that, we'd see the quality shoot up quite a bit. My major hangup is that nowhere else has comments in any useful form. I know it's been a long tradition to complain about the editing here - I've been around for most of slashdot's history. But lately, it's just been insane. Two articles submitted, yet the one without a useful summary or links and filled with grammatical errors gets posted? Repeatedly? I block kdwason due to his ridiculously bad submissions, so he sends his shit to another 'editor', and it gets posted? Really?

      Find me another site with a useful comment system, and I'm there.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    7. Re:So.... by abigor · · Score: 1

      Ars Technica tends to have better, though fewer, comments to their stories, and threads are moderated pretty ruthlessly (trolls etc. are deleted outright). The story topics tend to be better and often more technical. There is no Idle and not much in the way of Your Rights Online type stuff either. Desktop Linux zealotry is generally viewed with a really raised eyebrow of doubt, as it should be.

  32. What's still keeping me away by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm a pretty geeky guy who has played around with Linux many times over the years (starting back in the late 90's), hoping to get away from Windows. Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have. And, while great strides have been made with Ubuntu, I'm still not convinced that Linux will ever be that OS I'm looking for. I know these will all be poo-pooed by the Linux fans, but here are/were some of the problems that I (as a very technically literate Windows user) have run up against when I've installed Linux in the past*:
    1. Confusing distros Just thinking about all the different distros and configurations still gives me a headache. Ubuntu has blunted this somewhat, but even with that you have to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing, which is damned confusing to a layperson. The worst part of this is trying to download software for Linux off of some website and running into multiple versions with odd notations regarding different distros.
    2. Poor documentation Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.
    3. Software, Software, Software this is the biggest problem, and not so easily dismissed as some fans would pretend. My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux? Probably not. Can I just direct her to a clone of equal quality? Probably not.
    4. Little support (if not openly hostile) There aren't a lot of places to call for Linux support. And a lot of the places you can go for support on the net are filled with Linuix fanatics who are openly hostile to Windows switchers and newbies. The level of "you don't belong here" attitude towards newbies in Linux circles makes Apple fans look civil.
    5. Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user with windows, I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software. with Linux I can install it via the built-in installer. but that only works if said software is in the repository. If not, getting it installed is often a lot more complex than just downloading a file and double clicking on it to install. Which brings me to:
    6. Still too much reliance on the command line interface Telling someone to break out a command line and type "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" is like telling a Windows user to reinstall DOS and learn its syntax.

    Those are just some of the reasons Linux still isn't there for me. Ubuntu has come a long way toward this, but it's still just not there.

    *maybe some of these issues have been more recently resolved, but I can only go on my fairly recent dealings with Ununtu and Debian.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:What's still keeping me away by js3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pretty right on most points. To me linux distros are like wrapping paper. underneath it's still a chaotic mess as soon as you try to install anything not included with the distro you run into install hell. Software is the most annoying thing to me when I deal with linux. So you find this app you want to install.. install it and it requires lib.version.x or whatever. So you go download the said lib and it's version x+5 and it doesn't work and all that bullshit. Why can't they just come as independent packages? Too much reliance on this or that lib.

      --
      did you forget to take your meds?
    2. Re:What's still keeping me away by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user with windows, I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software. with Linux I can install it via the built-in installer. but that only works if said software is in the repository. If not, getting it installed is often a lot more complex than just downloading a file and double clicking on it to install.

      Know what's confusing to a Windows user? The built-in Microsoft add-remove programs/programs and features administration GUI tool where you can "turn Windows features on or off". It's exactly like a Linux GUI package manager, complete with a (local) repo, except the local repo programs (called features), like telnet, ftp, smb, etc, are separated from the third party installed programs, and the third party (potentially trojan) programs are given top billing, which leads to a new Linux user's common mistake of just downloading any rpm, deb, or binary they find and running it.

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface Telling someone to break out a command line and type "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" is like telling a Windows user to reinstall DOS and learn its syntax.

      It's more like telling them to open up cmd.exe and type arcane commands for a bug/vulnerability workaround instead of making a patch, which Microsoft has done many many times. BTW, I'm of the mindset that most computer users should know command line concepts, if only to prevent them from needless repetitive GUI clicks.

    3. Re:What's still keeping me away by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have.

      With my parents, Windows 7 with Firefox/Adblock as a browser finally accomplished this. By default they don't allow root privileges when prompted unless they were planning on installing something or it's on the very short list of annoying but safe autoupdaters they've seen and cleared with me.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    4. Re:What's still keeping me away by robertkeizer · · Score: 1

      I agree, differing distributions can be confusing to a newcomer on the linux scene. That being said, when at a local Unix meeting I regularly hear newcomers referring to "linux" when in fact they mean "ubuntu". This can easily be averted with a 5 minute explanation, not to mention there are very similar things going on in the Windows world ( Vista Home Premium vs Home vs Work vs Ultimate, etc. ). As for documentation, does the person you're referring to actually make use of Microsoft documentation? I doubt it. Microsoft documentation is known for being cumbersome and bloated. I agree, software is the key issue facing the Linux desktop today. I still have to run wine or full emulation for some things. Installing programs, in newish distro's can be done by a website, without requiring the package to be in the repository. Slax and *buntu offer this to some extent. Not to mention a lot of packages are self contained, and will have a simple gui for ./configure && make && make install. The command line is being used a little to much for "end users" in my opinion, and I agree with you on this. That being said, there are many different package managers out there for all different distro's that provide a way of avoiding the command line. All in all, very valid points. In the end all distributions including Linux, Windows, and Mac OSX, have the same problem: If the user is doing specific things, or wishes things to be done in a certain way, they will find a way to do it. This extends to saying "My computer is broken, by me a Mac" - which happens more often then one would think.

    5. Re:What's still keeping me away by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      You hit right on the nose there. What's even worse is that Linux evangelists are badly in denial about all of these problems, preventing them from being solved.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    6. Re:What's still keeping me away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Confusing distros Just thinking about all the different distros and configurations still gives me a headache. Ubuntu has blunted this somewhat, but even with that you have to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing, which is damned confusing to a layperson. The worst part of this is trying to download software for Linux off of some website and running into multiple versions with odd notations regarding different distros.

      Now I'm confused. You begin by saying you're a pretty geeky, technically able guy. Is it a problem for you that you think laypeople get confused by Gnome and KDE? And for the laypeople, is it really that much more confusing to say "Gnome is one graphical interface you can use (it looks like this... *show*), KDE is another (*show*)" than to say "Windows 7 comes in UltraCorporate, HomePlus, HomeMinusPlus, Entry-Squared and Vanilla editions"?

      Poor documentation Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.

      I think there is an "uncanny valley" with regards to documentation for a certain range of users. For the day-to-day read email and browse the web user, documentation is really as good (or bad) as it is with Windows. For the very technically able, such as developers, there's awesome technical documentation to be found all over. It's perhaps the mid-range user, the one who wants to fiddle with stuff but isn't that good at it yet, who gets screwed over. This is a problem.

      Software, Software, Software this is the biggest problem, and not so easily dismissed as some fans would pretend. My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux? Probably not. Can I just direct her to a clone of equal quality? Probably not.

      Are we talking about the ordinary desktop user or are we not? Really, for every sewing machine you come up with, I can find two pieces of physics lab equipment that only runs on Linux (or similar). Let's not pull x-ray diffractometers and sewing machines into this!

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user with windows, I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software. with Linux I can install it via the built-in installer. but that only works if said software is in the repository. If not, getting it installed is often a lot more complex than just downloading a file and double clicking on it to install.

      Of course things are different when you move to a completely new environment! I'll grant that everything being the same old is an advantage Windows has, but it's certainly one that EVERY competitor will have to face, and it's not really fair to count it. I agree that it's something you have to consider when switching, but it's inherent in the very idea of switching OS. Also, let's not forget the obvious fact that regarding software installation, the Linux distros' way of doing things is *far superior* to the Windows one, especially with regards to security.

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface Telling someone to break out a command line and type "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" is like telling a Windows user to reinstall DOS and learn its syntax.

      You're confusing things again. The "read email and browse the web"-user never gets told that! If he needs to install anything, he'll be told to click the big shiny "install software" button and the "install security updates" button. The mid-range (and high-end) users may be told to do some simple CLI stuff, I agree. But really, I don't understand how it's any worse than "click menu A, look for B, go to the tab C, find the checkbox that says D, set it to enabled, find dropdown E, choose F"?

    7. Re:What's still keeping me away by hoggoth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      KDE vs. Gnome: Tell me about it!

      I wanted a drop dead simple distro for my wife and my mother to do their email and web browsing with no more virus headaches. I read up and found that Linux Mint was the friendliest experience out of the box.
      I went to Linux Mint's website to get it and was offered this choice:

      Linux Mint Gnome 32 bit edition
      Linux Mint Gnome 64 bit edition
      Linux Mint KDE 32 bit edition
      Linux Mint KDE 64 bit edition
      Linux Mint Xfce 32 bit edition
      Linux Mint Xfce 64 bit edition
      Linux Mint LDXE edition
      Linux Mint Fluxbox edition
      Linux Mint Debian edition

      WTF. Now maybe I'm out of the loop and haven't been going to my local Linux club meetings, and I certainly don't know the secret handshake, but seeing this choice with absolutely no explanation of what the hell the difference is does not inspire me about a distro famous for being "simple for newcomers".

      Perhaps there is ONE MAIN DEFAULT edition with some alternate editions available, but that isn't how it appears on their webpage.

      I think I'll get them Macs.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    8. Re:What's still keeping me away by mamer-retrogamer · · Score: 1

      I'm a pretty geeky guy who has played around with Linux many times over the years (starting back in the late 90's), hoping to get away from Windows. Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have.

      Ditto. And that's why for the last 4 years when anyone asks me about my recommendation for a new PC, I tell them "get a Mac". Yeah, it's not completely free (as in beer, or speech), but it utilizes a lot of the open source projects we know and love, is UNIX, and lets both power users and newbies get what they want done without dealing with things they shouldn't have to (registry problems, malware, restricted multiverse repositories, and the like). Most people just want a machine to get a job done and don't really care *how* it does it, just that it does.

      Windows 7 might be getting there, but I jumped ship with Windows XP and haven't looked back. Maybe someday Steve Jobs will decide to lock down Mac OS X like iOS, but if that happens, and the OS will once again becomes an obstacle to what I am trying to accomplish, I will look elsewhere.

      --
      Schrödinger's cat is not amused—maybe.
    9. Re:What's still keeping me away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Disclaimer: I'm not replying as a zealot or anything, but many of your points are contrived.

      Confusing distros. Just thinking about all the different distros and configurations still gives me a headache.

      Then just pick one. Go with the masses and pick Ubuntu. Go for the support route and pick Red Hat or SuSE. It doesn't matter, and for "the average person" (which is really your argument) they've probably only heard of one or two anyway, and it's probably not an obscure distro to begin with.

      Heck, I've had people get confused trying to decide between WIndows XP, Windows 7 32-bit, and Windows 7 64-bit. Same issue.

      Ubuntu has blunted this somewhat, but even with that you have to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing, which is damned confusing to a layperson.

      Why do you have to get into Gnome vs. KDE at all? Ubuntu comes with Gnome by default. Stick with the defaults. That's what the layperson would do.

      The worst part of this is trying to download software for Linux off of some website and running into multiple versions with odd notations regarding different distros.

      If you use some form of repository, that's not an issue. And I still see planty of Windows applications that have separate versions for 32-bit, 64-bit, Win9x, etc.

      Poor documentation. Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.

      Fairly accurate. But a good number of Windows applications are commercial software, so you're paying for the documentation with the purchase. Also, much FOSS is available for both Windows and Linux (e.g. OpenOffice, Firefox). The same documentation applies to these products, rendering the whole Windows-vs.-Linux documentation point moot in these cases.

      Software, Software, Software. This is the biggest problem, and not so easily dismissed as some fans would pretend. My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux? Probably not. Can I just direct her to a clone of equal quality? Probably not.

      Indeed, some instances require Windows. Linux is not for 100% of the population, just as Windows is also not for 100% of the population. Nobody is suggesting there has to be one OS to rule them all. Clearly your mom needs Windows. Does that mean my mother needs Windows? Absolutely not.

      Little support (if not openly hostile) There aren't a lot of places to call for Linux support. And a lot of the places you can go for support on the net are filled with Linuix fanatics who are openly hostile to Windows switchers and newbies. The level of "you don't belong here" attitude towards newbies in Linux circles makes Apple fans look civil.

      If you want support, there are numerous popular distros (Red Hat, SuSE) that provide paid support, just as Microsoft does. If you're looking for free support, then yes you need to weed through the trolls and gurus alike. But try taking a closer look at many of the Windows-support forums out there -- many of them are filled with clueless people and hostile "my way or the highway" types as well. They many not be Theo de Raadt, but they can deal out their share of verbal assault.

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user. With windows, I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software. with Linux I can install it via the built-in installer. but that only works if said software is in the repository.

      I take it you've never had a "can't find SOMETHING.DLL" error before? Try explaining that to a Windows user.

      Also, there are numerous pieces of software that run with their own installer, and have no reliance on a repository. The other day, I installed some software t

    10. Re:What's still keeping me away by IRWolfie- · · Score: 1

      Go with Ubuntu then? It's bound to be by far the most popular for good reason

    11. Re:What's still keeping me away by British · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user" - in regards to something like an app install, I agree.

      In Ubuntu, I take a look at Synaptic, I am amazed at just how unfriendly and granular it is. You have your dependency hell, which means if you want to install A, you have to install C, D, E, F, and so forth. Some might install, some will fail with some weird technobabble. Many apps find it necessary to have SEVERAL entries. One will be the game's main files, and then you have to install another "Data files for xxx". Why can't they be in some hierarchy?

      I also don't like it when many of the games to install require you to have the datafiles from the original. Try explaining that to your dad when he wants to install a game.

    12. Re:What's still keeping me away by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu has blunted this somewhat, but even with that you have to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing, which is damned confusing to a layperson.

      It is indeed quite confusing and probably doesn't say anything at all to a new convert. But I don't see Ubuntu having a problem here; when you go to Ubuntu website and click on download you get the GNOME version by default, you don't need get asked either during the download or when installing as to whether you'd like one or the other. So, atleast in regards to Ubuntu the problem isn't there.

      The worst part of this is trying to download software for Linux off of some website and running into multiple versions with odd notations regarding different distros.

      This is annoying indeed. And it often happens that your distribution isn't mentioned at all. Sure, an experienced user would know that an .RPM probably would work on any .RPM-based distro, and .DEB would probably work on any .DEB-based distro...but even then it is not guaranteed: the dependencies list might refer for example to gnome-panel-bindings-ruby whereas the distro has the exact same package available but with the name ruby-gnome-panel-bindings. So, while it in theory it would work you'd have to drop to command-line and do some magic to actually get it to install.

      I wish distros would come up with a standard naming scheme that works across the whole board, on all the freaking distros. That would solve this issue and then you could just provide an RPM for RPM-distros and DEB for DEB-distros without having to mention a distro name at all. Then distros could take it a step further and just have the package manager automatically converting RPM to DEB or DEB to RPM when the user wishes to install such a package.

      But actually coming up with a standard naming scheme which all distros would adhere to? Highly unlikely.

      My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux? Probably not. Can I just direct her to a clone of equal quality? Probably not.

      It most likely wouldn't work on a Mac either truth be told. It just happens that Windows-apps and drivers often work only on Windows, and in such special cases as your mother there isn't much that can be done.

      Poor documentation Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.

      This I don't really agree with. I mostly agree with all your points, but this just ain't really true. There's lots of documentation that comes by default with distros and can be accessed as easily as on Windows: select Help on the menu, or press F1. Or if you are looking for something that isn't in there a simple Google usually gives all the information you need. Especially the Ubuntu community sites are very active and every time I've stumbled upon them I've just been more and more convinced that they are going in the right direction. I don't know about the other distros' community documentation sites really as almost every time I've googled for something it's the Ubuntu sites which come up, and it's not really such a bad thing anyways; the instructions there are usually generic enough to work on other distros too.

      Little support (if not openly hostile) There aren't a lot of places to call for Linux support. And a lot of the places you can go for support on the net are filled with Linuix fanatics who are openly hostile to Windows switchers and newbies. The level of "you don't belong here" attitude towards newbies in Linux circles makes Apple fans look civil.

      I haven't seen such attitude anymore in ages. I used to frequent on Mandriva irc channels and help out newbies, didn't see such behaviour there. Nor have I seen on the afore-mentioned Ubuntu community documentation sites. Of course, there are always those who are holier than thou, in all OS camps, but

    13. Re:What's still keeping me away by glatiak · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I tend to agree -- I have made a couple of runs at a Linux desktop and have bailed because the software just wasn't there. None of the major applications I use exist in Linux versions -- that is a clue right there. The open source versions are too different and require too much fiddling to configure and maintain. And it is an awfully short step from setting options in a GUI to doing web searches for files and options scattered all over the machine -- and very fragmented support info that is version and distribution-specific. That is not to say that it cannot be done or that if my needs were different I could be satisfied with what is available -- I know people who are quite satisfied with what they can do with their Linux laptops out of the box. But it just doesn't work for me. Oh, 30 years ago when I was writing DBMS internal code, compilers and the like -- lots of assembler, C and scripting, I might see things differently. But there we are -- I just don't have the time or inclination to do that level of fiddling anymore and am appalled that the need to do it as a general rule still exists. Too many times have I set something up, had it work perfectly, then did a reboot and nothing worked due to special install rules -- then ugly digging to get it working again. So I stick with Windoze -- at least it works most of the time and helps me do what I need.

    14. Re:What's still keeping me away by salmacis2 · · Score: 1

      I've long believed that the way for linux to succeed on the desktop is to focus on one distribution only. Push the Ubuntu brand, rather than linux. We need a company like Apple, that makes it's own hardware and makes sure Ubuntu is optimised for it.

      Geeks will still be able to install other distros, but for the mass-market, the confusion of different distros must disappear. Software vendors should only have to worry about packages for Ubuntu - if the community wants to create packages for other distros then fine.

      As much as I hate to say it, we need software like Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop and iTunes ported. (I myself have an iPhone, and the non-iTunes alternatives are sketchy at best.) I know free alternatives exist, but linux won't be taken seriously until the major software packages are available. Games would be nice, but the Mac managed without them for years, so I see that as less important.

    15. Re:What's still keeping me away by dunezone · · Score: 1

      I see this problem with other open source projects also. You download what you believe is everything but you need X,Y,Z also downloaded and installed. Why cant this crap just come together as one single download?

    16. Re:What's still keeping me away by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Totally agree with you.

      The Linux Kernel is excellent, I have no objections. However, the kernel just makes the computer work, the user uses applications, not the kernel.

      Is because this issue of user programs is that the Linux desktop "dies"... An incredibly bizarre confusion of standards, programs that run at half or even work, applications "GUI" in which the features are 80% at the command line, Hell, as example the latest version of Compiz Fusion (0.9.0) is neither possible to compile because he has missing vital files for do that!

      The "normal" computer user do not want to know all the dozens of command-line options for a DVD burning application "GUI" to be able to use the same... He wants to turn on the computer, open the program and use it, nothing more than that. And Linux fails miserably at that point.

      (And importantly, the author of TFA does not mean that Linux has "died" in the sense of ceasing to exist, but in the sense that he'll never have a user base large enough to stop being a "curiosity" because defects described above. Maybe a more correct title is "Linux fails as desktop and why").

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    17. Re:What's still keeping me away by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      I've always been for program/library independence. The exception is where the required extension is so incredibly large (like .NET for example) that it's not worth it. Otherwise I like stuff self-contained - even things like user prefs and settings (and yes I see the advantages of storing in the registry etc., but even so).

      On a related note, I dislike 'installs' generally, and if I had things done my own way, everything would extract from a zip the same one folder, and be ready to run straight away, without littering the hard drive with millions of files (I'm looking at you Apple).

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    18. Re:What's still keeping me away by maugle · · Score: 1

      Regarding your last point: Yes, people will tell you "open up the terminal and run sudo apt-get install whatever". That is because they are lazy, and it's much easier to tell you to run a one-liner in a terminal than it is to type out "Go to the applications menu, click on Ubuntu Software Center, go to the search bar on the top right, search for "whatever", click on the search result, and click install."

    19. Re:What's still keeping me away by boxwood · · Score: 1

      The thing is windows has gotten people used to doing things the wrong way. You really should be avoiding downloading .exe files that claim to be installers. You should be using packages. First of all an .exe could be a virus. and Secondly an .exe is not aware of libraries and dependencies. But MS has only recently introduced MSI packages, so many software developers are used to simply putting stuff in whats basically an executable zip file and copying all the dll's needed with the exe, and you end up using more disk space and using more memory when running multiple apps.

      You really don't need to use the command line in linux anymore. You can access pretty much everything using either the GUI or the CLI. But when you ask for help installing something, people are going to say "sudo apt-get install whatever" because that is a hell of a lot easier than saying "click Applications, Ubuntu Software Center, click on search bar (with the magnifying glass) type whatever, click on whatever, click the install button, type in your password". And its much easier for you when you're following the instructions to simply copy and paste the command into a terminal window and press enter.

      Poor documentation? WTF? I find that to be the biggest strength of linux. I type "Ubuntu whatever problem" into google and 95% of the time I have the answer on the first page of results. Compare to windows where I have spent half a day or more trying to get a solution to a problem.

      And ubuntuforums is always very friendly. People really bend over backwards to try to help you find a solution for a problem.

      For your windows apps you have several solutions available. Wine works really well. You can install windows in a virtualbox. And you can dual boot.

      But all of your points can be summed up into one: You're used to windows and linux is not windows. You know where to find documentation, and support for windows, and you have some windows only apps you like. You are used to installing things in windows.

      I use Linux, Windows, and MacOS, and honestly Linux is the best out of the three. I triple boot because games work better on windows. I don't really use MacOS much, though I liked iPhoto (until it broke, it doesn't seem to work anymore) and the DVD player is nicer in MacOS, though I had to fiddle around with a hack to get around the region coding. But for browsing the web, listening to music, doing work (you know what I use my computer for 90% of the time), its all linux. MS has made some improvements with .Net and MSI's and they have improved security and stability, but its still not there.

    20. Re:What's still keeping me away by TigerTime · · Score: 1

      Yea, I'm right there with you. Until linux or it's numerous versions grow up enough that I don't have to ever open a command prompt, it won't be considered a desktop for the mainstream. For me, I've tried Ubuntu on my laptop and the installer freezes halfway in the unpacking/install process and just reboots. So Ubuntu is worthless to me. It worked on my desktop fairly well, but getting things done is a maze of undocumented disasters one right after the other. Back on my laptop, I tried openSUSE, which installed like a charm. But then i realized that the installers were completely different and it acted different than Ubuntu. At that point I threw my hands up in the air and went back to Windows. Linux is just not ready. Until they decide on one distribution mechanism (deb vs rpm). One package manager. A more stable installer. And quit worrying about theming colors, which instant messaging client to preinstall, and where to place the buttons on the window.

    21. Re:What's still keeping me away by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 1

      I've been using Linux as my primary desktop environment since '97, and I agree with you.

      I think too many the people who bother to involve themselves in coding for Linux (and particularly towards the end-users) are lacking in .. well .. empathy: They are simply not able to reset their mindset such that they can see how your application will be perceived from a first-time user. I know the tricks, how to google effectively, the knowledge base in my head is sufficient etc etc so I'm happy using Linux. But if I was a less curious and stubborn person, I'd given up a good while ago.

      Linux is overall also far too anarchistic in its nature to produce a good Desktop OS. It will remain as a superior server platform, a good development platform, a breeding ground for new stuff, but it won't ever gain end-user traction. KDE and Gnome will continue to live side-by-side, Ubuntu dares not be controversial enough to completely drop either. And the desktop will therefore be both slower and more confusing than it should be. We make stuff work, but we rarely make them shine.

      The Linux desktop even missed the netbook wave, which was almost custom-made for it to shine. XP on my HP Mini 311c is good, solid and misses fewer frames (especially in Flash) than Ubuntu running the official nvidia ION driver. What a missed opportunity! (I realize M$ used dirty tricks to lock Linux out, but those frames don't drop themselves - Ubuntu is slower than XP)

      Linux is adequate for almost anything, but good at only a few select things, forever trapped in the 80/20 rule. That's the curse.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    22. Re:What's still keeping me away by sea4ever · · Score: 1
      The reasons you mention here are all fair, I suppose. That last one I think should be omitted though.

      Still too much reliance on the command line.

      Well, isn't a *nix OS supposed to be reliant on the command line? An analogy to this would be my friend saying he doesn't like LISP because of the parenthesis, which are a big part of what LISP is. (I can't think of any other way to implement a language like that without the parens)
      If linux no longer relied on the command line, it would no longer be Linux. It would probably end up becoming something similar to windows.
      Just like switching to a new programming language, when you switch to a new OS don't expect it to be exactly like the last one you used, start using the features/etc. that the new one has and you'll come to see that it's all that way for a reason.
      You see Linux is not a replacement for Windows/OSX, it's an alternative tool with it's own feature set.
      I could be wrong but differentiation of tools is important.

    23. Re:What's still keeping me away by the+plant+doctor · · Score: 1

      I'm a pretty geeky guy who has played around with Linux many times over the years (starting back in the late 90's), hoping to get away from Windows. Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have. And, while great strides have been made with Ubuntu, I'm still not convinced that Linux will ever be that OS I'm looking for. I know these will all be poo-pooed by the Linux fans, but here are/were some of the problems that I (as a very technically literate Windows user) have run up against when I've installed Linux in the past*:

      • Confusing distros Just thinking about all the different distros and configurations still gives me a headache. Ubuntu has blunted this somewhat, but even with that you have to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing, which is damned confusing to a layperson. The worst part of this is trying to download software for Linux off of some website and running into multiple versions with odd notations regarding different distros.

      Isn't this the point of Linux? Choice? Education is the key here, not complaining that it's too hard to decide. Pretty easy to present both and give good information for the new user to decide which to use.

      • Poor documentation Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.

      I'd agree with this

      • Software, Software, Software this is the biggest problem, and not so easily dismissed as some fans would pretend. My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux? Probably not. Can I just direct her to a clone of equal quality? Probably not.

      I agree, however, do they offer a Mac client as well as Windows? It seems that oftentimes these types of specialized software assume that the end user only will be using a MS OS. This isn't the fault of Linux. It should be addressed, but placing the blame on the OS is the wrong approach. The manufacturers need to know that end users want support for their OS of choice.

      • Little support (if not openly hostile) There aren't a lot of places to call for Linux support. And a lot of the places you can go for support on the net are filled with Linuix fanatics who are openly hostile to Windows switchers and newbies. The level of "you don't belong here" attitude towards newbies in Linux circles makes Apple fans look civil.

      Gotta disagree, the Ubuntu forum is one of the most helpful and friendly I've seen for most anything.

      • Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user with windows, I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software. with Linux I can install it via the built-in installer. but that only works if said software is in the repository. If not, getting it installed is often a lot more complex than just downloading a file and double clicking on it to install.

      Really? You're trotting out this tired argument again? If a user is advanced enough to need something that's NOT in Ubuntu or Debian's repositories then it's a pretty safe bet that they're knowledgeable enough to know how to add a PPA or compile from source to get something so specialized. I can't think of anything I use that's not in PPAs or repositories currently and I'm a fairly advanced user with what I do for my research.

      • Still too much reliance on the command line interface Telling someone to break out a command line and type "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" is like telling a Windows user to reinstall DOS and learn its syntax.

      Errm, I use it because it is faster, but most Ubuntu users that I know aren't of my ilk and they have no issues doing things without the command line.

    24. Re:What's still keeping me away by Duradin · · Score: 1

      "Isn't this the point of Linux? Choice? Education is the key here, not complaining that it's too hard to decide. Pretty easy to present both and give good information for the new user to decide which to use."

      So why not actually do both? Oh ya, one of them is a documentation thing. Someone else's problem.

      "Gotta disagree, the Ubuntu forum is one of the most helpful and friendly I've seen for most anything."

      One specific example in a sea of "It's open source, rewrite the code and fix it yourself." does not make the community friendly.

    25. Re:What's still keeping me away by Byzantine · · Score: 1

      This is exactly the problem. By and large, distributions try to be all things to all people instead of creating a whole OS; in my view the point of a distribution should actually be to limit the available software to a reasonably maintainable level. Nobody, though, wants to be the bad guy—or is even in a position to be the bad guy—and say "No. MyLinuxDistribution 3.14 has standardized on ThisApp. I don't care how much you love YourFavoriteApp; it's not going in." The difficulty is of course compounded the larger the committee making decisions gets, which is why Debian contains everything under the sun.

      Slackware is the obvious exception, but then it's also a project headed and (to my understanding) largely done by one man.

    26. Re:What's still keeping me away by deiu · · Score: 1

      So...as always there's the other side of the story. I am definitely not a fanatic, but I think people have the right to know the "other side" of the story as well. :)

      Confusing distros: some distributions are specifically tailored to particular tasks. However, having a larger number of possible choices should always be better. Compare it to buying a smartphone, where people usually read reviews and decide on the product they want to buy based on personal preferences.

      Poor documentation: The community usually provides the help you need faster than looking through documentation. I still find it difficult to identify issues under Windows, where you only get an error number, compared to the log files in Linux.

      Little support: there are lot less hostile people these days than it used to be. Identifying issues in open software takes less time than waiting for a company to release a patch for a proprietary driver or application. Also, I have yet to see _FREE_ support offered for Windows. Having people whine on forums that they "can't do this" as well as they could in Windows doesn't help either. ;)

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user: you can easily double-click a .deb file or a .rpm file and have the installer run automatically. The days of source-compiling are long gone for the common user. If said application has unresolved dependencies, the installer will look them up and offer a solution (e.g. usually installing them along). This way software developers can create smaller applications that benefit from libraries that get updated frequently (better security?).

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" can alternatively be done through the package manager (i.e. Synaptic, under ubuntu). For the desktop user, the CLI is practically non-existent. There are some administration tasks that require knowledge of CLI, but that doesn't affect the desktop experience for the common user.

      Conclusion: granted, Linux lacks some specialized software, but that's not the OS' fault really. Developing multiplatform software should come to the advantage of the company that creates it, allowing for increased widespread, which in turn generates revenue. Look at the mobile platform developers, most of them release software for all the major OS platforms. Anyway, I can't help but wonder why would I want to get weekly phone calls from my parents/grandparents complaining about viruses....

    27. Re:What's still keeping me away by neumayr · · Score: 1

      Why download "linux" software from a random web page when nearly everything you want can be downloaded from the same repository you get your OS updates from.

      Indeed, why? Actually, there is a lot of software that isn't present in the major distribution's repositories. What would be nice would be a standardized installer that the distributions can provide their own backend for, that's really easy for developers to add to their projects. Kind of like InstallShield.

      And lastly, the "hostile linux people" is pretty much a myth in my experience. I seem to get a lot of help all the time.

      There are some distributions that attract more elitist asshats than others. Debian and Arch Linux especially, according to my experience. In contrast to its reputation, Gentoo seems to have a very helpful community. But maybe that's because of its limited userbase, so they don't get many questions that makes one want to scream RTFM..

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    28. Re:What's still keeping me away by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I want the expert to make the choices. Pick the best things that go well together. If I have a strong opinion on something else then it will be up to me to install that on top of my EASY INSTALL.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    29. Re:What's still keeping me away by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      For your windows apps you have several solutions available. Wine works really well. You can install windows in a virtualbox. And you can dual boot.

      Ah, yes. For the typical consumer, who doesn't have the time or desire to learn a lot about computers ... I can just see them trying to figure out Wine, VirtualBox, or dual booting. On a non-sarcastic note, I'm not sure those solutions are the best for someone who just wants something that works. The issue is that, for "mom and dad," Windows works for everything the want it to do. In order to get into that "market," Linux has to work just as well. It's hard to entice people by saying "well, Linux is awesome and free, but you're going to have to pay for a Windows OS anyways and run it in a virtual machine in order to run the programs you need to." Why not just run Windows and forget the Linux part?

      I disagree, all his points were not used-to-Windows-not-Linux points. Most of them were not.

      Here's an example. I have a slightly older Dell laptop. It has an Intel wireless card, uses ipw3945 for a driver I believe. Full screen flash on hulu makes the wireless connection freak out and I have to disable/enable to get it to work again. I have no problems on Windows.

      Another one: Totem freaks out when it encounters a problem on a DVD. I had to install VLC in order to watch library movies, it handles scratches much more gracefully (don't relaly notice, unless they are REALLY bad).

      Now, for me ... the flash problem was hard to figure out, but eventually I noticed the correlation, tested it, and determined it was actually causing it. The Totem vs. VLC one wasn't too hard. For a typical, average consumer? Those issues are way to basic. I never encountered any of those with Windows - WMP played DVDs fine, wireless drivers worked fine, Flash wasn't a problem. I know, Linux doesn't control Adobe, and it's not necessarily Ubuntu's fault, but it's still an issue. And those were not issues with being familiar with Windows.

      With all that, I still use it, because I'm geeky and I tihnk it's cool. But it's not for everyone, and my wife would have been able to figure out those two problems on her own. She hasn't had any problems with Windows lately. In fact, before I figured out the flash-disconnecting-wireless issue, we would start watching on hulu on my Ubuntu lapotp, get kicked off, and resort to using her Windows 7 laptop.

    30. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Confusing distros Just thinking about all the different distros and configurations still gives me a headache

      Then don't. Just pick one.

      Poor documentation

      People don't read documentation anyway.

      Software, Software, Software this is the biggest problem, and not so easily dismissed as some fans would pretend. My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine. Is it available for Linux?

      Vendor lock-in is not Linux's fault.

      Little support (if not openly hostile)

      Who has ever called Microsoft for support and gotten anything useful? You're better off just going to their knowledge base. That's not terribly different from going to to the Ubuntu forums for instance, which are honestly more helpful in my experience.

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user

      When in Rome do as the Romans do. Linux is different from Windows because it's not Windows. If you want it to be Windows, use Windows, we won't miss you. Oh, is that the "openly hostile" support you were referring to above? Sorry, if you go to Rome and expect everyone to speak English to you you'll be treated rudely too.

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface

      The CLI is used because it is superior to the GUI, much like verbal language is superior to pointing and grunting. If learning a new language is too much for you, don't switch to Linux and don't move to Rome.

      The issues you describe are mostly ones of culture shock. The fact that you experience culture shock when moving to a new culture doesn't mean that that culture is wrong or bad. It's just different, and it's up to you to be tolerant and learn how things work. If you think the culture should adapt to you instead, that's just a typical American cultural superiority complex. That's not surprising, but people aren't going to be motivated to help.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    31. Re:What's still keeping me away by Ragica · · Score: 1

      I was also afraid to switching my mom to Linux, but finally after yet-another-windows-disaster I finally snapped... set her up with Kubuntu. I have to say, it was pretty painful for a while. Lots of "but I used to because to do this-like-this" pain. Especially around area of really simple stuff which is actually pretty frustrating on many linux desktops: - drag web pages from firefox to desktop - setting wallpaper - downloading photos from digital camera But anyhow, things have settled down. She still has constant problems. But now I can fix them so much more easily! It's not a hair-pulling mysterious inexplicable balls of pain. It's definitely worth it switching relatives to Linux if you support their computers. And when they complain that some stupid windows program they are missing, just tell them to go back to windows if they want but you won't be touching their computers anymore... And also "remember all the problems you had on windows?" Amazingly they quickly forget the horrors they experienced on windows fairly quickly, and need to be reminded.... Bottom line. Most people just *hate* change. Force them to change somehow. It *will* be painful. But it's totally worth it in the long run for sooooooo many reasons.

    32. Re:What's still keeping me away by weicco · · Score: 1

      Or you could totally skip Linux and go to FreeBSD. At least documents and support is better than "When in Rome".

      --
      You don't know what you don't know.
    33. Re:What's still keeping me away by Terrasque · · Score: 1

      This might get me labelled as some linux fanatic, but oh well..

      First of all, I use windows 7 at home, and ubuntu linux at work (started linux with slackware in '95). I also used OSX for half a year before I had to admit it was not for me. I do support for friends and relatives, and have also worked as tech support for an ISP for a year and a half. So I've got some experience with both the software and users.

      First of all, the confusing distros issue. Most linux people will tell you that if you dont know what desktop distro you want, take Ubuntu. So that's really a non-issue. (Did you know the just Windows 7 have six different editions? Plus 32/64bit, plus N versions)

      Poor documentation - My experience is that the lowlevel documentation of linux is miles ahead of windows, and on the high level documentation.. 99% of users needing help completely ignores it (and any helpful message that shows on the screen). Yes, it matters, but much less than you think.

      Software - Valid point, there are alternatives for many programs, but the alternatives often lack polish / functions. Wine is not a solution, its a bandaid that helps *sometimes* (and the result is often unstable). Of course, there are things that go the other way too. Linux have a good terminal, very good appdesktop integration (which is why I use ubuntu at work, gedit (with gnome ssh folder layer)/vim + terminal really makes a difference), and much better installation / uninstall / update routines.

      Support - Again, Ubuntu goes a long way on this one. The forums are pretty friendly, they have decent documentation on their site, and Canonial offers paid support (and links to other companies supporting Ubuntu).

      "Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user" - well, the natural state of a non-technical pc user is confusion :) There are some changes, but software install isn't really the one you should shout largest about. First of all, you have the ubuntu software center, which gives a user friendly, categorized, searchable overview of (a lot of) selected software. Often with screenshots and link to the website of the project. Secondly, people can still download a file from the web, click it, and a program installs. Instead of downloading an exe or msi file, they download a .deb file, and a GUI window pops up with a description of the program and asks if you want to install it.

      Command line - Now, I've heard this so many times... But its been years since last time I HAD to go to console for some desktop thing. I usually use console myself, but that's because it's faster, not because there's no alternatives. So, got any actual examples? I honestly can't think of any.

      Oh, and you forgot drivers, which still can be a real problem. Especially on new laptop models.

      --
      It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
    34. Re:What's still keeping me away by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what you're saying. Distributions of Linux are quite the opposite. They don't try to be all things. Linux isn't Windows or OS X, you're not stuck with a very limited range of experience. Each distro has a rather specific personality and you pick the one that fits best with who you are. Window managers/desktops--KDE, Gnome, Xfce, Fluxbox, Emacs (if you're that sort of person), etc. are better thought of as applications in their own right, not a part that constitutes the OS. They're yet another option to tailor your system to your personality. Some distros let you pick which to use, some are specifically built around a particular one. There are distros for every range of user ability and personality.

      Being able to run any manner of app that was written for Linux isn't trying to be all things to all people. It's called supporting the user's ability do what they want to do. What kind of user would want to run an OS where if they tried to install X application and was told by the OS that it had no knowledge of X application so go get stuffed (in spite the software being written for the OS)?

      If you are the type that is put off by choices, and want capricious, arbitrary restrictions then perhaps Linux isn't for your personality in general. Go grab a Mac, it has security and stability rivaling Linux and has a very narrowly defined range of options. That said, I'd encourage you to not be put off by a bit of upfront research work regarding the options Linux distros offer. There are plenty of resources explaining these choices and many distros offer what are known as "live CDs" that enable you to preview the OS's experience without committing to actually installing it. Most people wouldn't think of accepting the one-size fits all option for shoes why should you your operating system? The pleasure of wearing the perfect fit make the effort worth it in the end.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    35. Re:What's still keeping me away by metrometro · · Score: 1

      And these are also the reasons my small business uses (and hates) Windows. And I'm thinking about switching people to iMacs, which is anathama to me, but probably an OK business decision.

      I do not want to patch things. I do not want to train people (including me). I do not want to sudo get anything. I want a f'ing dumb terminal to talk to our online resources and maybe edit some documents. Put Android on a desktop, port a text editor, and I'll run it.

    36. Re:What's still keeping me away by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      Now maybe I'm out of the loop and haven't been going to my local Linux club meetings, and I certainly don't know the secret handshake, but seeing this choice with absolutely no explanation of what the hell the difference is does not inspire me about a distro famous for being "simple for newcomers".

      That's mostly easy. Some are 32-bit (like how there's Windows 7 32-bit) and some are 64-bit (like how there's Windows 7 64-bit). Meanwhile, the other big names (Gnome, KDE, etc) are the different focus (Home, Professional, Ultimate). Of course, a DVD that just contained everything and had a default option would simplify things. But, then you'd have to likely have to d/l 2+ GB and you'd likely need a DVD burner.

      Perhaps there is ONE MAIN DEFAULT edition with some alternate editions available, but that isn't how it appears on their webpage.

      Window managers (which are the big differences in the names) are like sects. Sure, you can be a Christian. But there's no "one main default" Christianity. Trying to push one as a default is only likely to piss off every other sect. It's precisely because there's such little differences that makes people so angry about it because if one actually choses one over another, it means you've actually spent a lot of time and energy on why one is right or one is wrong. Being nebulously Christian (or Muslim or Hindu) tends more to just being from an area where people just presume you are and for which outside of rejecting it, a lot of people don't seem to put a lot of thought into it.

      It's the same way about one's favorite brand of soda (while less so whether one says "soda", "pop", or "Coca-cola"), btw. I just wanted to throw in a not-entirely-pointless religious reference. :)

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    37. Re:What's still keeping me away by inshreds · · Score: 1

      My 60ish mother has been using a laptop with Ubuntu on it for nearly two years now completely trouble free. She runs the updates periodically when prompted on her own. Otherwise, the only support I have to give her is once every 6 months I tell her when it is safe to upgrade to the latest version. In contrast, she last ran Win XP for years. Though, inevitably her XP system slowed to a crawl or was infected by something or other at least twice a year. Worse yet, her XP was a money pit in virus scanners, malware programs, and other subscription bases services required to keep it running.

      To address the rest of your concerns:
      Confusing distros : One word: Ubuntu
      Poor documentation : Again, Ubuntu has fantastic documentation and its all free
      Software, Software, Software: Not really a problem. My mom uses OpenOffice, Evolution, and loves the Software Channel built right into ubuntu. She browses this herself, finds games and stuff, and best of all, I don't have to worry about some foreign shareware scamper ponwing her computer. Would you dare allow your mother to download software for Windows off the internet on her own? Oh, and for your sewing machine software, can pretty much guarantee you that it is usb or serial interface completely supported in Wine. Little support: Ubuntu forums rock. Great people, great support. I know that to be true as I try to "give back' by answering at least a few requests for help a month. Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user: My computer illiterate mother had no trouble at all switching to Gnome. In fact, she finds the interface less cluttered and easier to navigate than Windows. Yes, there was a short learning curve, but she caught up quickly

      In the end, my 60'ish very typical mother who is by no means a computer geek is completely in love with Ubuntu. In fact, she swears she will never own another MS product again. Hope this is food for thought. Maybe it is time to try again.

    38. Re:What's still keeping me away by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Vendor lock-in is not Linux's fault.

      It doesn't have to be Linux's fault to be Linux's problem.

      The CLI is used because it is superior to the GUI, much like verbal language is superior to pointing and grunting. If learning a new language is too much for you, don't switch to Linux and don't move to Rome.

      For some small subset of tasks, it's superior to the GUI. For the majority of tasks, it is not. This seems pretty obvious to me; if that wasn't the case, why would the GUI even have been invented and widely deployed?

    39. Re:What's still keeping me away by Confusador · · Score: 1

      As you say, some of these issues may be recently resolved. Specifically, software installation and support. As package managers have gotten more mature, software installation has become what you asked for, I go to the website for Skype or Chrome or World of Goo and download a .deb and double click it. Chrome even uses the .deb to add it's repository so it stays up to date.

      As far as support goes, I think it's Ubuntu's greatest contribution. You've perfectly characterized a lot of places where Linux folks congregate, but the Ubuntu forums are a marvelous place, even for people who barely know their way around Windows. If they can get there, they can get an answer to their question. Now, the answer may be "that's not possible," which brings me to where you are perfectly correct.

      Documentation remains a problem, but a relatively minor one and it's getting better. I don't foresee most of my family being unable to find an answer for something on Linux where they wouldn't be calling me for the same thing on Windows. The only big problem left that I can see is Software, Software, Software, and as you say it's huge. And it's a chicken and egg problem with no resolution in sight. If Android apps were able to be installed on a desktop, we might have a shot, but as it stands it's going to be a long time before it changes. My only hope is that Google is good about porting their apps (albeit slowly), so anyone who competes with them and wants to have folks like me recommend their software (e.g. Skype) is forced to follow.

    40. Re:What's still keeping me away by frps25 · · Score: 1

      About the confusing distros that measn you preffer having Linux starter edition which doesn't allow you to change the wallpaper? I agree that it lacks software, but it is not OS fault, I remeber ten years ago when people were asking big companies to create Linux drivers for their devices, right now IT IS HAPPENING, more hardware support is comming, but you must realize that in order to change the current market model it is necesary to change the way we think, easy enough, ask someone who has never tried Linux if he wold like to have it completly FREE, you'll notice that it is difficult for that person to grasp the concept and he thinks that it is not possible to be free and that he may be getting ripped off some how. About the command line interface, well, that tells me A LOT of your experience with windows: Once I had a problem with a customer on windows 7, icons on his desktop simply would not refresh (creating or deleting icons), The solution? Edit a cryptic, hidden, obscure registry key that I would have never find if Google didn't exist (Bing didn't find the right anser). So, stop this crap that Terminal commands are difficult when playing with the windows registry is like doing a brain surgery with a hammer and completly bllinded.

    41. Re:What's still keeping me away by Byzantine · · Score: 1

      Wow, you're condescending, ain't you? I'm half convinced you just want to troll, but I'll bite.

      Although for the past couple of years my primary desktop has run a BSD, I solely used Linux (mostly Debian, but quite a few others, including some that don't exist anymore) for the twelve years before that (except where required by work). So I'm quite aware of the traditional distinction between "OS" versus "applications." I say traditional because when it comes to Linux—as from your post I'm sure you know—this distinction completely breaks down. Everything is an add-on, an "application," including coreutils, the compiler, awk, Emacs, vi, Firefox, an ftp client, Shotwell, whatever—everything except the kernel. This is, after all, the whole point of a Linux distribution in the first place (Linux from Scratch notwithstanding), to let somebody else assemble a whole system which they then "distribute" and you download. That's fine. That's good, even.

      The issue is not that there are multiple distributions; that's fine and good for the software ecosystem. The issue is that, for example, Debian's page for the virtual www-browser package lists no less than twenty-six packages which satisfy installing it. This is what I meant by "being all things to all people." I, the user, should not have to choose between 26 different web browsers. That's simply absurd. (For those people that actually want or need for some reason to install Chimera (the latest date in the copyright notice, by the way, is 1997), well, they're certainly entitled to ./configure && make && make install.) But for most users, this is too much choice. They've already chosen Ubuntu or Debian or Mint or whatever. Why should they then have to decide what web browser, or text editor, or office suite they want? It is the responsibility of distributions to pick reasonable defaults. I'm painting in broad strokes, obviously, but it seems like instead, nobody wants to say "No" so everything just goes in, and then the user chooses. And making the user choose means that Linux distributions will never have the userbase (because people are put off by too many choices) or the polish (because developer effort is dispersed where it could be concentrated) of commercial operating systems. That's my opinion, for what it's worth. Notable counterexamples would be Ubuntu (on the shiny side) and Slackware (on the austere side). But note what both have in common: they both have somebody who can say "No." So I guess they're really not counterexamples at all.

      Oh, and to address your strawman: nobody, least of all me, said that an OS should tell a user to "get stuffed" when they try to install something not included with the OS. As I mentioned above, a user can always install from source. Or get someone to. Or application authors can provide statically-linked binaries. Et cetera.

    42. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      For some small subset of tasks, it's superior to the GUI. For the majority of tasks, it is not. This seems pretty obvious to me; if that wasn't the case, why would the GUI even have been invented and widely deployed?

      It's the other way around. The GUI is superior for a few tasks (random access file picking, image manipulation), and inferior for everything else. The reason the GUI was adopted so widely is because it's easier to learn, not because it's superior in general. And that makes sense, a tool that is less powerful is generally easier to use.

      Let's look at your argument through the traditional car analogy. That the automatic transmission is so widely used must mean that it's superior to the manual transmission right? No. For someone who knows what they are doing, the manual transmission is superior in every way. Same goes for the CLI.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    43. Re:What's still keeping me away by Byzantine · · Score: 1

      I

      Poor documentation Again, Ubuntu helps. But even that is spotty compared to Windows. And the "documentation" website of many distros (and Linux software apps) is little more than a bugfix list.

      This in a nutshell is why I've switched to the BSDs, where a bug report for a documentation error is given equal weight with a software error.

    44. Re:What's still keeping me away by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I think you misunderstood the parent post's complaint:

      Choice is great -- so long as you understand the choices.

      But when you don't, then they're just confusing.
      And not everyone has the time or inclination to become an expert just so they can make the INITIAL choices.

      For average folks, think of choice as a synonymy -- for a foreign language that you've just begun learning and have no working knowledge beyond the most basic meanings of basic words. (Should you call a horse 'equus' or 'caballus', and why??)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    45. Re:What's still keeping me away by shadowrat · · Score: 1

      well duh, just symlink lib.version.x to your lib.version.x+5 and you should be good to go! Well maybe your app calls deprecated or missing functions from the old lib. maybe you can still get the old version from git. if not, no biggie just get the source, fork your own version and wrap the new methods in calls the replicate the missing symbols from the old version, or even better, modify the source for the app you are trying to run so it's compatible with the latest version of lib.version. everyone would appreciate that! I know that's what my grandma does.

    46. Re:What's still keeping me away by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I want the expert to make the choices. Pick the best things that go well together. If I have a strong opinion on something else then it will be up to me to install that on top of my EASY INSTALL.

      The editions are really just about eye candy. Think of it as different "windows explorer" interfaces. The apps will all be pretty well the same.

      I suggest you download the live CDs of KDE and Gnome and just boot from CD and see which one you like best before installing. If you want things simple, you'll probably like Gnome. I notice that that is what they suggest as the "MAIN EDITION" too.

      I think you're being a bit unfair complaining about the 32/64 choice. They can't possible know if you have 32bit or 64 bit hardware, so they provide bot, just like MS does with windows. Note that the 32 bit version will work fine on a 64 bit CPU but you're not getting the speed advantage of your fancy CPU (64 bit code typically runs around 20% faster).

    47. Re:What's still keeping me away by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      It's the other way around. The GUI is superior for a few tasks (random access file picking, image manipulation), and inferior for everything else.

      So you edit films in a CLI? Play video games in a CLI? Write your documents in a CLI, even though you don't get WYSIWYG that way? Create websites in a CLI? (How do you preview them?)

      Hell, for that matter, write computer code in a CLI? Even *writing code* has been supplanted by the GUI solution....

      You're either the least-imaginative person on Earth, or completely deluding yourself.

      The reason the GUI was adopted so widely is because it's easier to learn, not because it's superior in general.

      Being easier-to-learn *makes* it superior. Way to miss the point. "If you ignore the fact that it can transport 200+ people in comfort, safety at 550 MPH, the 777 is far inferior to the Wright Flyer."

      And that makes sense, a tool that is less powerful is generally easier to use.

      The "less powerful" assertion here is not only unproved, but not actually supported at all. As far as I'm concerned, giving millions or billions of people the power to edit movies, photos, create beautiful documents, etc. makes the GUI significantly *more* powerful than any CLI around.

      (The term also extremely vague, meaning you'll just redefine it to make CLIs look superior the instant you need to.)

      Let's look at your argument through the traditional car analogy. That the automatic transmission is so widely used must mean that it's superior to the manual transmission right?

      Yes.

      No. For someone who knows what they are doing, the manual transmission is superior in every way.

      Wrong: it's not superior when my goal is to drive while eating french fries. So you're factually wrong off the bat.

      But let's assume you're correct. If a manual transmission is superior *in every way* (your words) than an automatic, why are millions of automatic transmissions sold each year? What's your explanation for your phenomenon? Do you honestly believe millions of people are going out of their way to use the inferior product? Do you think everybody in the world except you is insane?

      Look, it's really retarded to even have this conversation, because the last 20 years of computer sales have already proven beyond a doubt that the GUI is the superior interface. The only way you can even slightly support your position is to arbitrary discount points in the GUI's favor (its ease-of-use.) Other than that, the only real support you've given is the term "more powerful" which is conveniently re-definable to be whatever you'd like it to be.

      My last remaining question is, do you literally and genuinely believe this ridiculous position? Or are you arguing for some other reason?

    48. Re:What's still keeping me away by daffmeister · · Score: 1

      Let me save you some time in the future. One of your requirements:

      My mom, for example, uses special software to interface with her high-end sewing machine

      Stop looking at alternatives. That particular piece of software will only ever work with Windows. In fact, it's quite likely that it will become unsupported and only ever work with the current version of Windows, so expect to be supporting that for a long time to come, until she upgrades the sewing machine.

    49. Re:What's still keeping me away by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I tend to start people off with Puppy Linux booted from a CDROM. It's simple enough that most people can figure it out completely within a day or two and it includes most of the things that one needs on a day to day basis.

      But, for more serious work after the initial break in period, there's definitely better choices.

    50. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      So you edit films in a CLI? Play video games in a CLI?

      Those are a few more of the tasks that are fundamentally visual for which you'll want a GUI.

      Write your documents in a CLI, even though you don't get WYSIWYG that way?

      LaTeX is superior to any GUI typesetting program out there.

      Create websites in a CLI?

      Use Vim and reload the browser when you write out the file.

      Hell, for that matter, write computer code in a CLI? Even *writing code* has been supplanted by the GUI solution....

      Writing code itself is a CLI. There's a reason computer languages are textual and not graphical. Figure that out and you'll understand why the CLI is superior.

      Being easier-to-learn *makes* it superior. Way to miss the point.

      All things identical, being easier to learn would make it superior. But all things aren't equal. The GUI is easier to learn, but it's also less capable. The CLI is harder to learn, but you can do a lot more with it. That makes it superior.

      Wrong: it's not superior when my goal is to drive while eating french fries. So you're factually wrong off the bat.

      Fair enough. I guess the GUI is superior if you want to compute while eating french fries too. So I'll give you that much.

      But let's assume you're correct. If a manual transmission is superior *in every way* (your words) than an automatic, why are millions of automatic transmissions sold each year? What's your explanation for your phenomenon? Do you honestly believe millions of people are going out of their way to use the inferior product? Do you think everybody in the world except you is insane?

      Yes, millions of people go out of their way to use inferior products all the time. What is popular is often quite different from what is good. McDonalds sells billions of hamburgers a year, while the cafe down the street only sells thousands. Does that mean McDonalds makes the better hamburger? Hardly.

      Look, it's really retarded to even have this conversation, because the last 20 years of computer sales have already proven beyond a doubt that the GUI is the superior interface.

      The last 20 years have only proven that the GUI is the most popular interface. That's not the same as being the best.

      My last remaining question is, do you literally and genuinely believe this ridiculous position?

      Absolutely. Do you literally and genuinely believe the ridiculous position that market success is equivalent to quality? How can you ignore the innumerable counter examples?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    51. Re:What's still keeping me away by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Use Vim and reload the browser when you write out the file.

      You mean Lynx? Or are you saying to run the browser in a *gasp* GUI? (Because the latter I count as cheating: you're using a GUI for the task! Cheater.)

      Writing code itself is a CLI. There's a reason computer languages are textual and not graphical. Figure that out and you'll understand why the CLI is superior.

      Not if you're writing the code in a IDE, which is what I was referring to. I guess I have to be more explicit next time... or perhaps you also count an IDE as a "CLI"? Since you're already cheating on the browser example, I'm guessing you might.

      The GUI is easier to learn, but it's also less capable.

      How?

      The CLI is harder to learn, but you can do a lot more with it.

      What more can you do? What can you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      That makes it superior.

      No; that makes it a trade off. If I'm Hatta, and I completely discount learning curve as a factor in judging something, CLI's *might* be better than a GUI. (But ... still probably not.) But again: you're cheating. You can't just arbitrary decide that certain factors aren't important when considering two things, not unless those factors are the same across-the-board.

      Look at my 777 vs. Wright Flyer example, that's exactly what you're doing!

      It's not even worth trying to discuss this with you.

    52. Re:What's still keeping me away by makomk · · Score: 1

      (I realize M$ used dirty tricks to lock Linux out, but those frames don't drop themselves - Ubuntu is slower than XP)

      Flash on Ubuntu is slower than Flash on XP. Which isn't surprising, really - Flash sucks badly on every platform except Windows.

    53. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      You mean Lynx? Or are you saying to run the browser in a *gasp* GUI? (Because the latter I count as cheating: you're using a GUI for the task! Cheater.)

      Vimperator actually. Viewing documents, like images and videos, is a visual task for which a GUI is useful. For actually interacting with the document, I still prefer a command environment.

      Not if you're writing the code in a IDE

      Not sure why you'd do that.

      What more can you do? What can you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      Loops, variables, pipes, etc.

      No; that makes it a trade off. If I'm Hatta, and I completely discount learning curve as a factor in judging something,

      The learning curve is irrelevant when you're comparing capabilities. What matters is how much can be done, not how much can be done by a naive user within 10 minutes. I dunno if you've ever taken chemistry, but think of it like kinetics vs thermodynamics. The rate of a reaction (kinetically favored) has nothing to do with the state at equilibrium (thermodynamically favored). A reaction might be very fast, but over the long term not favored thermodynamically. Similarly an OS might be easy to use, but over the long term less useful than one that takes longer to learn but can do more. It's not the slope of the learning curve that matters, but the height at the top of the curve.

      Look at my 777 vs. Wright Flyer example, that's exactly what you're doing!

      Your example is bogus. The 777 is easier to learn to fly, but it's also more capable than the Wright Flyer. The CLI is more like an SR-71. Harder to pilot, but it can fly longer, faster, and higher than anything else.

      It's not even worth trying to discuss this with you.

      But it's entertaining and we're bored at work, right?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    54. Re:What's still keeping me away by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Vimperator actually. Viewing documents, like images and videos, is a visual task for which a GUI is useful. For actually interacting with the document, I still prefer a command environment.

      So you open it up in Vimperator (which appears to be Firefox), but keep a CLI handy in another window (or another computer entirely-- after all windows are a nasty GUI concept you hate!) with Lynx to fill-in forms? One GUI browser to look at the pretty pictures, and another CLI browser to interact with the document?

      Yeah, right.

      Not sure why you'd do that.

      There's a kajillion reasons, but I doubt you care because you're stuck in self-destructive a "no software made after 1977 can possibly be any good" mindset.

      What more can you do? What can you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      Loops, variables, pipes, etc.

      What TASKS do you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      Excuse me, for a moment there I thought I was talking to a normal human being speaking normal human being English, and not some kind of ridiculous caricature of a bearded Unix hacker. If you're unable to separate the concept of "tasks" from "features", then I guess it's pretty hopeless, huh?

      The learning curve is irrelevant when you're comparing capabilities. What matters is how much can be done, not how much can be done by a naive user within 10 minutes.

      Why? By what metrics?

      Similarly an OS might be easy to use, but over the long term less useful than one that takes longer to learn but can do more.

      Ok I'll bite: what OS is "less useful" than another? In what way?

      Your example is bogus. The 777 is easier to learn to fly,

      The example didn't use learning curve as a parameter. Congratulations! Not only did you fail to understand it, you failed to even COMPREHEND it! The rare Double-Fail.

    55. Re:What's still keeping me away by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Actually I had no intention of being condescending. I recognize that there are different users with different goals, personalities, and abilities and was attempting--perhaps poorly--to communicate that.

      It would seem reasonable that one should conclude that given a distro--such as Debian--having such an impersonal feel and a list of bloody near every publicly distributed piece of Linux software that the assumption is that the person doing the installation should have some idea of what they're wanting/doing. If this is not true then Debian is not the distro for them. Why punish people that know what they want, what they're doing and more importantly appreciate that ability of choice by forcing them to hunt down the source and go build it themselves? Have you done that often? Even if you know what you're doing that's a tedious PITA. Even with the utilities provided in the distro I use, Gentoo, it can be challenging. It would be a disservice to such a user. Wouldn't it be better to leave the poweruser alone with their distro and provide the less knowledgeable user with something simpler? There was a reason why Ubuntu was created. Its installation is usually simpler than a typical Windows install and comes with a default selection of apps for common tasks. There's a guide that provides explanations and descriptions of everything should they wish to customize.

      I understand the point of the linked blog article but at the same time, the Linux community has addressed this notion by providing simplified distros. Not everyone however wants a simplified, even dare I say, dumbed down system. This goes back to what I was talking about with regards to a distro for every range on the spectrum of users. Personally I think OS X is a great operating system, it's rock solid, and highly accessible. But I'd also never use it. It makes certain assumptions about its users that does not fit my personality. Specifically I can't stand things that assume I'm incapable of deciding for myself. Would I recommend it to a non-technical person? Absolutely. Likewise I certainly cannot imagine anyone advising a neophyte, and especially not a non-technical person to go try Debian, Slackware, Gentoo, Fedora, etc.. Frankly I can't imagine they'd direct a non-technical person to install an OS on their own regardless of what it was. Direct them as to what they should have someone else install sure, but certainly not on their own. In the case of a moderately knowledgeable though new to Linux person, they'd direct them to Ubuntu or some similar distro tailored for out of the box simplicity.

      The short comings of Linux on the Desktop aren't in what the community has provided. It's the lack of computer OEMs offering a simplified Linux distro as the preinstalled OS. Most people don't know how or care to bother with installing an OS themselves. That's why Dell slaps Windows on every one of their boxes, and why Apple, OS X. They don't just toss a disc into the box and tell them to install it themselves. It doesn't matter how simple you make the process these folks aren't going to do it themselves.

      I'm also not sure how purposefully lacking support for a given piece of software, thus forcing the user to go get source code and build it themselves isn't telling them to "get stuffed". In the open-source and more specifically *nix community, traditionally the author of a piece of software isn't also in the business of providing support for specific OS flavors. This responsibility falls on distro authors to take the source and create a package out of it that works for their distro. To do it any other way would be logistically impractical. Providing statically linked binaries has technical impracticalities and would be besieged with incompatibilities anyway.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    56. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      So you open it up in Vimperator (which appears to be Firefox), but keep a CLI handy in another window (or another computer entirely-- after all windows are a nasty GUI concept you hate!) with Lynx to fill-in forms? One GUI browser to look at the pretty pictures, and another CLI browser to interact with the document?

      Vimperator puts a command line at the bottom of the firefox window (and removes the menu/toolbar) so I can view a document graphically and manipulate it textually within the same window. It's a pretty wonderful fusion.

      What TASKS do you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      Ok, ok fair enough. Here's one I encountered not too long ago. We have a folder full of image files, either TIFF or JPG, but they were saved without extensions. Add the proper extension to each file, and convert every TIFF that doesn't have a JPG counterpart to JPG, saving the TIFF original.

      The GUI user who brought me this task had no clue how to do it with a GUI. I have no clue how to do it with a GUI. It was only a couple lines in Bash though. You could, I suppose, write a custom batch rename GUI for such a task. But in order to do so, you'd have to use a command language anyway, so why not cut out the middle man?

      The average GUI user would right click and open every file and manually convert each one with "save as". That gets exceedingly tedious after the first couple dozen. If they invested that time in learning Bash (or PowerShell, or even VB), they'd save time in the long run.

      The example didn't use learning curve as a parameter. Congratulations! Not only did you fail to understand it, you failed to even COMPREHEND it! The rare Double-Fail.

      Really? Because I'm pretty sure you said:

      Being easier-to-learn *makes* it superior. Way to miss the point. "If you ignore the fact that it can transport 200+ people in comfort, safety at 550 MPH, the 777 is far inferior to the Wright Flyer."

      If "being easier to learn" doesn't refer to the learning curve, then I don't know wtf it's supposed to mean. If the analogy in quotes isn't intended to clarify the point immediately preceding it that I allegedly missed, then I don't know what it was for. Clearly I did not comprehend it, but the fail is not mine.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    57. Re:What's still keeping me away by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between what a particular distro offers and what distros are offered. There are distros that provide intimate control and flexibility over an installation and some that provide a highly practical set of default choices as well as distros that are everywhere in between. There's nothing however that can eliminate the choice of what OS, or in the case of Linux what distro within that broader choice. Sure you can pick a particular OEM and what they install on their machines but you're still choosing. It's no different than going out to buy a car. The customer needs to do a bit of upfront work. If the car seems overly complicated with electronic gadgetry to them, they move on to something else, they don't demand the manufacturer rip out these gadgets that other people appreciate being there. That defeats the whole point of why Linux has the plethora of distros it does. The potential Linux user needs to ask a few questions of someone in the know just like you'd ask a car guy about a good car for you.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    58. Re:What's still keeping me away by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Vimperator puts a command line at the bottom of the firefox window (and removes the menu/toolbar) so I can view a document graphically and manipulate it textually within the same window. It's a pretty wonderful fusion.

      Under what Laws of Time and Space is using that *not* using a GUI? "Yes, CLIs are superior. I know because I use this GUI all the time. It kind of resembles a CLI if you squint a bit."

      If you believe CLIs are that superior, why are *you* of all people not using one? Christ. Now you're delusional *and* a hypocrite.

      Here's one I encountered not too long ago. We have a folder full of image files, either TIFF or JPG, but they were saved without extensions. Add the proper extension to each file, and convert every TIFF that doesn't have a JPG counterpart to JPG, saving the TIFF original.

      I love these crazy examples. How often do you have to do that? Once a day? Once a week? Once every 10 years? Maybe?

      The GUI user who brought me this task had no clue how to do it with a GUI. I have no clue how to do it with a GUI.

      So you know for sure CLIs are more powerful than GUIs, but you don't know how to fucking USE ONE?! Tell us again why you're qualified to have an opinion on this point?

      It was only a couple lines in Bash though. You could, I suppose, write a custom batch rename GUI for such a task.

      It's also only a few lines of AppleScript, or JScript or VBScript.

      The average GUI user would right click and open every file and manually convert each one with "save as". That gets exceedingly tedious after the first couple dozen.

      That says nothing about GUIs or CLIs, it only says if someone is ignorant of computers they might do the task manually. It's just as likely this hypothetical person would manually convert each one on the CLI.

      If the analogy in quotes isn't intended to clarify the point immediately preceding it that I allegedly missed, then I don't know what it was for.

      It is, but you're thinking too narrowly. First statement was specific to ease-of-learning. You got that.

      But the second part (in quotes) was a more generalized example lampooning your method of arbitrarily discarding aspects of the product you didn't like in order to make it more competitive. In this second part, I used passenger capacity, speed, and safety as the criteria I was ignoring, *not* ease-of-use. It wasn't intended to clarify the preceding sentence, but to expand on it.

      Note that this isn't the only place you think to narrowly. For example, this entire conversation!

    59. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Under what Laws of Time and Space is using that *not* using a GUI?

      The one where commands to the browser are given textually, line by line. It's not that hard to figure out. I've admitted from the very beginning that there's a set of visually oriented tasks for which a GUI is the natural choice. It is in no way hypocritical of me to use them where appropriate. Nice try though.

      I love these crazy examples. How often do you have to do that? Once a day? Once a week? Once every 10 years? Maybe?

      I usually have a GUI user come ask me to do something that I can do with a one or two liner every week or so.

      So you know for sure CLIs are more powerful than GUIs, but you don't know how to fucking USE ONE?! Tell us again why you're qualified to have an opinion on this point?

      Ok, so how would you do this graphically?

      It's also only a few lines of AppleScript, or JScript or VBScript.

      Which are also command line environments.

      But the second part (in quotes) was a more generalized example lampooning your method of arbitrarily discarding aspects of the product you didn't like in order to make it more competitive. In this second part, I used passenger capacity, speed, and safety as the criteria I was ignoring, *not* ease-of-use. It wasn't intended to clarify the preceding sentence, but to expand on it.

      Hm, I sort of see that now. It's not a very natural analogy, because "ease of use" isn't really a function. If I give you a widget and you ask "what does it do?", "It's easy to use!" isn't really the answer you're looking for.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    60. Re:What's still keeping me away by Troy+Roberts · · Score: 1
      1. Yes, having choice can be confusing. However, I, for one, would rather have choice than not.
      2. I have no idea where you are finding the documentation for windows. It is horrible. The documentation on linux may not be perfect, but I think it competes with windows rather well.
      3. Specialty software from a hardware vendor will always have this issue. I wonder if your mom's sewing machine has software for a Mac.
      4. I have always found plenty of support for Linux on the web. The same place I have to find support for windows, unless I want to pay large sums of money to Microsoft for support
      5. I admit that adding a new repository or installing from a deb or rpm might be a little more difficult. However, if you are installing software the is available in the repository, it is much easier than windows. Further, if you are using appropriate repositories, you will have very few or no instances where one software package breaks another. I have had this happen many times on windows, because of incompatible DLLs.
      6. Again, I wonder what windows you have been using. Windows has a command interpreter, actually two, Command.com and PowerShell. There are many things like resetting DHCP values that are easier on the command line than in a GUI on windows.
    61. Re:What's still keeping me away by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Um... this is more like Joe Driver who's been running around in his 1985 Ford since forever... goes to the Saturn lot, sees 50 different models all with every sort of gadget imaginable included... he reads a bunch of reviews and only learns that reviewers love anything gadgetry... gives up trying to decide which is the best choice and goes to the used-car lot where the choices are, at least by his lights, saner.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    62. Re:What's still keeping me away by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Confusing distros

      Just pick one and run with it. It's all linux on x86 so whatever application runs on distro X can by run on distro Y with about the only exception of the stuff designed to configure and update packages. Only sysadmins have to worry about multiple distros and don't really worry much about it.

      Poor documentation

      While the gnome people seem to be allergic to documentation just about everything else that is over a year out of alpha testing has a manual page.

      Software

      The entire point of having a computer is to run software, and if there is nothing on a platform that can do the job you want then you don't use that platform. However WINE or virtualbox etc may solve the problem if it's just that one app that isn't used all the time. I've retired a win2k machine that was just running one app because I can run the thing a lot faster on a new linux box under virtualbox.

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface

      Sorry, but this has to be said. IA command line is still very useful becuase it gives you more options when you actually spell out the words instead of choosing between a limited number of pictures to point at. It's as true now as it was on the GUI only Atari ST in the 1980s which became far more useful once a command line tool was added.

    63. Re:What's still keeping me away by dbIII · · Score: 1

      What TASKS do you do with a CLI that you can't with a GUI?

      Simple: any task that the writer of the GUI hasn't thought of but the CLI is capable of.
      This argument was old and pointless in the 1980s with people hitting the restrictions of GUI only environments such as the Atari ST. Eventually you want to make a choice on a computer that is different from childishly pointing at a choice of a few pictures and instead you use words to convey your meaning and get more things done.
      The above of course is blatantly obvious and both platforms have a mixture of both interfaces, but of course the REAL argument here is a stupid tribal pissing contest over which team is better manifesting as a stupid proxy argument where plenty of fake ignorance is on show. The answer to that is MS Windows works for some things and linux works for others and nobody should give a shit as to which one is "better".

    64. Re:What's still keeping me away by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      Choices are not confusing, when one is presented with meaningful and pertinent plain-English information about which one to choose.

      Or is too-bolder and that a radical thing to say? Mod me Troll then.

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    65. Re:What's still keeping me away by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That's a very good point. Sometimes it's not the plethora of choices that confuses, it's how they're presented. Too often only the technical-jargon names are given, with no guidelines or "common-sense descriptions".

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    66. Re:What's still keeping me away by pxc · · Score: 1

      The main default edition is Linux Mint Gnome 32-bit edition. Linux Mint is a dolled up Ubuntu re-spin, and as such I'd say it probably emphasizes the same release as its parent distro.

      In any case, they should all generally work equally well. Instead of looking for an official endorsement, glance through a handful of screenshots and pick whichever one feels best to you.

      When there's an expectation for "default", or "official" versions of anything, its easy for us to become worried when we don't see that. But even in the absence of canonical guidance, choice doesn't have to be hard.

      If you need assurance, then let me assure you that you'll be happy with whatever choice of desktop environment you make. And why not? You're the one choosing! ;-)

    67. Re:What's still keeping me away by pxc · · Score: 1

      You definitely don't have dependency hell in a high-level package manager like Synaptic, or its CLI brethren, apt and aptitude. Unless your distribution is broken (and most aren't), your end-user package manager will handle the dependencies for you automatically.

      As for browsing packages in a hierarchy, I think you have a point there. Viewing the repository as a dependency tree should be possible, and, if implemented correctly, quite elegant as well. There may already be some package managers that do this.

      The granularity thing is a lame complaint, IMO. Without that granularity, installs would always be huge, and tweaks to small portions of a suite of apps would require large downloads and recompilations. What you really need is something that hides much of that complexity for you. In that case, using Synaptic is looking in the wrong place. Try the Ubuntu Software Centre, which is designed to do what you want Synaptic to do.

      Two-part installs for games do suck. But lawmakers and lawyers would be better people to brainstorm with about this than developers.

    68. Re:What's still keeping me away by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Boy, this is rich. If the idea that a graphical program might have a command line interface causes you this much distress, you need to relax. As with most things in life interfaces don't necessarily fall into two distinct categories, but there's a continuum. Yes, even the most graphical of programs will have some command line elements. If anything that speaks to the power of the command line.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    69. Re:What's still keeping me away by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      What command line? Mom and Dad Downloaded Installed and use And Never heard of it!!! Mint 9!! (Thanks Mint!!!)

    70. Re:What's still keeping me away by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      Hmm Chevy Ford Dodge Nissan Etc..Make Model You sir Yugo God Gave us a Brain and thus we make choices! You sir Are a Sheep! BABABABABA

    71. Re:What's still keeping me away by puterg33k · · Score: 1

      Little support (if not openly hostile) There aren't a lot of places to call for Linux support. And a lot of the places you can go for support on the net are filled with Linux fanatics who are openly hostile to Windows switchers and newbies. The level of "you don't belong here" attitude towards newbies in Linux circles makes Apple fans look civil.

      I agree that it's not a client OS if you have to interface with the command prompt.

      In any facet of society or group that one enters, they undergo a bit of hazing. I don't agree with it, hell; I don't even like it. However, that seems to be the way it goes. Yes Linux users can be mean. Then again, so could Joseph Stalin...

      I think half the reason people use Linux is it's a challenge, most people just want to turn the damn thing on and have it work. Half the time I want one or the other depending on my mood.

      Like all things someone sees a potential for profit and wants to leave their mark. Heh, is Linux marketable... Not really... lol

      Above all, one thing I'll never understand is peoples loyalty to corporations. The mines better than yours attitude, are we that petty? Ewwww, humans

    72. Re:What's still keeping me away by kmeher · · Score: 1
      I'm a fan of linux and will respond to you from a professional point of view (as I am a Linux developper in a company).

      Confusing distros

      This is normal and the Open Source community will see it as an advantage but they doesn't see that it is a great challenge for the end user. I get lige 10 questions a day about which distro to use.

      Poor documentation

      Yes the documentation isn't really there. The documentation that exists is for developpers/scripters/sysadmins/.... not for the user who wants to change the name of a file he created.

      Software, Software, Software

      Here I can't accord you the point. This is not a distro/Linux fans/... problem, it is an enterprises problem. There isn't companies who targets the Linux market beacuase : the share isn't great and the development for the differences between the linux distros is overwhelming. Also changing the way things turn is done in a blink of the eyes without further notice.

      Little support (if not openly hostile)

      Here I must completely disagree. Because the help is present. Ask a question in the net and you'll find yourself with tons of responses. I've never posted a question because I had always found the responses through the older questions posted.

      Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user

      This is also a problem from the companies. Even if a company works on the Linux part, it doesn't do it correctly because it is always on the lowest importance. Take the example of VMWare, their installer is a great piece of software, but just lacks a GUI to install.

      Still too much reliance on the command line interface

      Yes that's a great problem too. Nothing to add. For me a GNU/Linux system isn't a good choice for an average user. Now the solutions ? To get it to a better level, a new way of thinking of the OSS must be made. OSS is different from do things partly. If you want users adopt GNU/Linux, the software must be made like pros. A better way, is a to make a consorsium that declares the minimum things in a Linux desktop (libraries, kernel version ...) and then decide about a standard protocol (not saying the X11) in the desktop GUIs because developping a GUI application is always subject to the KDE/Gnome/LXDE/... problems. I won't be giving the perfect solution, but these are some lines to think about.

  33. reality check by Tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and amazing strides in usability

    Uh, where?

    Every time I checked, both KDE and Gnome were pretty much busy copying whatever the latest UI abominations out of Redmond were at the time. Their UI design people completely ignore usability, and the fact that Microsoft can inflict great usability pains on their users simply because they have so many and most of them are locked in.

    An alternative OS needs to provide something better, not just a cheap copy.

    There are a few innovations and advances, I'll grant that. But the main interfaces are crap, pure and simple. Because usability is expensive. You simply can not create good usability at a programmer's desk. You need user testing, labs, feedback cycles and, most importantly, a clear vision. Some non-programmer understanding of design would also help a lot.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:reality check by destroyer661 · · Score: 1

      Uh, where?

      Every time I checked, both KDE and Gnome were pretty much busy copying whatever the latest UI abominations out of Redmond were at the time.

      Hahaha... ohhhh if only you knew how wrong you are...

      --
      #define true false // Have fun debugging!
    2. Re:reality check by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Agreed 100%.

      I'd add that usability is often a rather different discipline to software design, and for some reason usability experts don't seem to be too common in the F/OSS world. My guess is that they tried telling a few F/OSS developers how unusable their product was and are still in hospital.

    3. Re:reality check by raijinsetsu · · Score: 1

      The UI was "copied" out of Redmond because that's what Windows users complained about: "The UI is too different from Windows, and I can't find my way around." You cannot reinvent the desktop UI from scratch and expect people to switch easily. It's like migrating someone from the command-line of DOS 3 directly in to the flashy GUI of Windows 7 or Mac - they will not like it.

      The real problem with Linux, and I'm talking the major distros that have been targeting desktop users for years, is that hardware and software vendors refuse to pick up the platform (for the most part). Until the vendors start releasing for Linux what users are already using in Windows (Photoshop, anyone? Yes, I love GiMP too, but some people don't) then Linux will have a smaller market share.

    4. Re:reality check by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      Well, last week I installed Mint Linux as my main OS on my laptop. While at first I thought that the cube desktop was bit of a gimmick I actually find it really useful. OS X has spaces which are similar but - as far as I can see - nowhere near as customisable. Windows doesn't seem to have anything like it. I've set it up so that right clicking in the top corner will take you to the next/previous desktop and doing the same in the bottom corner will do the same but take the current window with you. Add to that the fact that it is easy to make a window always stay on the current desktop (I think you can do this with OS X but it's in some menu somewhere, not easily accessible in the top-left window menu) and you've got something far more powerful than Microsoft's massively limited drag-to-the-side tiling thing.

      Obviously this only one small aspect of it but I would argue that usability is one of the best parts of Linux. The only trouble that the software I need doesn't run on Linux so it makes the whole thing academic.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    5. Re:reality check by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

      Not only that, you need all the other applications follow your usability and that is where the main troubles always start.

    6. Re:reality check by boxwood · · Score: 1

      Do a little exercise. Invent a user interface that people are going to know how to use and give access to the most needed features.

      People are used to there being an X to click to close a window. They are used to having a taskbar at the bottom of the screen. When you invent your revolutionary new interface, be damned sure you know what you're doing if you make things different from what people are expecting.

      And yeah IBM, Novel and others paid for a lot of usability studies for Linux. The result of those studies showed that people were familiar with concepts such as windows, buttons, scrollbars, dragging and dropping, taskbars, notifications areas and menus. OMG but Microsoft has those things, and we need to be DIFFERENT! So we should ignore all those usability studies and make a square wheel because we don't want to be like MS?

      Thats what Apple did, I suppose. But apple has the reality distortion field where you can have a bad UI, but if you have neat special effects to go along with it then its the best interface evar!

      Linux does not possess a reality distortion field. But it does have a good UI. MS did usability studies. Linux did usability studies. Some of the things they came up with were similar. Therefore some UI elements were similar.

      It is not a cheap copy. In fact I've noticed some UI elements in Windows 7 that were "copied" from linux.

    7. Re:reality check by neumayr · · Score: 1

      To be fair, KDE4's desktop integration is better than that Windows provides. Not as solid yet, but better. Closer to MacOS X than Windows.
      Sure, it's probably copied, but not cheaply.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    8. Re:reality check by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      The real problem with Linux, and I'm talking the major distros that have been targeting desktop users for years, is that hardware and software vendors refuse to pick up the platform (for the most part). Until the vendors start releasing for Linux what users are already using in Windows (Photoshop, anyone? Yes, I love GiMP too, but some people don't) then Linux will have a smaller market share.

      most likely because they depend upon Microsoft's market development funds... start supporting Linux and find you fail to qualify for the big handbacks... difficulty is proving that this IS happening.

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    9. Re:reality check by Tom · · Score: 1

      Do a little exercise. Invent a user interface that people are going to know how to use and give access to the most needed features.

      Thanks, but I'll pass on that. Because I know that I am not a usability expert. I know enough about the topic to avoid the dumbest mistakes, and spot them when others make them, but then again I'd never call myself a painter just because I can spot the differences between a da Vinci and a kid abusing some crayons and a perfectly innocent piece of paper.

      People are used to

      And that is a factor in usability. But it is not the only one. People act as if "that's how the guy with the largest market share does it" were the only aspect you'd ever have to consider.

      Linux does not possess a reality distortion field. But it does have a good UI.

      No, it does have a UI that closely resembles what most people are used to. That says nothing about quality. Coke is a popular drink, that doesn't mean it is an essential part of a good diet.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    10. Re:reality check by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Usability is a lot more then the desktop UI. If those are simply synonyms in your head, you're just plain old wrong. It's how easy it is to go get software. It's how fast you can find a file that you need which you saved a month ago... somewhere. It's how intuitive it is to find out where to adjust the how screensaver comes up. It's about how many panes you can have open in the file browser. It's how fast a newb can figure out how to set up a router and get to the web.

      In my own recent experience switching from XP to Ubuntu, which may not count for much, the Linux platform is better usability wise.

    11. Re:reality check by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I'd add that usability is often a rather different discipline to software design, and for some reason usability experts don't seem to be too common in the F/OSS world.

      Usability advice on open source projects is, at best, completely ignored. At worst, they're yelled at for pointing out solvable issues with providing patches. This is untested advice, of course, as genuine usability testing requires at least some amount of money and most open source projects won't shell out for it.

      (There are exceptions; both KDE and GNOME used to do good usability work, but I haven't been keeping up on what they're doing now. Firefox managed to get usability by giving usability-obsessed developers say on UI-related development. But finding people who are good at both usability *and* development is near-impossible.)

      Another poster here mentioned this (and sadly I didn't bookmark it), but the real attribute lacking from open source developers is *empathy*. Before you can make any advances in usability, you have to care that your software is hard-to-use, and frankly I don't think most open source developers care.

      My guess is that they tried telling a few F/OSS developers how unusable their product was and are still in hospital.

      Yah pretty much.

    12. Re:reality check by Reziac · · Score: 1

      And my response was the opposite:

      Why does the linux desktop look more like a Mac every time I see a fresh one?? Why would I want a cheap copy of a desktop I dislike??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:reality check by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      I want to like kde because of its better customizability, but I've tried it in three major incarnations are there's always been something broken that I needed. Once an auto-update broke things so badly that I couldn't luanch the GUI.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    14. Re:reality check by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      It's how fast a newb can figure out how to set up a router and get to the web.

      How many beginners set up routers? Also, is using the computer for routing, or is it using a dedicated device?

    15. Re:reality check by Tom · · Score: 1

      Like so many things, we fortunately don't have to discuss what "usability" means. The term has been defined by ISO as "The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use."

      You could have a different personal definition, but if you want to engage in an exchange with others, it would be better to follow the common one.

      So, if you want an in-depth discussion, you need to first
      a) specify which users we are talking about
      b) specify which goals we are talking about
      c) specify the context of use

      If we're talking about regular computer users for private use in their home on a desktop PC, then installing software is a secondary concern, setting up the desktop background and screensaver are primary concerns, panes in a file browser are tertiary at best, and setting up an Internet connection is tricky because half of them will ask their geeky son, brother or nephew without even trying.

      The really important things are neither of those. The really important things are the day-to-day actions of the typical user for his day-to-day goals. The usability of the e-mail client and browser is probably ten times as important as the usability of the OS or window manager for this. However, there are things that make or break usability even here. For example, the "ribbons" thing has been ripped to shreds by every usability expert outside Microsoft. Hiding seldom-used menu options sounds like a good idea at first, studies have shown it confuses people because the menus keep changing.

      So what can a good OS do, UI-wise? It can provide the proper "context for use". Stuff like Expose makes the average user happier than virtual desktops (or the Mac equivalent, Spaces) because an overview perspective is closer to his everyday experience than panning around a number of desks. And, despite me personally prefering to have at least 3 buttons on my mouse, a single mouse button is probably better for average users, quite a lot of them don't even get the concept of "right click".

      Now if you're talking about geeks as the specified users, then a lot of things change. :-)

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    16. Re:reality check by HeckRuler · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I was trying to paraphrase ISO's definition in a way that helped make my point. Let me rephrase it, usability does not stop at the user interface. Moving buttons around, making them different shapes, having them do crazy ribbony things, are usability issues, but that's not the end of usability. If you don't care about anything other then the least sophisticated, then yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

      The usability of the e-mail client and browser is probably ten times as important as...

      And for average user, the e-mail client IS the browser. So the usability of the OS (which is what we're talking about here) starts and stops with a button that opens firefox. And hell, that's not even the OS, that's the desktop. But users DO occasionally use the other programs, or want to affect the OS in some way. Sure, most of their time is on the browser, on facebook, doing whatever. But completely ignoring the use-case where they plug in another monitor, or whatever, hurts the usability of Linux.

      Hmm, you know how linux geeks can over estimate user's technical skills? Well I think you're failing in the other direction by treating the users as neanderthals that need instructions on how to move the mouse.

    17. Re:reality check by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, Gnome (at least in Ubuntu) had some nice usability improvements, next to providing actual new stuff to the desktop, most of not being a copycat of something. I guess this is all up to perspective.

      Besides this, OS (and software) developers copy each other all the time when it comes to usability improvements. I'm seeing stuff in Win7 that was in Linux software and OSX for years before that.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    18. Re:reality check by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      Really? OMG Sorry Docking bar has been out YEARS Before MS even had toughs of slapping it on Win 7! Snapping windows? No been on KDE for a wile! Windows 7 Copy's LOTS from LINUX AND MAC! Pull The head out of the Butt!!

  34. NeXT and me (you) by choke · · Score: 1

    What content? I've supported the desktop world for the entire existence of desktops. The whole landscape of 'content' as the term is misapplied here changes every 2 years or so. What exists today, will be forgotten tomorrow.

    So how's this for funny. I just got a job at Apple - something I never thought I'd do. Even funnier though is that I'm using a mac, which is something I'd have put money on not doing. It runs UNIX, but moreso, it has put UNIX in the hands of the -least- technically motivated users, and done so with deftness.

    So, I call bullshit on this. It can, and is being done. Just not done right, right now.

    It's easy to be a skeptic and predict failure, and even easier for those who cannot or do not try to succeed.

    --
    "No good deed goes unpunished"
    1. Re:NeXT and me (you) by neumayr · · Score: 1

      There is the "fragmentation" argument that makes the "Let's turn NeXT and MacOS into MacOS X" success story not applicable here.
      Apple had a single vision, and a bunch of very talented people working towards it. Linux has a few dozens visions, and a bunch of very talented people working towards their favorite one.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
  35. Sad by zn0k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is kind of sad how obvious the whole "flamewars for ad views" thing has become on this site.

  36. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by neumayr · · Score: 3, Funny

    The only thing that keeps businesses running Windows at all is the large volume of industry-specific applications (and even web sites) that only work on Win32 and IE. It certainly isn't lower support costs.

    Uh huh. Even if that were true, you're expecting them to reimplement all those application to what, Linux and Firefox?

    This story is a troll, yes, but as long as it's here, let's feed it!

    --
    Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
  37. Oh come on. by Dancindan84 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    10 years ago before the iPod was released if someone had told me that Apple would have a wildly popular music device, a huge share of the smart phone market, a respectable piece of the desktop market and unbelievable sway over industry direction I'd have been hard pressed to say I thought it would happen. At the time they were fairly niche to graphic work for the most part, similar to how Linux is currently doing it's best in the server niche.

    "2010 is the year of the Linux desktop!!" isn't realistic, but neither is "Linux on the desktop is dead!!"

    --
    "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    1. Re:Oh come on. by Combatso · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple is a company with a leader, they set clear goals and work towards that... While I see your point, I don't think you can really draw comparisons. I don't think we will ever see the age of "linux on the desktop", however since Android, ChromeOS and all that mature we may see an "age of [linux in disguise]" on the desktop. My point being, a community can't drive the market to linux, but a big player like G certainly can... IF they have the right people with the right vision.

    2. Re:Oh come on. by Dancindan84 · · Score: 1

      I agree. If Linux ever makes a serious push into the desktop market I believe it will be on the back of a company that's pushing it there, and I imagine it won't be exactly what we think of as "Linux" today.

      When you look at things like netbooks, who's to say the desktop of tomorrow is going to resemble the desktop of today at all? Linux may never be right for today's desktops, but tomorrow's desktops may be right for Linux.

      The tech industry changes too much and too fast for there to be a fat lady singing for Linux (or anything else) on the desktop.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    3. Re:Oh come on. by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      While I see your point, I don't think you can really draw comparisons.

      I think you can - the 1990's was full of "Apple/Mac is dead" articles in magazines and on web sites. Until development comes to a halt you shouldn't count on something dying.

      The funniest thing about those mac is dead articles was that they usually included some "helpful" advice to Apple about how to turn their fortunes around - advice which was usually the exact opposite of what Steve Jobs did to turn the company around.

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    4. Re:Oh come on. by Combatso · · Score: 1

      my point was, there is no point man for the linux community. So the community as a whole lacks vision. Sure there are a few key players, and some money bouncing around but there is no clear leader and never will be. Its very openness prevents that. It will always be on the fringe, because there is nothing to keep you on Linux once you go.

    5. Re:Oh come on. by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      It will always be on the fringe

      But being on the fringe is far, far away from being dead.

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    6. Re:Oh come on. by Combatso · · Score: 1

      thats true... i don't agree with the 'linux on the desktop is dead' statement... only way it would be dead is if there was no active development.. which clearly isn't the case.

  38. Regarding Flash by cedars · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "the fragmentation of the Linux platform and the hurdles presented by..."alpha-quality" drivers for audio and video hardware made success elusive for the [Linux] Flash development team."

    Okay, fair enough. But how does Adobe/Macromedia then explain the failure to deliver a decent plug-in on the two other major platforms, Mac OS X and Windows?

    1. Re:Regarding Flash by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      How about "they don't know how to make efficient code"?

      Give the Flash developers computers that were mid-range five years ago, because frankly that's what most people are still using. Only a tiny fraction of users keeps up-to-date with the high-end computer hardware of the month.

  39. So one guy lost faith--why is this headlin news? by spikenerd · · Score: 1

    So maybe Linux will camp out in the server and smart-phone markets for a while. Maybe vendors don't believe in Linux on the desktop yet. Whose to say it will never move into that market? Commercial products die when they lack the market share to support the salaries of the programmers. Free software lives until the last guy stops donating his time. We are nowhere near that. Linux continues to make a phenomenal difference to me, and I will continue to contribute as long as it keeps the ideals of freedom. Small != dead.

  40. Really I would say Linux on the desktop is a safe by DarkOx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look at it this way. The operating system is becoming more and more a commodity. Most of the content "desktop" users want is online, and is going to be accessed via browsers. The other things they want to do are pretty much play video disks (blue-ray is a problem right now) and do pretty basic document editing and e-mail. There are some users that want do basic video work and like as well.

    None of these things require a finely tuned OS any more, even Linux with its recent advances in hardware detection and automatic configuration do a good enough job that all this is possible with little technical know how. I don't even have an xorg.conf on the system I am using right now. Android phones are more capable than the PCs most of us were using less than a decade ago. Linux certainly can be the platform on which an end user interface is build and its proven it can host the ever more limited selection of applications.

    There is not going to be a market for Operating systems that have licensing costs for home users pretty soon. Look how popular the IPAD is! More and more people are realizing what they want is a smart phone with a word processor and some games, a PIM, and financial package of some type; not a "home PC". Linux devices are perfect for that role; as Droid has already proven. Just wait until some of the tablet manufacturers like Motion Computing marry their existing hardware (tablets with stands and removable keyboards) to a droid like platform and target consumers. My guess is they will have the same success Apple is enjoying.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  41. X is Dead by jokermatt999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "(X) is Dead" is just as unrealistic as "(X) is the Year of the Linux Desktop". I think the TFA is right that Linux may never gain a majority share, but that doesn't mean it's *dead*.

  42. Linux is winning where it counts today-handhelds by jothar+hillpeople · · Score: 1

    Desktop innovation is dead. The only active innovation is on handheld devices, and linux (in the form of Android OS) is quickly becoming the biggest game in town. If you count handhelds and Android OS, linux would have a much higher user percentage.

  43. I get the odd feeling... by dreemernj · · Score: 1

    That the number of "Desktop Linux is Dead" stories is inversely proportional to the number of "PC Gaming is Dead" stories.

    --
    1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
  44. Not just the Linux desktop by bergie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd say, the concept of desktop as it was defined through 80s and 90s is beginning to die. Touch interfaces, actually well-working mobile devices and web services ("the cloud") are taking over more and more of the desktop's traditional role. More than a problem for the Linux desktop, I see this shift as a big opportunity as the importance of the traditional vendors like Microsoft is declining. Here are some ideas on what the "Linux desktop" ought to do: http://bergie.iki.fi/blog/the_web_and_the_free_desktop/

    --
    Midgard Project - Open Source CMS
    1. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by Ephemeriis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say, the concept of desktop as it was defined through 80s and 90s is beginning to die.

      Agreed.

      Smartphones, iPhones, iPods, and iPads are becoming major players. We've got an assortment of ebook readers and netbooks and whatnot that don't really run a traditional "desktop" OS of any kind. Even conventional Windows machines are shipping with stripped-down non-desktop environments loaded on them. My new Dell latitude came with some kind of Linux-based instant-on environment for surfing the web and reading email. Folks buy televisions and set-top boxes that'll stream content from YouTube or Hulu or Google or Netflix or wherever.

      I have no doubt that Windows is going to hang around for a long time. And we're going to have desktop computers running desktop OS'es for a long time. But I think the relevance of the desktop is waning.

      Folks are more interested in the content than how they access it. Folks want to pull up Facebook, they don't really care if they're doing it on an iPhone, or an Android phone, or a Mac, or a Windows box, or what. They just want their Facebook.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    2. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > Smartphones, iPhones, iPods, and iPads are becoming major players.

      What are some Linux-friendly (as in completely administerable/syncronizable etc., true Shell + SSH would helpf for remote server admin'ing) smartphone's out there worth getting?
      Was thinking of getting the N900, but then Nokia announced dropping the OS. No experience with Android etc.. What's the deal with Meego...something worthwhile? Insides are appreciated.

    3. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by martyw · · Score: 1

      Yep, iPads are predicted to sell about 47-50 million in 2011, most of them replacing desktops and laptops, that would mean huge shift of critical mass of users towards another type of computer. Still, second popular tablet OS seam to be Android..

    4. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by tangelogee · · Score: 1

      I'd say, the concept of desktop as it was defined through 80s and 90s is beginning to die.

      Agreed.

      Smartphones, iPhones, iPods, and iPads are becoming major players. We've got an assortment of ebook readers and netbooks and whatnot that don't really run a traditional "desktop" OS of any kind. Even conventional Windows machines are shipping with stripped-down non-desktop environments loaded on them. My new Dell latitude came with some kind of Linux-based instant-on environment for surfing the web and reading email. Folks buy televisions and set-top boxes that'll stream content from YouTube or Hulu or Google or Netflix or wherever.

      Exactly. And for the vast majority of people, the reason why all those examples do well (without Windows) is because there is (for the most part) no real need to configure, finagle, tweak, etc. what it is doing. It Just Works. However, with Linux as a desktop, that, for all intents and purposes, is not the case.

      I have no doubt that Windows is going to hang around for a long time. And we're going to have desktop computers running desktop OS'es for a long time. But I think the relevance of the desktop is waning.

      This is true. Most people just want to get to teh interwebz, and don't care how, asd long as it is fast and they don't have to do much to get there.

      Folks are more interested in the content than how they access it. Folks want to pull up Facebook, they don't really care if they're doing it on an iPhone, or an Android phone, or a Mac, or a Windows box, or what. They just want their Facebook.

      See above.

    5. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by proslack · · Score: 1

      You aren't considering the importance of lap/desktop computers in business. Corporations are big spenders in that sector. A smart phone is great, but not for manipulating 10,000 line spreadsheets, complex modeling, or typing up five page reports.

      --


      Floating in the black seas of infinity without a paddle.
    6. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by bergie · · Score: 1

      You can also have MeeGo or Android running on the N900. And besides that, it is sweet to have a phone where you have root.

      --
      Midgard Project - Open Source CMS
    7. Re:Not just the Linux desktop by bergie · · Score: 1

      Sure these devices are becoming more popular. But how many people go in to their office and sat at an iPad, or Android phone to work all day long. As far as comfortable way top use a computer all day long, the desktop is still way ahead of these touchscreen devices and will be for a while yet.

      Yes, I think it was Steve Jobs comparing iPad to desktops saying "desktops are like trucks", meaning you use them for the heavy lifting but not for anything fun. But this may change when productivity software catches the Touch paradigm. Remember when desktops were just for hobbyist use and the real work happened on terminal applications accessing mainframes?

      --
      Midgard Project - Open Source CMS
  45. It's not about the OS, really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Most people want to buy feelings, not actually do something useful with the machine. Example: buying a Mac because it is pretty, at least partially for the feeling of owning something aesthetically pleasing. Games fall into this category too. People will line up to hand over money to buy something that barely works because a) friends are doing it and so they want to play it too, and b) playing the game will give a feeling of accomplishment very slightly different from the feeling of accomplishment gotten by playing the last game.

    Most ways in which Linux is technically superior does not fit into this mental model of what a computer is for, and we are surprised that it doesn't have marketshare among these folks why exactly?

  46. I am going to load Ubuntu and try it out by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    I will try Ubuntu on a spare desktop and try to use it for a while and see if it holds up.
    It will be interesting to see where it fails and where it succeeds, but my friends have all said it runs very well.
    And maybe, I will never purchase an OS again.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:I am going to load Ubuntu and try it out by digitaldc · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the information!
      Driver issues and gaming apparently are the big showstoppers for Linux OS.

      --
      He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:I am going to load Ubuntu and try it out by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      You go, I would try Mint 9 first (More stable) But Ubuntu works very well! I just like Mint better! One on Suse One on Ubuntu!

  47. Predictions by GF678 · · Score: 1

    I shall predict how the comments here are going to go:

    * Someone will complain how Linux doesn't work as well as Windows for X, which is used as evidence why desktop Linux sucks.
    * Someone will counter-complain how Windows doesn't work as well as Linux for Y, which is used as evidence why complainers suck.
    * Repeat the first two endlessly
    * Someone will say Linux is free (beer/speech) and if there's a problem, you can fix it.
    * Someone will present a well thought-out essay as to why Linux has failed and continues to fail on the desktop, but will be ignored.
    * Someone will state it already IS the year of Linux on the desktop... for them, their family, friends, pets and their friend's pets.
    * There will be 1000+ comments in total.

    To add my 2c, I tried Ubuntu 10.10 recently. The supplied open-source drivers for my ATI card had working vertical sync but crap power management, so my laptop would run hot and the fans were extremely noisy. I also didn't have much customization of features due to lack of control panel. The proprietary drivers had broken vertical sync but working power management, and the catalyst control panel. I needed the control panel for various functionality and the need to run the fans correctly was not in question, but the drivers couldn't properly vsync to save their life, and so videos tore. The control panel could force vsync to be enabled, but the next time the X server restarts, it conveniently "forgets" this and tears once more. The solution is then to disable vsync and reenable it.

    I did tons of research, hoping to find a solution. There isn't none. ATI drivers are the responsibility of ATI, I am aware of that. It doesn't help that they suck balls though, and it affects the quality of my experience with Ubuntu (and hence Linux) as a whole. In the end I thought "fuck this" and went back to a working Windows 7 install.

    1. Re:Predictions by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      How do you even noticed the problem of Linux desktop is not the OS itself, but the applications.

      I also tried using my Radeon 4870X2 under Linux and the result was disastrous. The ATI proprietary (the "free" version does not even work) driver for Linux achieves the feat of being even worse than the Windows version, think of a F-16 turbine in afterburner roaring on their side and you will have my video card running under Linux.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:Predictions by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      So you mean we'll have an opinionated discussion comparing the virtues of different OSs and, due to the fact that there is no such thing as the One True OS and that each one has it's strong points and weak points, we won't reach any kind of concurrence. You say it like it's a bad thing but isn't that kind of why we're here on Slashdot? To exchange points of view and discuss matters?

      To add my $0.02, I use Windows (XP & 7), OS X and Mint Linux. I like them all. Also, the ATI graphics card in my MacBook seems to work perfectly under Linux.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    3. Re:Predictions by GF678 · · Score: 1

      How do you even noticed the problem of Linux desktop is not the OS itself, but the applications.

      Quite true, and yet people run applications, not operating systems. The OS in a means to an end and if suitable apps (or driver support in our cases) is not up to snuff, then there's little surprise if it's got low market share.

  48. Android? by DudeFromMars · · Score: 1

    A front door assault on Windows is not getting anywhere.
    Android is proving wildly popular for phones.
    If Android can prove as popular for tablets.
    If Tablets can make laptops obsolete
    If both those things happen, then Android could get somewhere.
    It will take a platform shift to displace Windows as King of the Hill.

  49. Another "Adventure in Punditry" by mlwmohawk · · Score: 1

    Let's be honest...

    What is "dead" and what is "alive" when it comes to technology? Linux has millions of users. This is a fact. It isn't dead. It isn't going to be. Will it be as popular as the Mac? Probably not. Will it be a market that people will ignore? Probably, but if there is a market of millions of possible customers and little competition, an enterprising company would be foolish not to take some notice. The problem with Mac and Windows is, well, Mac and Windows. Windows does suck. Everyone knows it. Most reluctantly use it. The Mac is better and people love their macs, but they are not as entrenched (yet) as Windows and their are issues, plus it is a more expensive platform.

    I would hazard to say that Windows and Mac are just as dead as Linux. There are no new applications. Computers themselves aren't getting faster only "wider." We are done. There's nothing left for the desktop to do. We can only improve what we have or alter the way in which we deliver services (i.e. netflix, hulu, etc.). Its a toaster or a VCR. People still buy toasters and VCRs (well DVD players), but they aren't getting any "better."

    The interesting work isn't the desktop, but the device that comes after it. Obviously phones and mobile computers are big, but that is approaching saturation as well. What's next? Is there a next? The whole tech world is search.....

  50. Partly True by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    If we are talking about world domination with the goal of being the overthow of M$ and MAC then the story is quite correct. Linux still has a shot at workstations and turnkey PC applications that use a caned desktop. Finally, if certain critical applications such as Open (Libre) Office can improve themselves to the point of being a real substitute for their M$ counterparts Linux still has a shot as the desktop OS in office settings that stick to the basics. Of course, it will remain the desktop of choice for open source developers, home brew 'Makers' and computer hobby types.

    I've installed Linux on an older ThinkPad after discovering that the Windows Wifi support didn't work (and I did NOT have the restore CD or partition) while Linux DID get my Wifi to work. My desktop dual boots between Windows 7 and Linux, though I rarely use Windows, it's there for the occasional something that hasn't been ported to Linux yet.

    Let the companies trying to make money selling Linux on the desktop worry about the lack of adoption, while those of us who are using it just enjoy. It ain't going away.

  51. Backroom deals killed Linux on the Desktop. by miffo.swe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Every time Linux has been on its way to success on the desktop Microsoft has stepped in and made its life short. Why did Dell despite pretty decent figures refuse to sell their Linux desktops in the open? Why was it only avaliable in a very limited amount of countries? Why did a computer with Linux cost more than one without an OS or FreeDos, or Windows?

    Linux was well enroute to gooble the whole netbook market up when suddenly Asus ditched it overnight after hard pressure from Microsoft. Resellers refused to take it in despite good sales figures.

    This has nothing to do with Linux in itself. It could be the best OS in the world but it still dont have a chance until the monopoly is broken. The OEMs are held by the balls by Microsoft and nothing will change until that grip is lessened.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
    1. Re:Backroom deals killed Linux on the Desktop. by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1

      Why did Dell despite pretty decent figures refuse to sell their Linux desktops in the open?

      As I recall they showed up right next to the windows boxes in the little grid thingy. How is that hidden?

      Why was it only avaliable in a very limited amount of countries?

      Because they were testing the market. You don't spend millions launching a product line worldwide without a very good idea it will succeed.

      Why did a computer with Linux cost more than one without an OS or FreeDos, or Windows?

      Clearly because Dell believed they would cost more to support than Windows boxes. Probably because of driver issues, returns from clueless cheapskates, and separate low-volume licensing deals for the non-free bits they had to add to make a usable Linux desktop (e.g. DVD/MPEG stuff).

    2. Re:Backroom deals killed Linux on the Desktop. by dewatf · · Score: 1

      Linux has never ever been on its way to desktop success. It has never had more than 1% of the desktop market and is not growing. That is the entire point of the PC World article. That is not the result of a conspiracy, and referring to PC World article is not trolling.

      Most people don't want to have to bother with updating an OS, let alone partitioning and installing one and hunting around to find drivers that work. Then hunting down and installing the applications they want to run. Homes and businesses want to buy a computer, push a button and use it. That is why the major desktop OS is still Windows XP, and it will become Windows 7 as people buy new computers because that is what will be installed on the computer they buy.

      Linux computers cost more because they sell in smaller numbers and Linux is more costly to install, support and train users in. With Linux and X Windows, Gnome, KDE and host of libraries needed to run applications a full version of Linux runs slower than XP on a netbook. That is why Dell and Asus are ditching it, it is simply dollars because the cost of an OS is irrelevant compared to the testing and support to get and keep it working.

      As to all this that my uncle's cousin runs it as a desktop so it must be growing and will soon take over the market that is all nonsense. Yes many people use Linux, but the fact is only 1% of the desktop market. Linux is modular and flexible and free but it is not homogenous, simple or easy and was never intended to be a mass market commercial OS.

      And there is the claim here that universities use Linux so that is future. Not as desktops in Australia they don't. I have worked for two major universities one uses all Mac desktops and laptops the other used a mix of Macs and PCs but is now switching to centralised PCs and laptops with Microsoft Outlook, Exchange, Internet Explorer and MS Office all supplied and supported on a tender from one major computer supplier, because that is the cheapest to install and support.

  52. wow by Spiked_Three · · Score: 1

    a realistic article on slashdot.
    i agree and disagree. your points are very valid and correct.
    and the mac suffers the same fate for many of the same reasons.... except mac is moving forward?
    the pc represents a huge shift in how things got done. people don't fully realize it yet, but the iPad is almost as large a shift. it actually does what java and the browser were supposed to do and failed at (provide a ubiquitous new, useful platform).
    linux can hang their hopes on android tablets. if not there, then whatever is next, but yeah, the desktop PC revolution is coming to and end, and linux is out of time there.

    --
    slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
  53. Not a troll... by cpuh0g · · Score: 1

    The article is actually pretty spot-on, IMO. Linux will never be a mainstream desktop OS like OS/X or Windows. For the small percentage of computer users who frequent THIS site, it may seem heretical to state the obvious, but that doesn't make it less true. The article doesn't say that Linux itself is dead or that it is not a viable platform, just that it isn't ever going to be mass-market successful as a desktop platform ala OS/X or Windows.

    Why does this piss people off? And just because it works great for *you* doesn't negate the arguments that the author is making.

  54. just love the article and the comments by Torvac · · Score: 1

    you ever noticed how bad a CLI is ? but its perfectly legal to let users hack around keys in the windows registry (i guess because there is a GUI for that ?).

  55. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by Stachybotris · · Score: 1

    And then there's Windows 2008 R2... While I applaud the decision to go 64-bit only as a way to try and push developers into finally writing for 64-bit systems (after all, the capabilities have been around for what, a decade or so?), I think it may backfire on Microsoft the same way that UAC did in Vista. Users will be most unhappy that their legacy application that they've been running their entire business on for the last eight or twelve years and that can't be updated or is no longer available won't work on the new server they just bought. Of course, Server 2003 & 32-bit Server 2008 will reach their end-of-life eventually as well, and that's the point when things will really change.

    In the mean time, Microsoft's need for constant support and massaging keeps a lot of us employed...

  56. Meh by chill · · Score: 1

    I predicted this all along, and still stick with it.

    Linux will become the desktop of choice among the masses when the desktop no longer exists.

    That is, as applications move into the cloud and the desktop turns into a smart/thick client, Linux will be the primary choice. It is lighter weight, much more OEM-customizable friendly and cheaper than Windows or Mac.

    Sun was right when they said "The network IS the computer". They were just a couple decades early in trying to bring it to the masses.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  57. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by somersault · · Score: 1

    Even if that were true, you're expecting them to reimplement all those application to what, Linux and Firefox?

    The thing about Firefox is that it complies with standards. If it runs on Firefox, chances are it runs on every browser.

    Many industry specific apps also run on Linux, it's not a stretch to imagine more tech companies porting their apps to Linux at all.. MS is slowly losing grip on the computing world, and nothing of value will be lost.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  58. content by hedrick · · Score: 1

    Whether Linux is realistic depends upon what you want to do. I use a Mac as my primary way to access TV, and to some extent movies. As far as I can tell the only major source of video content is iTunes. I'd love to find an alternative, but there doesn't seem to be any. Hulu only keeps some shows, and you can't rely on which ones. It seems unlikely that the major content providers will be interested in supporting Linux unless things change more than I think they will. It's pretty clear that if Apple hadn't pioneered with iTunes, they wouldn't even support the Mac. I find it odd that content providers haven't provided a credible alternative. It seems in their interests. But it looks like only Apple has enough clout to force them to do something reasonable.

  59. You can't fail what you don't try to do by CodePwned · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My name is Chad and I hate using linux... however....

    Linux has never tried to replace windows for the common user. It's focused on being a useful, security minded, light weight alternative for power users, IT professionals etc...

    Linux has never marketed itself as a gaming platform, or multimedia home system etc. There are flavors of linux USED that way, but never advertised like windows. Linux has only recently (past 5 years) reached a point where it is user friendly to new users. Fedora Core or Unbuntu really took off with the whole user experience.

    "But there's no content!"... what are you smoking? Sure... your mom can't install "Couponfriend" on a linux machine but that's not what Linux as a whole is focusing on. Linux is a business grade utility. It's a solid alternative to windows that allows you to do almost everything windows can do. The limitations you encounter are what programs you use.

    A company I work with recently made the push to move to linux distros instead of windows. Dear lord the users hated it at first until productivity went up, and IT costs went down after 6 months.

    There were 567 LESS tickets concerning hacked machines, malware and crashes. The centralized management software they use controls what can be installed on the machine... and pushing installs works just like windows except the machine doesn't have to restart. This solved a lot of issues for the small business as they just couldn't afford the windows equivalents.

    The difficulty comes in what programs are being used. Users navigate just like they used to to find files. Hell they even created "My Document" folders... except those are hosted on a SAN, but the user doesn't know.

    Linux is NOT dead as a desktop OS. It just might not be at the point of a typical user who thinks Best Buy is a smart place to go for a computer.

  60. Again? by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its dead again? Good thing it has a bunch of friends that can cast level 9 resurrection.

    1. Re:Again? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Level 9 resurrection?
      Well, at least I would get to play "Jewels of Darkness" and "It Came From the Desert" again...

    2. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what's dead? Paper magazines about computers, like PC World.

    3. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Good for them, but resurect is a lvl 7 spell O.o

  61. My brain hurts by Stumbles · · Score: 1

    Yes it is obvious with the plethora of file systems supported by Linux it can be a daunting task for peanut brained Window users to decide which one to use. It is a wonder they can get past a Windows installation where it asks if you want your partition formatted as fat or ntfs. However, since Window users are so accustomed to clicking through on whatever the defaults are, I fail to see how Not Choosing the defaults of a Linux distro is an issue.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  62. Just keep telling yourself that. by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    You can debate whether or not desktop Linux has a chance all you want. I'll just keep using my Linux desktop along with half the people in this office.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  63. Why do we even care? by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 1

    Every once in a while, another story like this pops up on /. They're either talking about the strides its making in the desktop market, how it's stagnating on the desktop, or outright troll summaries like this one.

    I just don't give a shit.

    I run linux on my desktop. My wife does too. As do my parents. Know why? Because my 'support calls' are ZERO. My mother NEVER calls me because something screwed up on her computer like she did with Windows. She sits down, she plays some fucking farmville, talks to her sisters on facebook, reads her e-mail, and she goes away.

    All that said, I couldn't possibly care less what you run, or what your family runs. It doesn't affect my life any. If linux becomes the defacto desktop OS, great. If not, great.

    My only gripe, the one thing that pisses me off, is how it's still damn near impossible to get a competitively priced, good hardware laptop without fucking Windows on it. That infuriates the shit out of me.

    Other than that, use Windows or Mac OS all you want. They're not for me, and they never just do what I want them to. If they do for you, wonderful.

  64. Can I have those 5 minutes back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article sites a lack of good DRM and the move toward cloud computing as the primary indicators that Linux is not only dead, but will always be dead, despite having become viable in terms of ease of use and stability, etc. Ugh. So are savings accounts dead now that almost everyone uses credit? Are families dead because people can buy condoms? What about going outside? Is going outside dead?

    That was painfully stupid.

  65. SlashDot,CmdrTaco Linux, by Fibe-Piper · · Score: 1

    Has anyone else noticed the sharp drop off in comments on Slashdot the last couple months?

    Yes the summer is always going to be slower, but wow, someone like Taco makes a statement like this and nothing. It is a desperate move. But why? Isn't that the real headline we are looking at?

    --
    I went to battle M.C. Escher, but drew a blank.
  66. Re:Linux will continue to fail till the games come by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Clearly Microsoft knows what it's doing too. This is probably the main reason they don't just outright 100% abandon their PC game market in favor of the Xbox.

    Microsoft and Apple have both seen the writing on the wall. The desktop PC is leaving the home. It is being replaced with a mixture of Laptops, Smartphones, Tablets, and HTPCs, approximately in that order (in terms of replacement, not adoption.) Microsoft's foray into the new consumer reality is the Xbox. The Xbox got them in the door and the 360 implements the marketplace and trusted computing models. Apple's is the iPad, and they have already speculated publicly that OSX will be merged into iOS and not the other way around. This sounds like a distinction without a difference since both are based on the same underpinnings but the reality is that iOS is about a mindset, not about technology. OSX will end up as a walled garden eventually as well, albeit probably on less restrictive terms.

    You will be able to do general purpose, Open source (both software sources and multiple sources) for the foreseeable future. But I think that both Apple and Microsoft envision a future in which most software is delivered only electronically, which can provide substantial advantages (to the seller, mind you) in license management. Not to mention picking up a piece of every sale.

    The moral here is that Microsoft does not abandon the Xbox because it is the future. One day there will only be one Microsoft platform, but you will be able to buy a machine with little I/O as a games machine. Clustering will solve the expansion problem. The average consumer would rather buy a game console every few years than upgrade their video card, so you can expect PC gaming to be sharply deprecated when Microsoft feels that their desktop customers are ready for a walled garden. Expect it to come quite some time after Apple makes the shift, and "proves" that it is what "people" "want".

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  67. Lack of content? by bugi · · Score: 1

    If by lack of AAA game titles, well yes that probably doesn't help adoption by hardcore gamers. So very sorry your itch isn't sufficiently scratched. But you know, you are quite welcome to pitch in and address the issue. Maybe with you being so well placed with Big Media you would have some pull? Or are you just having WoW withdrawl? that does run here, you know.

    I'd say some niche markets are underserved at present but, largely, those communities are building their own tools now. For instance audio, animation and font folks are getting into their blood that the only folks who can properly address their "market" are the ones who are motivated, that is themselves.

    So,

    content: only if you limit the definition to broadcast "content"

    fragmentation: aka diversity, and largely compatible with each other

    ideology: an ideology that is strengthened by great internal diversity

    1. Re:Lack of content? by DogDude · · Score: 1

      "I'd say some niche markets are underserved at present but, largely, those communities are building their own tools now" A niche like... oh I don't know... small business? There's not one functional accounting application that runs on Linux. Not one.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Lack of content? by bugi · · Score: 1

      My accountant demands that I use quickbooks. :(

      The ledger part isn't the problem though. It's the legal (tax) mire and the proprietary file formats.

      Useful article: http://lwn.net/Articles/314577/

  68. XP's end of life will see a jump in Linux adoption by Robo1icious · · Score: 2, Funny

    When XP reaches its end of life Linux will see a huge jump in users. Microsoft has done a good job of making sure Vista and Windows 7 are difficult to maintain without a valid license. Once they end support for XP many users will be left with the decision of spending several hundred dollars on a License or learning to love Linux for free.

  69. Lame and pointless by after.fallout.34t98e · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most computer users I come across need 4 applications: an internet browser, a pdf viewer, a program that can open word and a program that can open excel files. I haven't seen a Linux desktop that doesn't provide these out of the box in the past few years.

    So, what is missing from getting Linux to the masses?
    1. retail distribution channels (walmart, dell, ...)
    2. marketing presence
    3. easy to use, consolidated app store with a way for users to actually pay for stuff

    Google could easily fix all 3 of those issues; why hasn't it yet? ... ChromeOS. Expect a solid windows competitor in the next few years.

    1. Re:Lame and pointless by LQ · · Score: 1

      Most computer users I come across need 4 applications: an internet browser, a pdf viewer, a program that can open word and a program that can open excel files. I haven't seen a Linux desktop that doesn't provide these out of the box in the past few years.

      So, what is missing from getting Linux to the masses?
      1. retail distribution channels (walmart, dell, ...)
      2. marketing presence
      3. easy to use, consolidated app store with a way for users to actually pay for stuff

      Google could easily fix all 3 of those issues; why hasn't it yet? ... ChromeOS. Expect a solid windows competitor in the next few years.

      How about a desk-top OS that can't play DVDs without you figuring out what extra stuff you need to install and who's audio is a complicated mess? Ubuntu is a great achievement but it's still not there yet.

    2. Re:Lame and pointless by after.fallout.34t98e · · Score: 1

      It all works for me and I don't remember doing anything special to get it to work. I wouldn't know about blurays, but dvds work just fine here. I watch blurays (and dvds as well) on my ps3 though because the bluetooth remote provides a better interface than my keyboard and mouse.

      Oddly I guess, Windows is where my sound problems are all at. Every time my background changes (according to the default win7 style), I get a static sound. There is constant background static in every 3d game. My friends say my mic has a lot of static as well.

      If I watch enough youtube videos then my speakers start making a very loud static noise (doesn't matter what my volume is at unless it is muted). The only way to get rid of this is to reboot. None of these issues are there when I boot into Ubuntu.

    3. Re:Lame and pointless by sirrunsalot · · Score: 1

      Most users also want a good music player. No matter what you think of iTunes, the iTunes Store surpassed the 10,000,000,000 mark last February, and I still can't get past vastly inferior sound and a speaker that hisses because of a bug in the kernel.

    4. Re:Lame and pointless by fluffybacon · · Score: 1

      How about a desk-top OS that can't play DVDs without you figuring out what extra stuff you need to install

      Funny, I'm a Linux user who had the same problem with a fresh install of Windows XP the other day.

      --
      It's not big, but it's clever!
  70. Desktop is dead by invid · · Score: 1

    Long live the cloud!

    --
    The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
  71. I'm posting this from a Linux desktop by dwheeler · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm posting this, from a Linux desktop. It doesn't look dead to me.

    --
    - David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
    1. Re:I'm posting this from a Linux desktop by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      Me too.

      It would actually be nice to have a definition of what this elusive "desktop" actually is because Linux does pretty much all I need a desktop to do and has done so for years.

      I haven't migrated fully to Linux at home because I'm more than happy to stand up & admit that there are certain games & apps on that run better (and easier) on Windows XP than they do in Wine - but none of those "killer" Windows apps I have registered (Forte Agent Usenet client, Tag&Rename audio tagging app, MediaMonkey media player & synching app, a few others) do anything that cannot be done on Linux, they just do it a bit better.

      And, unfortunately, the problem isn't Linux not being ready for the desktop, it's users not being ready for the Open Source way. When marketing types see a niche for a piece of software from which profit can be made, a software company usually steps in and writes that software; and if the people who have paid good money for that software don't like it, they can sit back, complain, and (rightfully) expect the software to be changed or fixed.

      But with Open Source, if you sit back & wait for something to be done, it's likely nothing will happen. Instead, you need to develop a mentality of caring as much about a piece of free software as you would a paid-for piece of software - that means contacting the software authors and communicating in a decent way why the software misses some of the features you need.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    2. Re:I'm posting this from a Linux desktop by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      No no he's not dead, he's restin'! Remarkable OS, Linux, isn'it, ay? Beautiful window managers!

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  72. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

    If the company is running a legacy application that is no longer updated and does not work on x64 systems, then most likely they will keep a 32bit system even if it is no longer supported (the app probably isn't). And if the server is only for internal use and has a good firewall (which it should have) then the fact that the OS is no longer updated should not be a big problem. How many companies are still using NT4 and 2000?

  73. Good by Maltheus · · Score: 1

    I never understood the desire to push Linux into the mainstream. It would just make it a greater target for the virus writers. As long as it's not so fringe that it loses community support, I'm fine with it. IMO, the linux desktop has never been stronger than it is now. I can play most of the games I care about under wine and anything else under vmplayer. The nagware that dominates windows applications makes that desktop dead for me.

    1. Re:Good by JonySuede · · Score: 1

      You are irascible and you should be ashamed of it.

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    2. Re:Good by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      I think currently the market share stands at 90, 8.9, 1.1, for windows, OSX, linux collected. I don't want or need linux to be the 90, but for the good of software in general, I'd love for windows to be knocked down to around 60, OSX be at 30, and linux be at 10. Then you would see people taking cross platform compatibility a lot more seriously.

    3. Re:Good by mikechant · · Score: 1

      I never understood the desire to push Linux into the mainstream.

      Two good reasons:
      1/ Higher market share = more companies provide drivers/specs for random devices
      2/ Higher market share = more companies port 'important' software

      Both of these would potentially benefit at least some of the existing 1% or whatever it is who currently run Linux on their desktop.
      You can afford to ignore 1% of your potential market (because of the cost of supporting it), not so much when it's 10%.

  74. Yes it's all.. true? by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 2, Funny

    I had no problems with playing DVDs on my Ubuntu. Well, of course the highly praised WinXP offers that, too... Wait, it doesn't!

    Oh, and no DRM... I surely miss this "switch off features if the user is doing anything suspicious" feature from Vista. I feel so insecure without a Master observing me and telling me what I can and cannot do with my computer. The restrictions are beneficial for users, everyone knows that.

    And there is no Flash for linux available or even planned in the near future. Robert Strohmeyer told so and I believe him. Just ignore all these "Install Flash" suggestions in Firefox, it's non-existent in linux.

    Let's better talk about iPhones and Steve Jobs. Because Steve Jobs is sooo cool. The only way linux can survive is being cool. Like in high-school, you know. Try to hang out with cool guys and do everything like them. Then everyone will love you. Of course, if you're not an ugly geek.

  75. As long as computers come by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    installed with Windows or OS X at the factory, with the costs hidden in the purchase, the public won't care.

    To them it is "free" because the cost is not broken out. If you would challenge them most would come back and say a) they don't care, b) the makers get such big discounts it doesn't matter, or c) like what can you do?

    So, the purchasing public doesn't see a need for a "free" OS when it just comes with the machine. When a new Windows upgrade finally comes down people can just buy a new cheaper computer to replace that "old slow one". People with Apples, well if its new and shiny (I own two Macs, so don't pelt me with rotten food)

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:As long as computers come by neumayr · · Score: 1

      So, in summary, you are saying Linux' appeal would be its price, if the competition wouldn't be cleverly hiding theirs.
      That's not much to go on.

      I've been using Linux since '98, and while its usability has made great progress, so has Windows' and especially MacOS'. And overall, those two are winning. While the KDE4 desktop integration theoretically beats Windows, it's a lot less solid and doesn't work with the majority of applications. Gnome just feels outdated.
      MacOS seems to win in desktop integration, with only KDE4 having a chance to catch up. As far as I can see, Windows isn't even trying, relying on its reasonably stable technology instead, where it beats MacOS and Linux' desktop environments.
      Please note this is my _subjective_ comparisons of the OS's use on a _desktop_, and with that disclaimer nobody can disagree with me. Hah :P

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
  76. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    I run a number of 32 bit apps on my Win 7 64 bit machine. They all installed and run fine. What are you on about?

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  77. This is It! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

    And now, at long last, the Year of the Linux Desktop is at hand.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  78. Who the fuck are you kidding? by PotatoHead · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's possible to get some nice applications, including CAD, Arch, Mech, and Electrical CAD, CAE, and lots of other good stuff on a Linux Desktop.

    A well confugured Ubuntu system will work for a Rocket Scientist as well as some kids wanting to surf the net.

    How many times did we hear, "Apple is dying" in reaction to their small share?

    Exactly.

    Now a few percent means a LOT of users, and that fierce ideology means those users can use it for as long as they want to, share or not.

    Funny how that works, isn't it?

    1. Re:Who the fuck are you kidding? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      It may work quite well for a rocket scientist (probably better than Windows ever would), but won't work for a civil engineer. Linux still has some path to go, and some professionals are still not burned due to selling their freedom out to proprietary software builders.

      That said, the "will just read email and surf the web" people are the most obvious target. Unfortunately, those are well served by Windows XP and have no plans to migrate to something that didn't come on their computers (unless MS makes something like Vista again, obviously).

    2. Re:Who the fuck are you kidding? by bored_engineer · · Score: 1

      some nice applications, including CAD, Arch. . .

      The trouble is that many firms (at least in the US) have extensive training, libraries, and a variety of AutoCAD add-ons. Although a Mac version is coming soon, for now, AutoCAD only runs on Windows. Further, there's lots of software for which there is no Linux or Mac analogue. While you can get engineering and scientific software for platforms other than Windows, there's too much that you can't get, quite aside from an individual firm's investment in a particular platform.

  79. blink blink. by Niklot · · Score: 1

    what are you talking about? Linux is more popular than ever, being used on more platforms than ever. I am studying computer science in university and we have ubuntu on the majority of the pcs, and we are encouraged to use OS and linux quite frequently. Crap article much? Plus you can play virtually any games on linux that you can on Windows, just download playonlinux and install away~! I play oblivion on my ubuntu desktop all the time. I can't think of any proprietary apps that I can't replace or better on linux for free.

  80. The Tags Tell the Tale by gratuitous_arp · · Score: 1

    The tags for this post are just hilarious.

    troll trolltroll trolltrolltroll trolltrolltrolltroll

    LOL

  81. Slashdot is dead by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Or at least it is jumping the shark. Look at how many trollish stories in one night. Can we mod the whole site "troll" and be done with it?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  82. I put my neighbour on it. Shit by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Bad news, I guess I got to remove it again and give her back the OS that allows her to install every bit of crap that wants her attention. She is a nice woman but has a low IQ. She "gets" that there are scammers around but can't resist to click on stuff. Endless problems on windows even on limited accounts. Zero under Ubuntu and the relocation of the close window and the start menu? Not a problem. "Oh, this has the close windows on the left..." and that was it. No problems because nobody ever told her it was supposed to be a problem. Close button on the left.

    She is very happy with it and now it is dead...

    And I wonder how her desktop counts. Because it is a Compaq and so came with windows. So does this work desktop. So did my home computer. None of which run Windows.

    But Linux has its problems. But it is like that cute redhead girl who loves you so much. Sure, she has a temper and her hair springs every which way when it is wet and she freckles like mad at even a hint of sunshine and... but you will NEVER ever replace her for the blond bimbo that everyone else has had because despite all her quirks, deep down she is right for you.

    There are three kind of linux users. Those that hate MS, those that want to be different for difference sake and those that just want to get stuff done without constant bugs or corporate motives getting in the way. Last time I used windows I suddenly ended up with a ghost network card, complete duplicate of the regular one but kept messing every thing up. Then it went away again. Just no thanks. Linux may have its moments, but I can always fix it. It is handable. Windows isn't.

    And as for the dream being dead. It ain't windows on mobile phones or tablets so far. The dream could just be taking a different form. And if you see MS reacting so badly to Open Office, I think MS clearly has not counted opensource out yet. Because they fear loosing office less then the idea that with Word gone, Windows could so easily follow.

    The dream is still there, but only for people who use Linux because they like it. Not because they want to see Bill Gates stumble. The lovers remain, the haters will always hate.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:I put my neighbour on it. Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But Linux has its problems. But it is like that cute redhead girl who loves you so much. Sure, she has a temper and her hair springs every which way when it is wet and she freckles like mad at even a hint of sunshine and... but you will NEVER ever replace her for the blond bimbo that everyone else has had because despite all her quirks, deep down she is right for you.

      Not to mention, the sex is fucking amazing!

      Posted by the happy (and tired) husband of a redhead.

    2. Re:I put my neighbour on it. Shit by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      [[ Linux has its problems. But it is like that cute redhead girl who loves you so much. Sure, she has a temper and her hair springs every which way when it is wet and she freckles like mad at even a hint of sunshine and... but you will NEVER ever replace her for the blond bimbo that everyone else has had because despite all her quirks, deep down she is right for you. ]]

      --Friend, that is a beautiful sentiment. If I had mod points, I would mod you up. :-)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  83. Guess what? by sirrunsalot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here's one thing *nix can do!

    sudo echo "127.0.0.1 www.pcworld.com" >> /etc/hosts"

    Goodbye.

  84. Re:Cowboy hats by muckracer · · Score: 1

    > Cowboy hats are also dead, because almost nobody wears them. Someone needs to tell the cowboys.

    I did! And I tell them again, as soon as I can have solid food again. O_0

  85. It's the hardware, stupid by Baavgai · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only real thing that holds Linux back on the desktop is hardware. No so much the actual computer as the myriad of junk people plug into them.

    A POS printer from Walmart will run fine on Windows, but not any Linux distro. So many of the external toys that people expect to simply buy and use have zero Linux support. Wifi in particular is tragic.

    I use Linux and accept I may have to do a little research to get some PlugAndPray toy that will work. Grandma is lucky if she can figure out where the plug goes. If she plugs into windows, it will usually hold her hand, at the very least say something. If she plugs it into a Linux box, it can be ominously silent.

    1. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by VMaN · · Score: 1

      I disagree somewhat.

      Sure, new "exotic" or specialized hardware like usb tv tuners or multifunction devices typically aren't plug and play, but older common hardware has way better support than windows/mac.

      In my experience printers in ubuntu 9.04 and up "just work", and even webcams now. Mind you, most accessories die when their driver support ends (Do you want win98 or winxp drivers?). Not so in linux.

    2. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but Microsoft has as little to do with providing the app to flash the DVD-RW drive as Linux does - it's the manufacturer that has chosen to release a Windows-only flashing app.

      Although I do keep an XP installation around, I had a similar problem with two Belkin Powerline Ethernet adapters that needed to be flashed to the next firmware revision to work at anything close to their published speed. The box claimed Windows and Linux support (in fact the OS is pretty irrelevant in all honesty) but Belkin only created a Windows app to do the flashing with. I did email them to complain about their "Linux support" claims on the box, but never got a response.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    3. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by santiagodraco · · Score: 1

      This is a hardware problem? I think you mean to say it's a Linux problem. Or said another way it's the fact that there are so few users running Linux that the hardware mfg don't see a compelling argument to write device drivers for their gear.

      At the end of the day desktop Linux is a tinker toy, that is the problem. No one really owns the product such that they can effectively drive programs for adoption in both the application and hardware spaces. This is what originally killed the Mac market for so many years as well (that and their opposite approach, a closed platform). But with Jobs back AND ownership of the platform with resources and programs to promote, the Mac is making a comeback.

      So it's probably safe to say that desktop Linux with it's Jobs, or it's Apple, is dead.

    4. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Continuously referring to non-Linux users as "Grandma" doesn't help much, either. Doesn't matter if you don't mean it as a collective label. That's how it comes across.

    5. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 1

      Grandma is lucky if she can figure out where the plug goes. If she plugs into windows, it will usually hold her hand, at the very least say something.

      Grandma gets someone else to "fix" her computer for her. Seriously, how many window users can install windows? Or a printer? About all they can do is download a exe, double click and say OK as many times as a dialog pops up. Then they ask others to fix it.

      I run only linux at home. All Slackware boxs. A friend is over and ask to use a machine. No problem. Well the first thing he tries to do is install some MS crapola so he can use MSN chat or whatever. Later he gets done what he wanted (print some airline tickets). Finally he tells me about how windows just "works" better for him and then says, "Oh by the way I can't get my printer/scanner to work and my computers is getting really slow. You know computers right, can you come around and fix it."

      That is the MO of the average windows user...

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    6. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by jjinco33 · · Score: 1

      I hear this quite a bit, but have not had this problem in over 5 years. Do you have any recent examples?

      --
      Meh.
    7. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by couchslug · · Score: 1

      OTOH, Linux still supports plenty of hardware for which Windows driver support was dropped, forcing Windows users who "upgrade" to buy new peripherals.

      I like being given free peripherals, so I have no complaint, but those who buy new ones because they can no longer get drivers may be less pleased.

      Going on a turd hunt for scanner drivers and software for Windows vs. just plugging in my "inherited" HP scanner to my Ubuntu machine? I'll take option 2. :)

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    8. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by Baavgai · · Score: 1

      I only did it once. Still, point. Joe User? Non Techie? EveryPC? Person who in prior decades had 12:00 blinking on their VCR?

      I literally meant grandma, actually. To be honest, mother in law, but it didn't have the same ring. Though grandpa uses the Ubuntu box I set up for him without issue. Their printers are recognized by Ubuntu, be we've had other things that result in tech support calls ( me. ) Every question about some USB dingus, like a camera or wifi dongle, makes me cringe.

      I generally recommend everyone buy Apple. Then they can bother their "geniuses" and not me.

    9. Re:It's the hardware, stupid by El_Oscuro · · Score: 1

      Sometimes it is the other way around too. About 5 years ago, I bought an el-cheapo Kodak camera from Best Buy. I needed to download pictures to my PC and didn't want a lot of fuss so I plugged it into my Windows 2000 machine. Nothing, no new drive letter, just nothing. Finally after spending about 1/2 hour fiddling around with it and installing 100MB of Kodak crapware I was finally able to download pictures to it. "This is bullshit, there has to be a better way." Just out of curiosity, I plugged it into my Linux box and it popped up a dialog box: "A camera has been detected. Would you like to import your photos into F-Spot?" F-spot has been my photo manager ever since.

      --
      "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
  86. Traffic must be slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There kinds of grunge articles are a dime a dozen. ./ must be dropping in 'hits' these days and the Great Taco needs to increase traffic. What better way than to poke a stick at the hive.

    Of course, it's ultimately a futile effort.

    Trolling - a way to increase traffic.

  87. You lost me... by specific · · Score: 1

    some of the problems that I (as a very technically literate Windows user)

    Right there! That's the spot. The spot where you lost me.

    --
    If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably worth it.
    1. Re:You lost me... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Right there! That's the spot. The spot where you lost me.

      And that's the spot where *you* lose everyone else.

  88. So, am I an ideologue by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I love Linux on all my systems at home. I enjoy using Windows 7+Visual Studio at work, and know my registry intimately. I call 'troll' on the PCWorld article. Does that still make me one an ideologue?

    By the time I left community college three years ago, encountering non-geeks who use Linux was no longer a surprise. Some time this year, I stopped being surprised at seeing Linux installed on laptops in coffee shops. Does that make me an ideologue?

    I've seen support for Linux in commercial games and applications grow to the level Macs were at prior to the iPhone explosion. I've seen the number of non-Linux-compatible websites drop dramatically, thanks to improvements in browser technology. My WoW-playing fiancee was using Linux exclusively before I met her.

    I still call 'troll' on the PCWorld article. Does that still make me an ideologue?

    1. Re:So, am I an ideologue by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Earlier this year, I started anchoring* a 4-hour social meeting every Saturday for the local LUG. I show up at a coffee shop for a certain time range, and anyone who wants to show up can. No agenda, no rules (except 'don't get us kicked out of the venue'), just socializing among geeks with some common interests. So far, it's been pretty much constructive, and we've had people in the area overhear us and ask us questions. Last week, we chatted about physical computer security, programming, audio encoding, and the passive {VGA|USB|etc}-to-Cat5 media changers one guy built. All in all, a good face for the community.

      I highly recommend the format.

      * Meaning that even if nobody else shows up, I'll be there, so people won't choose not to go because of a chance that there might not be anyone there.

    2. Re:So, am I an ideologue by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      LUGs are an under-rated resource that are pretty common, yet almost never mentioned. I've only attended a few recently, but you can generally post to your local list and get a friendly response in no time. Though I've gone to a few boring meetings, I can't say I was never offended or talked down. Novices are welcome and there is always the off chance of a recruiter being present (that always quiets the know-it-all). All in all, they are a healthy thing that Mac and Win really can't brag about.

      In the end I guess it is kind of like a cult or religion. We have the weekly bible study, the prayer list, and even show up on college campuses to evangelize and spread the good word.

    3. Re:So, am I an ideologue by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      In the end I guess it is kind of like a cult or religion. We have the weekly bible study, the prayer list, and even show up on college campuses to evangelize and spread the good word.

      Heh. That's far more formal than the meetings I run. The meetings I anchor are explicitly Linux-associated only in that the primary attendee draw comes from the local LUG. More or less, if you're interested in learning about or chatting about a technical subject, or want to show-and-tell your latest project, or just want to listen in while a bunch of geeks talk geek, you're gold. :)

      The evangelizing, well, that's more the Ubuntu guy's thing. :)

  89. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  90. I love the smell of by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1

    flamebait in the morning...

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  91. This is crap by Assoupis · · Score: 1

    ... a 1-2% user base hosting install parties in so many different cities when new versions are launched and maintaining user groups isn't qualitatively the same as a 92% user base that are mostly apathetical. It doesn't seem like Microsoft will ever put a break on software piracy, because that's who's their tech enthusiast user basis is. Wine is getting better and better though. Obviously, north american and west european governments can sorta afford to get Windows this or that, but even then, for political reasons (read realpolitik), its way better to have software built locally, or at least that you can review locally.

  92. You guys are really missing the point by razathorn · · Score: 1

    Some of you are really missing the point and calling this a troll / flamebait. The article has some very good points. It's not the linux desktop itself that is dead, it's the dream of being a major player like OSX or Windows is dead. Linux never WAS a major player, and its opportunities to become such have passed, or at least appear to have for the time being.

    I gave up on a linux desktop a long time ago. I fought the good fight. I was there for FVWM, FVWM2, Afterstep, WindowMaker, Blackbox, Original Gnome and Original KDE, Gnome with Nautilus, KDE2, and KDE3. I was there for Netscape navigator gold, dosemu, wine, communicator, star office, openoffice, openoffice.org, mozilla, firefox, thunderbird, gcalc, gimp. Now I use my favorite apps from linux on windows or mac.

    Why? Because I simply don't have time to futz with my desktop anymore. I'm an adult. I have a wife that needs attention. I have a house that needs attention. I have a son that needs attention. I have a full time job that takes most of my time. I have one, perhaps two hobbies that get any remaining time and screwing with my desktop to try and make it work at least sorta as good as OSX or windows is literally the very last thing I would ever do with my time now days. I suspect that there are others in this boat. I really never realized how much time I wasted on my *desktop* until I just started using XP or OSX -- oh, you mean I'm done -- awesome, now I can go do something I really care about.

    1. Re:You guys are really missing the point by Carpathius · · Score: 1

      What he said.

      Linux on the desktop isn't dying. It never was.

      I've been using Linux since kernel version 0.98. Once I found WindowMaker, it was my preferred window manager for years. I also ran Linux as my only OS on my only computer in the late '90s. I ran a webserver from home using Linux. Now that computer sits, turned off and pretty much obsolete (it's a 386) and my gaming box is the most powerful computer in the house and it runs Windows because that's currently the best platform for games. I'm using a Mac right now. I purchased it to write for iOS, and now it's become my work machine. What do I need Linux for?

      I've spent my life making a living either writing apps that run under Unix or admining Unix boxes. SunOS. AIX. Solaris. HPUX. SUSE. Red Hat. At some point in my career I worked professionally on every one of 'em. I *like* Unix as an OS. I remember when we moved the PDP-11s from AT&T something or other to BSD 2.9, and getting an actual full screen editor -- this weird thing called "vi" -- that acted kinda like ed, but not really.

      So, coming from the standpoint of someone who really does appreciate Linux for what it is, I say that it doesn't matter that Linux isn't a desktop system. I doubt it's ever going to have the applications and support it needs to make it as a desktop OS.

      But, so what? It's a fantastic server OS. It's taking over the Unix server market that used to be held by Solaris. Why do people care whether or not it's being used as a desktop OS?

      Sean.

  93. LIES! by cavedweller96 · · Score: 1

    LIES! I refuse to belief this! I know actually a fair amount of friends who are beginning to use Ubuntu from windows. Although Ubuntu is not the be all and end all of linux (I run Arch), I think the userbase is growing. or at least I hope It is...

  94. Obligatory Python Code by duh+P3rf3ss3r · · Score: 1

    It's not dead, it's just pining -- pining for the fjords.

    --
    Give a man a match: warm him for an instant. Douse him in petrol and set him aflame: warm him for the rest of his life.
  95. Accept reality by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe we should start asking what those 1-2% represent.

    What kind of people use a Linux desktop full time? Geeks. Developers. Bright minds.

    Consider Linux a piece of specialized software. How many computer users run specialized software? A small percentage of the total. Yet those are important for their respective niches.

    Apple has 5% but it's the cream of the crop in regard to certain traits: people who favor aestethics and "just works" over everything else and are willing to pay extra for it.

    Maybe it's time for Linux to stop aiming for more than 5%, ever, and instead embrace what it is: a professional-grade OS, for professionals.

    Why obsess with taking over the desktop of average Joe, against Joe's wishes?

    --
    i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    1. Re:Accept reality by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Apple has 5% but it's the cream of the crop in regard to certain traits: people who favor aestethics and "just works" over everything else and are willing to pay extra for it.

      That's not the only reason to use OS X. I bought a MacBook Pro because the built-in sound card using the standard CoreAudio API processes audio and MIDI data faster (by 10-20ms) than my previous Windows laptop did with a Firewire external interface and ASIO drivers. That's a very significant difference when you're using your laptop as a recording studio and in a live instrument rig--try playing a song when the instrument's voice lags noticeably behind your key press.

      Not only does it "just work," it just works better. The only drawback to the OS for me is that I can't play Thief 2.

    2. Re:Accept reality by ADRA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Professionals want PC's that work just as much as the rest of the world. Without some semblance of market share, you can't get hardware manufacturers to look at you (BSD,*NIX), so you're stuck between a rock and a hard place. In order to get good hardware support, you need market penetration. In order to get market penetration, you need to make the OS attractive outside of your core community. In order to make is appealing to outside audiences, you loose the professional focus of the OS.

      Getting Linux in a position to satisfy all three criteria in a relatively seamless way will be a tight walk that may just take another 10 years to get right, but as long as you keep at it, things should always get better.

      --
      Bye!
    3. Re:Accept reality by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      Oh, Linux users are snobs too, just a different kind. What, never heard the famous warcry before: "show us the code or shut up"? :)

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    4. Re:Accept reality by Haeleth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      YES! This is spot on.

      It is frustrating that currently, every major Linux-based project seems to be working hard to dumb itself down and remove more features and configurability with every new version, in the name of "being easy for Grandma". Then Grandma carries on using Windows, and the developers say "oh dear, it must still be too complicated", and the cycle continues. Linux developers are making the product worse and worse for the people who actually use it, in the name of making it easier for people who do not even want to use it.

      Because, really, what would Grandma gain from switching? She knows Windows. It does everything she needs. It's not particularly insecure these days, particularly since her grandson installed that cute Firefox icon for her. And she couldn't care less about the power of the CLI, or the ability to run a different window manager, or multiple X sessions, or any of the other cool things that are easy to do in Linux and difficult or impossible in Windows. Why should Grandma use Linux?

      The two things Linux should be concentrating on are being a great Unix-like desktop for power users, and interoperating well with Windows infrastructure such as Microsoft Exchange. (The latter is important in order to allow its use on enterprise desktops -- there are plenty of developers who could make a very good case for using the same platform on their desktop that their code is going to be deployed to, but need to be able to demonstrate that doing so is not going to hinder their ability to use corporate email and collaboration services.)

    5. Re:Accept reality by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Why obsess with taking over the desktop of average Joe, against Joe's wishes?

      Because Joe insists that we use Microsoft Office.

    6. Re:Accept reality by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      Apple has 5% but it's the cream of the crop in regard to certain traits: people who favor aestethics and "just works" over everything else and are willing to pay extra for it.

      Well, I'm a computer engineer and I and a lot of my engineering peers own Macs. Aesthetics have very little to do with our decision... (we're geeks after all). "Just works" is way up there, but the number 1 reason that we like Macs is that Mac OS X is unix and the number 2 reason is that Mac OS X is the most flexible, configurable, programmable OS available - bar none.

      As for paying extra... you pay a little more and get a lot more... there's a big difference between the concepts of price and value...

    7. Re:Accept reality by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      It is frustrating that currently, every major Linux-based project seems to be working hard to dumb itself down and remove more features and configurability with every new version, in the name of "being easy for Grandma". Then Grandma carries on using Windows, and the developers say "oh dear, it must still be too complicated", and the cycle continues.

      I'm all for that cycle of dumbing down into extinction, as long as it's quarantined to the one distribution. The others will come out stronger from the experience.

    8. Re:Accept reality by Draek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the number 1 reason that we like Macs is that Mac OS X is unix and the number 2 reason is that Mac OS X is the most flexible, configurable, programmable OS available - bar none.

      Most flexible and configurable, really? care, then, to describe the steps required to make OSX' look and feel similar to that of Windows 2K? preferably ones that don't involve VMs in them.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    9. Re:Accept reality by freeztar · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should start asking what those 1-2% represent.

      What kind of people use a Linux desktop full time? Geeks. Developers. Bright minds.

      Consider Linux a piece of specialized software. How many computer users run specialized software? A small percentage of the total. Yet those are important for their respective niches.

      Apple has 5% but it's the cream of the crop in regard to certain traits: people who favor aestethics and "just works" over everything else and are willing to pay extra for it.

      Maybe it's time for Linux to stop aiming for more than 5%, ever, and instead embrace what it is: a professional-grade OS, for professionals.

      Why obsess with taking over the desktop of average Joe, against Joe's wishes?

      "Consider Linux a piece of specialized software." Linux is an OS. It's not specialized towards "geek. developers. bright minds.". That's just its traditional user base. For the "average user", firefox and openoffice is fine. Printing is needed, which is well supported in Linux these days. Music...check. Video...well, a bit more complex than plug and play, but doable for the average user, especially if scripts are used. Ubuntu is totally ready for the masses, but until the stigma of "geek only" is removed, it will never be accepted as such.

    10. Re:Accept reality by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

      I totally agree with you. As long as Linux has geeks and developers on board -- people who actually *develop it*, not simply *use*, it will be alive and kicking. Besides it can even turn out to be a dead end to aim for general consumer, because this can scare away developers in the process -- the only users who are vital to Linux.

      Not a No1 at the consumer market? I don't give a shit -- it is perfect for me.

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
    11. Re:Accept reality by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confused about my point. I was not trying to say that OS X can "look" like any other OS. Why would anyone want that? There's very little utility in making one OS "look" like another.

      Mac OS X has all of the flexibility and configurability of linux (I'm going to assume you know what that implies). However, Mac OS X adds a lot to the unix foundation with hundreds of OS X specific UI extensions. However, the biggest area where Mac OS X stands out is in the area of automation. No other OS offers anything remotely similar to AppleScript and Automator which let the user build custom utilities that work cooperatively with the OS and with applications... essentially adding functionality to the OS and to applications.

    12. Re:Accept reality by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      Not only does it "just work," it just works better. The only drawback to the OS for me is that I can't play Thief 2.

      You tried it in Crossover Games? They have a trial version so you can see if it works.

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    13. Re:Accept reality by Draek · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confused about my point. I was not trying to say that OS X can "look" like any other OS. Why would anyone want that? There's very little utility in making one OS "look" like another.

      Unless you particularly like the look and feel of said OS, of course. Besides, it's simply a small test, BeOS' interface for instance may be hard to replicate entirely due to its many quirks and its relative obscurity in today's age, but Win2K's is so simple and widespread that copying should not represent a significant problem on any UI that calls itself customizable.

      Mac OS X has all of the flexibility and configurability of linux (I'm going to assume you know what that implies).

      Yeah. Among other things, it implies that if I want to have my computer use a tiling WM and a transparent toolbar with two separate "Start"-like menus, I'll be able to get it without overwritting the goddamned OS with another one. In terms of true customizability OSX is not only far behind Linux and the BSDs, it's decades away from even Windows. It's Steve's way or the highway, and the fact that you may like it doesn't mean it's "customizable". But hey! at least you have a weather plugin, huh?

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    14. Re:Accept reality by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      First, let me say that no OS can do every little thing in exactly the same way as every other OS. That's an unrealistic goal and certainly not what I was talking about.

      You mention a handful of specific examples that you may or may not be able to do in Mac OS X, which even if accurate, does not demonstrate that Mac OS X is behind linux. If we listed all of the things that Mac OS X can do and all of the things that any linux distro can do and compared the lists, we would see a huge overlap. We would see some number of things that linux can do that Mac OS X can't do and we would see a much bigger list of things that Mac OS X can do that linux can't.

      I use Mac OS X, Windows, and linux daily. They all have their quirks and perks. I like them all - I'm not a hater. If I'm totally objective, though, I have to say that Mac OS X offers more perks than the others. Are there things that I can do in linux that I wish I could do in Mac OS X? Of course. Are there things that I can do in Windows that I wish I could do in Mac OS X? Of course. The list of things I can do in Mac OS X that I can't do on the others is much larger, though.

      I am less concerned about the aesthetics that seem to consume you and more interested in utility and functionality. Given that no OS will ever anticipate my every need, scripting power is the ultimate power. Sure, I can (and have) added perl and cygwin to my Windows machine and it's almost as good as perl in linux, which is almost as good as perl in Mac OS X. But perl (or any other conventional scripting language) is simply incapable of integrating with the OS and with the applications at the level that AppleScript is capable of. I can essentially change the feature set of my OS and of my applications.

      Your obvious hatred for Steve Jobs and all things Apple has blinded you to a whole world of possibilities. Your perspectives on Mac OS X are limited by your trivial understanding of it's capabilities. Hate is a crippling thing.

    15. Re:Accept reality by Draek · · Score: 1

      Look at yourself. You're basically calling me an Apple hater because I reject your notion of OSX' alleged greatness and brilliance, and its dominance quality-wise over other Operating Systems.

      Hate can be crippling, but nowhere near as much as fervor.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    16. Re:Accept reality by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Everything I've read about Crossover Games and other apps says Thief 2 causes problems. Heck, it even caused problems in Windows XP!

      The best solution would be to use Boot Camp and put a Windows on there. But due to the tiny 120GB hard drive and my audio work, I simply don't have room. I just realized that I have a relatively old donated PC sitting under a desk, though...now I just have to find my Thief 2 discs...

    17. Re:Accept reality by joeyblades · · Score: 1

      No, I'm basically implying that you are an Apple hater because of your tone and because you say things like "Steve's way or the highway".

      Also, you continually ignore the utilitarian argument that I've been trying to make and keep challenging with GUI eye candy crap you fancy from other OSes.

      Your premise seems to be if Mac OS X can't do some UI trick, but Windows can, then Mac is not as flexible. I can name a hundred UI tricks that Mac can do that Windows can't. I don't bother because these are beside the point. The point is that the Mac has an extensibility that not only is not, but cannot be duplicated by other OSes. This extensibility means that the Mac OS is limited more by the user's imagination rather than the OS designer's imagination.

      So you say "Steve's way or the highway", but I'm saying Steve's way offers infinitely more roads to travel than Bill's way or even Linus' way.

      Now if you want to make your argument about iOS, then I'm all over that. I am not a fan of iOS.

    18. Re:Accept reality by stilesalaska · · Score: 1

      Hmm I use Linux (Susu) Mom and Dad use Linux Mint. Neighbor Runs Ubuntu, None Geeks! All Joe sixpacks!! You are Wrong!!!

    19. Re:Accept reality by t_ban · · Score: 1

      Because, really, what would Grandma gain from switching?

      Why should Grandma use Linux?

      Grandma would gain nothing. But I certainly would, because then I wouldn't have to reformat/reinstall her OS every few months, and wouldn't have to bother about malware infestations.

      I can't hope to educate grandma about best security practices, so I'll do the next best thing.

      I'll install a solid distro with all the bells and whistles she needs (it may be ubuntu or it may be slackware, won't matter, she'll only be using some programs), customise the GUI to be as simple as possible to meet her simple needs, disable all unnecessary ports and services, configure ssh and port 22 (just in case she asks me to do something later), turn on monthly updates, and be done with it for some years.

      --
      First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win. -Gandhi
  96. Agree totally by Tangential · · Score: 1

    I punted on M$ and windoze in 1999 and exclusively ran linux desktops on my notebooks and desktops until 2006. After 7 years of battling everything from not-quite-there apps, to desktop inconsistencies and notebook driver issues I gave up and switched to OSX (cause I wasn't going back to M$.) I chose it because of the unix-like underpinnings. The move was a bit of a struggle at the time (primarily in getting used to using my mouse so much more than I would prefer and I've since figured out how to be mainly a keyboard user again) but I haven't looked back. I still run linux on all of my servers but life is too short to have to wage war with my desktop when I am trying to use it to run my business. I run various linux distros (and XP) in VMware on my MBP for any missing functionality that I still need but I don't resume them very often.

    --
    Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
  97. Who wants to play a DVD on a desktop? by O'Nazareth · · Score: 1

    This is talking about everything but desktop.

  98. Desktop is dead... by AlexiaDeath · · Score: 1

    Linux is live and well, hoping platforms and claiming ever larger areas of the corpse of the soon mythical desktop. Gamers go to consoles. Netbooks don't have the power for them anyway. Nobody really buys a desktop unless they want a sort of customizable general purpose console or a machine to do a specific task. The only place where the desktop way of life still has refuge are the high end heavy laptops and office workstations. And even that market is thining.

  99. Dead for me. by The+Breeze · · Score: 1

    I still run Linux on my servers. But I don't have time to spend half a day installing software anymore where I must resolve dependancy hell or stuff like that. People tell me, "oh, xyz fixes that". Every time I try to track down "xyz", it's never quite there.

    Apache, Postfix, solid stuff that's been around forever, yeah. Desktop apps, nah. Too much of a pain to deal with. All my laptops used to be set to dual-boot; not anymore. Windows is stable enough and I don't have to spend 12 hours figuring out how to install stuff and getting flamed if I dare to ask a question or hear "write it youself!"

  100. Too many distros by Thyamine · · Score: 1

    It's certainly a strength to have so many options available for technical users, but normal users get confused by just the few version of Windows out there. Try and explain the various versions/distribution options for Linux and they immediately start thinking how maybe they'll just stick with Windows. I personally love OS X, and even among friends/family who know that and trust me for tech advice, they have a hard time thinking of anything outside Windows/Microsoft. There are lots of reasons why Linux hasn't taken off, but I don't know that I'd call it dead.

    --
    I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
  101. Yeah, right. by VShael · · Score: 1

    It's no more dead than it is imminent.

    The biggest problem with Linux for the Desktop, is this. Linux developers don't seem to remember (if they ever knew) what it was like to be an ignorant user.

    Linux for the Desktop has to be made for the ignorant AOL "Me too!" posters that plagued Usenet back in the day.

    My sister in law is no IT slouch, but has limited experience with *nix systems. She emailed me the other day to ask what the linux equivalent of dir /p was.

    Ask a linux guy that question, and you can get several different answers. And it's a pretty good bet that some of them will involve things which are non-intuitive or just not common place to the *average* computer user. Like piping.

    ls -a | less

    was what she eventually wound up with, and only because I went off on a tangent about how less is more, and more was the original paginator etc... before I realised what I was doing, and shut the hell up.

    Until linux can be made not just user friendly, but *ignorant* user friendly, it won't be a viable Desktop for the mainstream audiences.

    That said, Ubuntu has made great strides in that direction.

    1. Re:Yeah, right. by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Using dir /p kinda takes out of the class of ignorant user. And I would say Ubuntu is already easier to use for a computer noob (as opposed to a Linux noob who has a vague idea how to get stuff done in Windows).

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  102. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

    And then there's Windows 2008 R2... While I applaud the decision to go 64-bit only as a way to try and push developers into finally writing for 64-bit systems (after all, the capabilities have been around for what, a decade or so?), I think it may backfire on Microsoft the same way that UAC did in Vista. Users will be most unhappy that their legacy application that they've been running their entire business on for the last eight or twelve years and that can't be updated or is no longer available won't work on the new server they just bought. Of course, Server 2003 & 32-bit Server 2008 will reach their end-of-life eventually as well, and that's the point when things will really change.

    You are aware that Server 2008 R2 ships with the 32-bit compatibility layer disabled by default, not totally removed?

    --
    GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  103. The desktop is dead by redhog · · Score: 1

    The Linux desktop is dead. Not because Linux sucks, but because the desktop as an important arena for killer apps, is dead. All the killer apps of the latest 10 years have been web based; facebook, twitter, blogging, wikipedia, google mail, google maps, etherpad... The only usage of the desktop nowdays is as a boot loader for a web browser.

    Linux, or free software in general, as a delivery platform for killer apps, however, is live and well. Google uses Linux. Wikipedia uses Linux, Facebook uses Linux.

    --
    --The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
  104. Definitely Agree! by reitton · · Score: 1

    I think Linux and FreeBSD are godsends on the server side but I have to agree with OP on the Desktop side. There is one very harsh reality that will never go away, the general consumer does not want to have to learn anything to use a computer. User facing technical folks will tell you that most users do not even have a firm grasp of how to use the start button after using MS products for 10 years in a business environment.

  105. Linux on my Desktop by int69h · · Score: 1

    Linux has been on my desktop for 17 years now. I don't understand the desire for world domination. How many installs do we have to reach for people to say that Linux has succeeded?

    1. Re:Linux on my Desktop by draxil · · Score: 1

      Yes I totally agree.

  106. Desktop Linux is very successful, alive and well by monkeyhybrid · · Score: 1

    I've used Linux on my laptop and desktop PCs almost exclusively for the last 5 years or so, and a mix of Linux and Windows for several years before then. Yes, I am lucky in that the vast majority of software I use runs on Linux and I fully understand why others may need (or prefer) Windows / OS X to suit their needs.

    Linux does everything I need, and does it very well. My work flow is much more efficient, reliable and flexible than anything I've achieved previously with other operating systems. To me, Linux on the desktop is a winner.

    However, if you're going to measure it's success by the overall percentage of desktop users using it then of course it doesn't look too good, but that's not a suitable metric IMHO. It may be relevant to some company like Adobe when they determine which platforms to bother developing for, but not to me.

    I don't see a 'Year of Linux on the Desktop' happening any time soon... if ever. That doesn't bother me though, as long as the Linux community keeps improving this great product, to be enjoyed by all those who do use it.

    If Linux on the Desktop is ever to gain significant market share, it will be in the years to come with OSs like Chrome OS, running mainly cloud based apps. And by that time, the OS you use will largely be irrelevant anyway.

  107. From PC Magazine so you know it must be true! by DougReed · · Score: 1

    I just loaded Maverick Meerkat on my Linux machine last week, and despite the fact that my Nvidea video card did not have proper support. (Ubuntu should have posted a "NOTICE: Nvidea Users Do Not Upgrade At This Time!!!"), but anyway; the machine is long since too old to run Windoze at all, so I cannot complain too loudly that my ancient hardware is starting to have issues. I was really quite surprised at how usable Ubuntu has become. I have switched back and forth between KDE and Gnome over the years as each became too annoying to put up with for one reason or another, and abandoned Red Hat in favor of [K]Ubuntu because Solaris 8 was more user friendly. RhythmBox is broken, but overall. There is now a tool to do just about everything without a console. I am normally a 'just edit the file' kind of guy, and I find myself USING the GUI tools because they work. Open Office reads docs better than ever before, and most of the tools are really quite good.

    In the end, I think Linux has FINALLY arrived. At least for the Debian team and Ubuntu in particular. Red Hat is dreadful today.

  108. Link has split personality? by Youngbull · · Score: 1

    Isn't it weird that this article cites only good things about Linux, damns the not so well spent chance in the turmoil of Vista, and then dooms Linux on the desktop because of it and the fact that you can't watch all DVD's (and related content) out of the box. Pretty strange indeed as I don't see Windows coming with a twitter/facebook/irc client, an bittorrent client, a full office suit, andriod integration, osv. out of the box.

  109. No. The Desktop is Dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Desktop Linux isn't dead. The Desktop is dead.

    Everyone is moving to phones, tablets and laptops. Most of the (smart) cell phones sold are running Linux, and quite a few of the other ones are running UNIX. You can buy phones that run Linux at Walmart for like $30. This is probably the time when your mom is most likely to start using *NIX on a daily basis (though she won't know if.)

       

    1. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Laptops are just desktops with a tiny screen and crappy keyboard. From a software perspective there's no difference. So the Desktop is alive and well.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    2. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

      Nah, as a use case the desktop isn't dead, not by a long shot. The new technologies haven't supplanted the desktop experience, they've supplemented it and expanded the usefulness of computing devices in contexts outside of the traditional workspace. What may be dying is the big bulky box that sits under the desk and has up to now been providing the 'desktop experience', but that's not the same as the activities associated with a workspace in an office. There is still plenty of reason to sit down at a personal workspace (ie. desk) and do work. My smartphone is nice, but it's severely limited as far as the kind of work that can be done with it. Too tiny keyboard, too tiny screen, not enough battery life etc. I appreciate that it can feed me information when I'm on the go, but I can't use it for most computing work. A desktop environment (a real desk/workspace) is better suited for certain tasks. I suspect that over time, small portable devices like phones and pads will be dockable so they can integrate into a variety of environments, whether a home entertainment system, a personal workspace or public forum (ie presentations). In the personal workspace context, being able to interface with a proper keyboard, monitor, printer, scanner etc. will be important. Suddenly, the ability to provide a proper desktop experience will be relevant again. It may not quite look like it used to, but the desktop is far from dead.

    3. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by Lennie · · Score: 1

      I think he means netbooks (really crappy keyboard, possible not with an Intel-compatible CPU).

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    4. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Netbooks are farther along on the tiny/crappy continuum, but the same OS and UI as a desktop.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    5. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by shawb · · Score: 1

      The HTC evo already has an HDMI out which you could hook a proper monitor to, wifi for home networking rather than using the cell network, and USB + bluetooth which could in theory* charge the battery, connect keyboard, mouse, printer, scanner and most other modern peripherals. Local storage would be a little limiting, but network and cloud storage are becoming ubiquitous. MP3s? Most of my friends just stream music from Pandora as it is. Movies? Youtube, Hulu, Netflix et all. Pictures? Many cameras can upload directly to flikr or photobucket. Your internet connection down? Remember, your computer is now a phone with Wi-max. In fact, most people won't even need a wire to bring internet in IF the cell carriers have appropriate data plans. All that would be needed is a dongle and appropriate software to manage it all.

      The reason I say "in theory" is because there may be issues running the phone as USB host... I don't know enough about the implementation of USB to know if this would work. I assume it would be possible to work around this with a USB hub that masquerades as the root and simply passes incoming info to a driver on the phone, but again, I could be wrong here.

      In the office most companies are probably going to stick with the boxy desktop or at least laptop form factor for quite some time. However, I fully expect that by the time I need to replace my current personal computer, all the functionality I need will be available in a phone form factor. Whether I choose to abandon the personal computer completely for the mobile platform will be an aesthetic choice and have little impact on my lifestyle. At that point one of the biggest deficiencies for home use may be games... but the mobile form factor is even beginning to handle its own there. Capcom doing a decent job of combining the technologies behind Zombie Run and Invizimals would breathe new life into the Resident Evil franchise. Same with any other FPS. MMOers could grind their character outside of their proverbial "mom's basement" maybe choosing to "dock up" solely for group raids or exploring new areas.

      And a decade or two down the road? I'm not going to speculate that far. We may have direct neural links by that point and then the whole interface thing becomes moot. Or maybe our society will have crashed and a handful of computers are maintained only as a reminder of the days of yore.. Or we will have reached utopia and computers will no longer be useful for augmenting our thinking power. Or, more likely, something in between those three. Ehh... who am I kidding about a decade. We'll know in about 794 days.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    6. Re: No. The Desktop is Dead. by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Being able to actually see what you're doing, not to mention type comfortably and fast, will never be obsolete. Sure, I've got a pocket tablet and I've got a netbook... but I spend 95% of my computing time on my desktop because it's a far better experience with a full keyboard and 23" screen.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  110. Next: by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

    Computers are dead. Everybody is sick of how they swallow up our lives, so now we're going out more, reading books, writing on paper with fountain pens, and playing games on boards with dice and counters. Maybe this is better suited to a science fiction novel... :-|

  111. "Little I/O" by tepples · · Score: 1

    One day there will only be one Microsoft platform, but you will be able to buy a machine with little I/O as a games machine.

    As I understand it, game consoles have the big I/O and PCs have the little I/O. What's the median screen size connected to each?

    you can expect PC gaming to be sharply deprecated when Microsoft feels that their desktop customers are ready for a walled garden.

    What does Microsoft expect electrical engineering and computer science students at universities to use once Windows becomes a walled garden? Do they really expect universities to stick with Windows (and keep training their students in Windows) if Visual Studio requires a $99 per year subscription to XNA Creators Club for each student?

    1. Re:"Little I/O" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, game consoles have the big I/O and PCs have the little I/O. What's the median screen size connected to each?

      It depends on the PC. Are we talking about a multiple-bus Magny Cours or J. Random PC? People use massive server-class PCs as desktop systems when "necessary" so they are valid competitors here; I myself built a dual Xeon server motherboard into a custom video editing system (with SCSI RAID) back in the day for someone who was starting up a CG outfit, with a fancy schmancy but over the counter video card since they weren't OpenGL programmers or anything. It rocked Premiere's socks. By no means an impressive accomplishment, but then, that's the point of my argument.

      As for screen size, that is relevant but not the entire story. There's also multiple monitors, and further there's numbers of pixels. You can get high-resolution displays for use with computers, even today in the world of proliferation of 720p and 1080p displays.

      What does Microsoft expect electrical engineering and computer science students at universities to use once Windows becomes a walled garden? Do they really expect universities to stick with Windows (and keep training their students in Windows) if Visual Studio requires a $99 per year subscription to XNA Creators Club for each student?

      Microsoft has "always" (for a long long time anyway) existed on the premise that forcing people to do things their way is a viable business model. They do offer some compelling reasons that you might want to do that, such as their IDE. We can argue about the relative merits of IDEs all day, but theirs is considered to be one of the best by most of the developers I know that are making actual money programming. If they further merge their game and desktop platforms then that only offers developers more incentive to do things their way. It worked for Sony, who broke into the handheld market by offering a platform that was substantially similar to an existing console platform, permitting developers to leverage the hard-won skills they'd developed working on Sony's last PITA.

      Microsoft already provides broad educational discounts, and many schools have agreements with them that permit them to not only use unlimited (or nearly unlimited) Windows licenses on student machines for a song, but also to use them on the administration computers, and indeed in some cases to give Windows away to students for their own use at home. When I studied x86 assembler in community college, MASM came with the textbook (now textbooks, that's a scam) and today you can download it for free. DOS is easy enough to come by, as are emulators in which it will run. Enough digression; the point is that Microsoft need only maintain their current policy of offering aggressive educational pricing to "solve" this problem. It worked for Apple, and Microsoft learned well from their example (as in so many other things) and implemented it themselves. They now have something of a stranglehold on educational computing as a result. Current students in a Microsoft-approved educational program will receive a discount, and/or it will be rolled into the course fees.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:"Little I/O" by tepples · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, game consoles have the big I/O and PCs have the little I/O. What's the median screen size connected to each?

      It depends on the PC. Are we talking about a multiple-bus Magny Cours or J. Random PC?

      I'm talking about home PCs. These tend to get a 17" monitor for desktops or a 13" monitor for laptops while the game console gets a 32" monitor.

      As for screen size, that is relevant but not the entire story.

      It's relevant for multiplayer video gaming, for example. You can't easily do this with a 17".

      There's also multiple monitors

      But how many PC games support multiple monitors, one for each player? Instead, they tend to expect each player to have a separate PC.

      You can get high-resolution displays for use with computers

      Any TV will work with a PC, but the PC and TV are too often kept in separate rooms.

      many schools have agreements with them that permit them to not only use unlimited (or nearly unlimited) Windows licenses on student machines for a song, but also to use them on the administration computers, and indeed in some cases to give Windows away to students for their own use at home.

      Windows licenses don't expire until end of support, which is usually ten years out. XNA Creators Club, on the other hand, expires after only one year, so you can't keep it for a couple years after you graduate while you look for a job, especially if you graduate into a not-ideal job market.

      Current students in a Microsoft-approved educational program will receive a discount, and/or it will be rolled into the course fees.

      And CS programs that switch to free software can offer lower course fees, as well as preparation for businesses that have switched to free software so as not to require a $99/yr XNA Creators Club subscription for every PC in the office just to run software developed by the in-house programmer.

    3. Re:"Little I/O" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As for screen size, that is relevant but not the entire story.

      It's relevant for multiplayer video gaming, for example. You can't easily do this with a 17".

      That's why homes are expected to do most of their computing on the game console. Have you noticed that handhelds are getting HDMI outputs, and the next wave will likely have multicore and GHz or near-GHz ARM cores? The mind boggles when remembering rolling around the garage on my Sun 4/260. I was originally hoping for an Open Pandora, now I'm hoping for a Panasonic Jungle. Maybe I'll end up with some third thing.
      Keep in mind that I plan to keep an engineer-class machine at home, but I think that most users neither need nor really want such a thing. Maybe I'm wrong; honestly, I'd like to be.

      You can get high-resolution displays for use with computers

      Any TV will work with a PC, but the PC and TV are too often kept in separate rooms.

      Well, I went the route of punching a hole in the wall and running a really long HDMI cable... I originally put it there for ethernet and power (side by side... but it's a short haul.) The closet adjoins the one in my room, and it contains the PoE injector from my WISP, and my own AP/border gateway.

      Windows licenses don't expire until end of support, which is usually ten years out. XNA Creators Club, on the other hand, expires after only one year, so you can't keep it for a couple years after you graduate while you look for a job, especially if you graduate into a not-ideal job market.

      A condition easily changed if necessary to retain student interest.

      Current students in a Microsoft-approved educational program will receive a discount, and/or it will be rolled into the course fees.

      And CS programs that switch to free software can offer lower course fees, as well as preparation for businesses that have switched to free software so as not to require a $99/yr XNA Creators Club subscription for every PC in the office just to run software developed by the in-house programmer.

      I don't disagree, and I'd love to see them all switching. This has long been the state of affairs, however, and yet schools predominantly run on and teach with Windows.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  112. I love it and I hate it. What to do? by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    I'm at a bit of a crossroads with Linux atm. The things I insist on having are:

    1. Easy, integrated whole-disk encryption.
    2. Resistance to security problems.
    3. Excellent multimedia capabilities.

    Nice-to-haves include:

    4. Free software to do everything I want.
    5. Usable documentation.

    Ubuntu wins on 1, 2 and 4. To achieve those goals with Windows, I have to buy an encryption product (e.g. PGP's whole-disk product); install a firewall and virus protection; and be ready to open my wallet for lots of odd software packages. With Ubuntu or Fedora, I just check an option at installation to get the encryption, forget about the security problems, and click a simple download menu to get software.

    Windows wins, hands-down, on 3. I've installed Ubuntu and Fedora a couple of dozen times (at least) in the last few months on 5 different computers and in every case getting decent Flash performance, getting AVI files to play, just getting the desktop to display at the native resolution of the panel is a royal pain, often requiring lots of arcane command-line work and the sacrifice of a couple of small animals.

    What's broken it for me, though, is my latest build, a machine that highlights the fact that Linux miserably fails on 5. I got tired of slow video performance so I built a nice, fast machine. It doesn't have crazy gamer graphics or a dozen sticks of RAM, but it's got $1200 worth of quality parts, all of them using chipsets listed as supported by Linux and Ubuntu. I get random freezes that stop everything but the mouse pointer. This should be simple, right? Go to the Ubuntu forums and you'll find the mother of all irritating support threads, over a thousand (iirc) posts of people with the same problem with no answers, no decent input from developers, and not even any standard diagnostic flow. There's a bug reporting system that, for this bug, is deliberately set up to require more information than can be gleaned from any frozen machine. The same bug is present in Fedora.

    This kind of really shitty attention to show-stopping bugs is enough to make me switch to Windows. I'm actually going to go to the store and buy a copy of Windows 7, download Avira and whatever is the currently best free firewall, and give my credit card number to PGP for another copy of their whole disk encryption. Then I'll have to toss out a few bucks here and there for an up-to-snuff NNTP client and a few other pieces of software.

    I've been using and sticking up for Ubuntu for the better part of a decade, but if all this works like it should, I may go back to Windows. (I NEVER thought I'd say that.) I'm such a Linux fanboi that I may also just build yet another machine and try again.

    But however this situation turns out, I'm really peeved with Linux right now and I'm not talking it up like I used to.

    Such a shame.

  113. October Fools Day by tepples · · Score: 1

    Did ... did it finally grow up? Sell out? Get brainwashed? Recieved ms-paid escort service? All of it in one hectic night?

    It's been six months since April Fools Day and they need some day on which to dump AFD style stories.

  114. What you see is what you get by bromoseltzer · · Score: 1
    Newsflash: Linux is not going to overtake Windows or MacOS on the desktop. Who ever thought they would? Be happy with what we have: A vibrant niche of the computing world, where geeks hang out and where lots of cool experimentation and collaboration happens. And where a lot of folks learn skills that they can use on the dark side if they need to earn a living. (And where corporate folks invest lots of $$ to get cost-effective server and embedded solutions.)

    If Linux had conquered the desktop, most of us would have to move on to some other GeekOS.

    --
    Fiat Lux.
  115. Fuck That by mm_202 · · Score: 1

    Linux as a desktop OS is not dead, far from it. It may 'dead' to be unwashed masses; but that is only because of their laziness and fear to try something new. Their loss.

    I don't have a single Windows box not only at home (4 desktops, 1 laptop, 1 server), but also at work (desktop/laptop, and I work in a MS shop). I've been doing this for years and have helped a lot of other people convert over (especially if they were using Vista), they just wanted some *stable* to check their email, do some surfing and maybe write a few papers. Once people see that they dont NEED Microsoft OSes/products to do day-to-day tasks (excluding gaming), they have no problem trying some more stable, secure, and solid.

    End of rant, and didnt RTFA.

    MM.

  116. Steve Ballmer, Billy the Gates and Stev Jobs by kubitus · · Score: 1
    will attend the funeral

    while Wozz, Paul Allan and Gary Kildall asks to be excused as they are writing new routines for *nix.

    -

    R. Stallman will in the meantime ask them all to say no bad things about Linux!

    enjoy - no more Linux FUD from Redmond!

    yours truly

    Gary Kildall

  117. Someone Smokes Too much Crack by wwbbs · · Score: 1

    Never ceases to amaze me how often articles come to press claiming * Linux is dead. Being desktop linux, HPC linux, Virtualized Linux, embedded linux or webserver linux. Linux is not dead however you visualize linux; is it a distribution a kernel, a building block, another component etc. It's and amazing tool and until the LKML goes offline Linux will exist and people will use it on there desktops etc. I for one think the desktop is dead not linux, I for one use X-Windows, VNC, ssh, and MS Terminal Services to accomplish both work and personal tasks all day long. Most of the time now I'm using some sorta QNX Flavour/Hybrid on my Blackberry to access my machines and my clients machines. At least I'm pretty sure the blackberry is using some sorta embedded Qnx realtime os.

  118. Dead? by big+dumb+dog · · Score: 1

    Sometimes efforts need to fail in order for someone else to have an opportunity to succeed.

    --
    "Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the f-ing Peace Corps." - John 'Bluto' Blutarsky
  119. Funny Stuff by Bob9113 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Six months ago my brother, who is a very stalwart end-user-only, tried Ubuntu for the first time. He now recommends it for everything except for gaming.

    But he is pretty smart -- probably not a fair test.

    Two weeks ago my neighbor across the street came to me and said she had a problem with her computer. She explained the issue in very primitive terms which boiled down to a broad-spectrum viral infection of Windows. She said a friend of her son had recommended that she "Do something called 'wipe my hard drive' then install Ooo Boo Too on Windows." The conversation continued in this vein for a while. In short, she is neither the sharpest tack in the drawer nor a skilled computer user. She asked for my help with the install. I said, well, maybe I should stay here in case you need help, but you should try to do it all yourself. If you can figure it all out, then you should be OK with using it, but it is pretty different from Windows.

    I helped out with a couple confidence things -- "Should I really wipe the whole hard drive?" "Yes.", "Do I really need a password?" "[brief pro/con explanation]" "OK, I'll use a password." -- but she did the rest on her own. Once it was up I showed her where the icons were and how to search for more software, where to put in her password for the local wi-fi she uses, how the system updater works -- but nothing else. I left feeling a little nauseous about the number of "How do I..." questions I would get over the ensuing days.

    Two days later I stopped over to ask how it was going. "It's great -- works a lot better than Windows did." (which I ascribed to cruft and viruses having made her Windows install slow) I asked if she had any questions. "Nope, everything is working just fine."

    1. Re:Funny Stuff by Duncan+J+Murray · · Score: 1

      Yep - similar experiences with my dad and sister - I was expecting loads of trouble, and was surprised to hear nothing from them. A ring a week later and it's 'no problems, you?'.

    2. Re:Funny Stuff by pinkeen · · Score: 1

      Exactly, my GF is not technical. She uses linux when she's at my place cause that is my only os. She has win on her laptop. I haven't ever try to convince her to use linux. But you see, she asked me to install linux on her box. At first she wanted to play with it, but now she says that it's actually faster and more friendly than win vista. BTW I use kde so installed opensuse for her, because it's the best kde-centered, mainstream distro out there.

  120. I agree with the article. by pavon · · Score: 1

    The dream of Linux as a major desktop OS is now pretty much dead.

    As someone who has used Linux for 13 years now, I agree with that statement completely. There is no reason to expect that Linux will ever become a major OS in developed countries. That said I disagree with the reasons given.

    The biggest issue is that Windows is good enough. People aren't going to change what OS they use, as well as all the applications they use, spend time learning something new, and deal will all the hassle of incompatibilities unless they see it as a major improvement over what they have now. This isn't the 90's when Windows crashed multiple times a week and had to be reinstalled from scratch once a year to clean up it's cruft. Viruses and botnets are still a problem, but not as much as they used to be, and there is good free antivirus software available to all but eliminate those problems.

    Even if linux was flawless - if it just worked all the time without thinking and was easy to learn, the improvement it offered over Linux still wouldn't be worth the hassle to change for most people. I do still hold some hope of Linux becoming more popular in developing countries, where the cost is a significant advantage, as well as nationalism. However, even they seem to prefer to pirate windows for various reason rather than use free software.

    There is also the issue of support. People are going to have problems with any computer system, and when they do who are they going get help? Not from the company that made it, and unless they are especially self-resourceful they aren't going to go to the internet to find it. They are going to ask their friends or family. If those people are using windows, it makes their life a lot easier if they are too.

    So it isn't just a matter of someone coming up with a way to make it work - there needs to be a radical change that really improves the way people interact with their computer. And if that happened it wouldn't really be linux on the desktop in the way we think of it. We probably wouldn't even call it linux because it would eschew the entire "linux desktop" software landscape the same way that android does on the phone. The desktop is a mature (or stagnant depending on your bend) concept, and there isn't much refining to be done.

    That said there is a good deal of movement in the mobile sector. That is an area where people aren't as locked in, and aren't yet set in their ways when it comes to how we interact with these devices. It is like the early PC market, and at this point it is still anyone's game. Free software (which is what we are really talking about here, not just linux) has a good chance of being a major player in that field, and we may also see more people ditching the traditional desktop for spin offs from the mobile segment (ala the iPad).

    However, the desktop is a dead end as far as market share goes. And I'm fine with that. There are lots of good bands that never made it big. There are lots of good products that didn't win in the market place. The linux community is large enough to support itself, and as long as it remains a useful tool for myself and others it is a success in my eyes.

    1. Re:I agree with the article. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      First you have to win the applications, then you can swap Windows out with Linux from under them. The whole "Welcome to Linux, none of your old software will work but for everything there is a G/KApp that is better" is a non-starter.

      And I don't mean the social semantic desktop, but to win traditional applications. Has anyone outside of Linux ever heard of e.g. digiKam? By the way an open source project with a very good name. No, they haven't.

      I've noticed there's not so much interest in making open source work on Windows or Mac. Linux apps for Linux users is preaching to the choir, Getting that software on other platforms would be evangelizing, because there's at least hope it'd be picked up by others.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  121. Non-free software by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, compile the piece of software you want to use against the library versions you actually have!

    End users don't compile non-free software.

    If you don't understand these things, don't use software from outside your package system!

    Package systems tend not to contain non-free software. The article mentions this ideological point.

    And if you claim all software should be free, how do you expect to fund the development of a major video game if you plan to release it as free software from day one as opposed to five years later like Id?

    1. Re:Non-free software by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Package systems tend not to contain non-free software. The article mentions this ideological point

      For one there's not much to be had. But a few (opera, flash) I use are available from the partner repository. The closed source Catalyst/nVidia drivers are also easy to install, and I suppose most freeware could get a spot there. What the repositories don't contain much of is payware, it's not a store.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Non-free software by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      Package systems tend not to contain non-free software

      There's nothing stopping non free developers releasing debs/rpms of their software - even better is when they have repositories that can be added to to the package manager (why people insist on believing that "going out to the intarwebs and downloading an installer" is a feature and not a bug is beyond me). As for what distro to support they can go the easy route and support the number 1 and maybe number 2 desktop distro (which means Ubuntu and maybe Fedora/RedHat). People who aren't using those distros can probably figure out for themselves how to get it running on their system.

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    3. Re:Non-free software by chammy · · Score: 1

      You can release the code for a game but still sell the media. Did you think Id just gives their games away for free? All the Quake code in the world is useless without a pak file to play.

    4. Re:Non-free software by pxc · · Score: 1

      I believe all software should be free (as in freedom).

      Do I avoid software that isn't released as F/OSS? Yes.
      Would I criticize that software, and/or recommend alternatives to others? Yes, usually.
      Would I seek to punish or rebuke companies who release their software as F/OSS only after a few years waiting period? No.

      I might want more community accessibility than Id's model allows, but I'm supportive of anyone who "comes to the light". I want (and advocate!) for bolder licensing schemes on the part of companies that approach F/OSS with hesitation. But at the end of the day, something is better than nothing. As long as the contribution isn't a disingenuous one (as indicated by things like TiVo-ization and patent encumbrance), I'm glad to have it.

      I actually kind of like the idea of a licensing scheme that progressively gives up more rights to the public. I think having "all rights reserved", then allowing non-commercial derivative works, then allowing non-commercial reproduction/redistribution, and finally complete freedom (a la public domain) is a graceful way to fulfill of the original spirit of copyright-as-monopoly. But of course, as a card-carrying FSF member, I'm even happier about works (of software and culture) that begin as free, open community projects.

  122. Bullshit by damn_registrars · · Score: 1
    The notion that software development is hindered by, as the summary states:

    and the fierce ideology of the open-source community at large

    Is total bullshit. Just because Linux developers want to see open source software does not in any way prevent closed-source software from going there. Indeed for several important industries there already is active development and release of for-profit, closed-source software for Linux. Nothing inherent to the Linux model forbids or inhibits the release of such software. There are many software developers who are making money developing and releasing Linux software; just because Microsoft and Adobe chose not to be in those ranks does not mean there is no money there.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  123. Jolicloud by belrick · · Score: 1

    I've installed dozens of Linux distributions side-by-side on my various laptops over the years and invariably I would be booting into the Windows OS of the day (XP, skipped Vista, happy with 7). Partly because of need to access some Windows-only software but also a comfort level. Even though 90% of my laptop use is for web/Internet. This coming from someone who spent his PhD doing everything in CDE (and having an Amiga at home).

    But then I tried Jolicloud 1.0. It is based on Ubuntu but feels a lot more like the iPhone in presentation. Applications arrayed on a home screen. Application windows maximized with very little OS clutter. Web applications promoted to feel like full apps.

    It boots so fast on my SSD Thinkpad X200 Tablet and it feels comfortable. Perhaps this is the Linux Desktop everyone is waiting for?

    Of course, I'm waiting for them to rev the Ubuntu base they are working on so the two-point multi-touch and Wacom pen of the X200 Tablet actually work (they work in Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10, if I recall correctly). That and supporting tethering to my iPhone (both of which work in Windows).

  124. The fat lady hasn't sung. by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

    Has anyone heard word from Netcraft on this?

    --
    The game.
  125. There are 2 Billion Desktop GNU/Linux Users by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    The two billion people hooked to the internet all use GNU/Linux.

    This is the 21st century, we deliver applications to the desktop through the browser and other client wares. Google, eBay, Facebook, Twitter, smtp mail....

    Everyone on the 'net uses Linux. What a colossal failure indeed.

    Off the desktop, mobile computing is the big thing now, yeah what a failure.

  126. Loves me some Call of Duty by maillemaker · · Score: 1

    I agree. My home PC is mostly an entertainment system, and that means gaming.

    I'm not going to dual-boot just for the satisfaction of running my email, web browser, and open office in Linux.

    --
    A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
  127. Installer vs. sources.list? by tepples · · Score: 1

    I can go to a website, download an installer and install my software.

    If you don't realise why that's a terrible system, you are probably too stupid to ever understand just how stupid you really are.

    In other words, the Dunning-Kruger effect. But what's the difference between A. going to a web site and downloading an installer and B. going to a web site and downloading a line to put in sources.list?

    1. Re:Installer vs. sources.list? by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      But what's the difference between A. going to a web site and downloading an installer and B. going to a web site and downloading a line to put in sources.list?

      Well, beyond the obvious (an installer could work on any distro, not just an apt-based one meanwhile a sources.list allows for apt to pull in updates), not much really. Both are bad because most distros and versions within a distro are incompatible with each other, possibly in subtle ways, and most developers aren't willing to both support many distros and versions in the short term let alone support them in the long term. Even within a distro community (Ubuntu), plenty of packages have been dropped in the last three years (something I noticed when upgrading from the 8.04 to 10.04) and while some individuals might have their own PPA, I'm not inclined to believe most will hang around in the long-term.

      In short, the issue fundamentally is that Linux userspace is heavily fragment and constantly changing and the LSB standard was pretty much a complete failure. This is more or less precisely because of an unwillingness to maintain backwards compatibility in userspace and heavy API churn (either simply from bad first design or a desire to "start fresh"). Distros try to counter this by recompiling everything to work with whatever is the latest new thing, but then each distro revision ends up adding to the problem.

      The only real way that these problems will be fixed in the long term is if both a newer LSB standard is created and if distros (RedHat and Debian being two big bases) actually follow them. Of course, that loses a major point of even having separate distros. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't see many current distros exactly jumping at the chance to obsolete themselves.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
  128. I blame X by agrajag9 · · Score: 1

    Not for being a resource hog, because it isn't. Not for being laggy, because it isn't. But for being so insanely confusing to change even the slightest settings. Every conf file for it is gargantuan and confusing. And it doesn't help that just about every distro I've used has put it in a different location. The tools to change settings are atrocious as well. I recently blew away my Fedora, Gentoo, and OS X boxes to replace them with Ubuntu, because it "just works". And yes, it does "just work", and installing new software from outside the main source repository is surprisingly easy. But that's not the point. X is ancient. Even M$ knew that they needed to do a major system overhaul after XP. But Linux is still using things that predate even itself - X has been around for god only knows how long, but the initial Linux kernel release was in '91. The UNIX-HATERS Handbook even has an entire chapter devoted to X. X is a fantastic system for servers - the client/server model it's built on works great for remote session - but desktop users don't want any of these 9000+ options and features; they want simplicity, and X is anything but simple.

  129. FTFA by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    "Over the past few years, modern Linux distributions such as Ubuntu have utterly transformed the open-source desktop user experience into something sleek and simple, while arguably surpassing Windows and Mac OS in both security and stability."

    The Defense rests.

  130. Let me ask my Linux desktop... by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1

    ...you know, the one that's been sitting on my desk for 12 years and counting...
    Really, as Linux users, should we care what PC World or some other corporate troll thinks? I thought we were past that.

  131. Oh no!!!! by Deputy+Doodah · · Score: 1

    Does this mean I have to get rid of my Linux installations now?

  132. Windows Mobile is Dead by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    Which is more relevant today? The mobile market or desktop market? Who's leading the mobile market...Hmmm.....

  133. Pathetic Reporting by psbrogna · · Score: 1

    Good job PC World- I hope you got a lot of advertising dollars for the FUD article. Just curious, after you've lost all your eyeballs how you'll pay to print your publication?

    Would be nice if somewhere there was mention of that fact that the author of the article is president of a software company that appears to be a pure MS shop- in addition to to being a "senior editor" at PC World.

  134. Is PC World the Nietzsche of today? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Nietzsche exclaimed that "God is dead." And yet, billions of people ignored Nietzsche and continued to believe and even convert to a religious believe. Just because he said it doesn't make it so. Likewise, PC World claims that desktop linux is dead, and millions of people ignore them, too.

    It seems like even Microsoft is ignoring PC World's proclamation as they are stepping up their anti-linux/fsf campaigns. For something that is supposedly dead, they sure are spending a lot of money against it.

    Linux on the desktop isn't dead. It's alive and kicking. Does it have any where near as large an installed base as Microsoft Windows does? Of course not. But then again, in the mid 1980s a small software company in the Pacific Northwest didn't have anywhere near the market share of IBM or even Apple. A lot can change in 25 years.

  135. Architecture and license differences by tepples · · Score: 1

    Some might install, some will fail with some weird technobabble.

    What weird technobabble, specifically?

    Many apps find it necessary to have SEVERAL entries. One will be the game's main files, and then you have to install another "Data files for xxx". Why can't they be in some hierarchy?

    For one thing, the executable for a game written in unmanaged code differs for each architecture (ARM, x86, x86-64), but the data files are often the same. For another, a lot of video games have the executables distributed under a free software license but the data files under a different, probably less free license.

  136. TFA is a trolling! by lordmetroid · · Score: 1

    The Linux desktop is not dead, it can't be, because I read on the internet that this is the year of the Linux desktop.

  137. Computing History by Roger_Wilco · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Consider not the fraction of the market, but the size of the market. How many people have GNU/Linux on their desktop?

    Compare the size of the market to the size of the market for various other systems. There were 17 million Commodore 64 machines sold. I suspect there are easily this many people with open source desktops in the world; there are around 10 million users of Ubuntu alone. Does the author mean to say that the Commodore 64 was unsuccessful, was itself dead on the desktop, for having a mere 17 million users? It seems unlikely.

    Being the sole desktop option is a hazardous place to be. If you believe in capitalism, you should prefer a mix, you should prefer that users (at some level, potentially corporate) decide which system to use.

    I use GNU/Linux: Ubuntu on the desktop, Debian on servers and sufficiently high-end embedded systems. That's not about to change. I'm glad others are concerned about converting people, but only so far as it causes them to make better the software I use.

  138. Finally time for Linux desktop then by slapout · · Score: 1

    I guess desktop Linux is about to reach critical mass then. Because every time someone declares something as "dead", it takes off. I remember when they declared Bluetooth dead and then it took off.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  139. Jack Welch's #1 or #2 mantra has been deprecated by An+dochasac · · Score: 1

    Jack Welch was absolutely right, if you want to be G.E. or Microsoft, you must be #1 or #2 in your market (and ruthlessly crush any competition.) But we aren't G.E. and we aren't Microsoft and with the Fed's policy encouraging M&As, we will soon be left with a few dozen mega-corporations who are averse to invention or innovation because it doesn't guarantee #1 or #2 and doesn't guarantee a profit to shareholders in the next 90 days.

    So where does that leave the rest of us? There are enormous gaps in the market the big guys won't bother touching because no one will make billions on desktops which require only one support person for 10,000+ desktops. No one will make billions on desktops which can run on last year's computers or on other handheld devices. No one will make billions on desktops which have accessibility designed into standard widgets or desktops which can beused as teaching tools by allowing users to see and modify what's under the hood. No one will make billions on desktops which can be customized to meet many diverse needs which haven't yet been dreamed of.

    In case you haven't heard, Jack Welch's winner takes all mantra has been deprecated In this new world, it's O.K. to be a niche player. In fact unless you are G.E. or Microsoft, it's crucial to be a niche player and in that world, the OpenSource Desktops (including various flavors of GNU/Linux) shine.

  140. Why Are These Not Problems On Windows? by EXTomar · · Score: 1

    "Poor Documentation" is an interesting complaint because the documentation for Windows including Win7 is still just as arcane as Gnome (I haven't looked at KDE in system docs but I suspect its the same state). Finding some of the Explorer keyboard shortcuts is a chore instead of being naturally pointed out to you so the onus is completely on the user to dig it out "secrets" which are conveniently in a book for $25.

    "Software, Software, Software" is also an interesting complaint where something like "Ubuntu Software Center" is light years ahead of what Microsoft offers let alone any other third party software vendor. Installing Blender of Gimp is just as easy as installing Firefox. And Microsoft isn't providing that special sewing software to your mom but ostensibly the sewing machine manufacturer. Would you have this same problem on Mac? Mac and Linux users seem to go "They won't support us" but somehow its Apple or Linux community fault but I'm not sure how it is or how to correct it. It doesn't seem to be a problem with the platform but the ISV.

    "Little Support" is again an interesting complaint because most issue a user will have Microsoft will tell them "Contact the vendor you bought the machine from". Turning around and calling HP or Dell the solutions range from shipping or hauling the box somewhere to long waits over the phone. I'm not going to say Linux is "stellar five star support" but I am confused how Microsoft offers "good support". Apple, Dell, HP offer good support but Microsoft is a giant "bleh".

    "Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user" doesn't mean "Doing things the Windows way" was any good to begin with. The Start "button" is not a button, a menu, or an explorer so explain that behavior to a new user is sometimes a challenge. It is at the bottom left of the screen instead of the top left. Again saying "its easy to install in Windows" is really odd because knowing how the installer works in Windows compared to both deb or rpm let alone the more advanced versions of both run rings around native and third party installers. You don't have to say "Install this for myself" or "Pick a directory to install" under Linux packagers. Why is "Doing things the Windows way" valuable beyond not wanting to learn another way? Apple through Mac does these things very differently as well and they don't complain. A lot of things on the modern Linux desktop "just work" but it is different where part of Apple's genius is they take a lot of time and effort to assuage the user from panicking.

    It seems like "Why are these not problems on Windows?" is that Microsoft some how drilled it into people's head that it is use's fault not Microsoft. If you didn't know Window-E opened a new Explorer that is the user not knowing not Windows presenting it to the user.

  141. back to by nonicknameavailable · · Score: 1

    oh well back to Windows 98SE then i can't use a dead operatingsystem

    --
    Mendacem Memorem Esse Oportet
  142. The ship has sunk? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

    I don't think so.

    Ubuntu has made some progress towards a consumer friendly Linux distribution, but it may not be enough. Truth is Linux is more of a platform OS not a polished user oriented system like Windows or OS X. We can pick and choose what desktop we like (even CLI) and how it will look and operate.

    We are a victim of our own success. Linux is designed to be as generic as Unix. It has attracted a lot of computer enthusiasts and professionals each making their own version of Linux. No idea is shot down or ignored. Everybody has a chance to create the next big thing. This generates a lot of noise. The non-computer savvy consumer finds this noise distracting and confusing.

    A lot of people (both non-geeks and geeks alike) really like to use an OS that is designed to be user friendly. They crave something that's been designed from the bottom up to be easy for them to use, while being powerful enough to get the job done. This is not Linux. Linux has the power but not the master design, the single vision, or the official "right way" of doing things.

    I think we should all admit that we like it this way.

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    1. Re:The ship has sunk? by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      I think we should all admit that we like it this way.

      Yeah, I don't really see Ubuntu being shipped with desktops in Best Buy as any real success or what should be the goal.

      There should never be one operating system, there should never be one browser, there should never be one processor architecture. Progress isn't one paradigm overpowering another and taking sole prominence.

      Maybe I have limited imagination, but I can't see one OS ever to be able to satisfy every user.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  143. Linux is not for main stream users. by deviceb · · Score: 1

    utility computing is for the sheep.
    running compiz on my sabayon DESKTOP here at the office every part of my desktop-wall runs sessions to other windows boxes mainly. Servers, VPN connections to various hospitals that may need support. This setup has proven to be the most effective for a user like myself that has to have a stable/secure platform when supporting tye types of systems i do.
    I will never be running a virtualized thin client from some mega company even though most people end up this way. Walk your path, don't cry about it.
    And as long as i can build a better box for media @ home, i will continue doing so. is not DX11 coming to linux in the future? Games have always been the crux of linux..

    --
    Kill your TV
  144. At least put some though in your trolling! by Seth+Kriticos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really don't mind some well written trolling, but this is just pathetic.

    Linux on the desktop is fine and better than ever. No, it's not mainstream (and I actually hope it stays so, I don't think more than 20% market share is healthy for any OS). It's fine in a way that there is an increasing user base. Also technically it's quite mature, and exceeds most of the competition in many ways (I'd list them, but it gets repetitive).

    Now granted, apps on Linux, especially commercial ones need some more work. And it's being done, slowly. Just from the distribution I see (Ubuntu), there are big strides to include this into the Software Center (yes, we have that already). It's still in test mode for the next half a year, but I think with a high probability that it will attract a lot of commercial interest.

    I also run a site with international audience (mostly the U.S. and China, + 67 other countries with 2k+ visitors a day, mostly private users) and the Linux share is at 2.88% there. This is much better than one or two years ago.

    So anyone telling me that the OS I currently write from is not existent or does not evolve is full of BS IMO. And the troll article was not even written in a way that would be fun to read (and we Linux folks have humor if you hit some valid points). Bad editor, grow some spine!

  145. MS Paid Trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've worked with Microsoft employees before. They have *admitted* to me that Microsoft pays people to troll boards, people inside tech magazines/sites/etc to write troll stories, etc. All to keep the *idea* of their barely functional, buggy, bloated desktop on top by making it "the" desktop in a majority of computer users' minds. This is the ONLY reason Microsoft is on top and alternatives such as OSX and GNU/Linux cannot get a foothold, not by any other reason.

    It should be illegal for a company to do such negative viral marketing, and is yet another example of how our social and economic system is fundamentally flawed and tilted to people who can lie and cheat and steal their way to the top and keep themselves there by throwing money at everything that threatens them.

    I keep a Windows partition on my computer to play games, but have considered taking it off many times before because I want to play games. No game is worth supporting a lying, cheating, scamming company that uses underhanded methods like this to keep themselves on top.

    My Windows dies today, if only to prove this trollish Microsoft-funded "article" false. Desktop GNU/Linux is alive and well on mine and many, many other desktops, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. And as we continue to push against Microsoft's lies and make people see what Microsoft really is, we WILL dominate the desktop.

    Count on it.

  146. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by JeremyGNJ · · Score: 1

    If this is true, then it's good news for Microsoft. XP Support has been set to continute until 2020.

  147. It's not the OS alone... by headLITE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most users don't *want* to stray from the party line or even realize that there is such a thing. They just want something that works. For normal people, Mac OS X gets that right most of the time, but not necessarily only because the UI is easy to use.

    For example, my mother needs a web browser and something that gets her photos off her camera. She does use e-mail, but as far as I know, she only uses some web mail system. She has a Mac because she can go to a store, pick one up, and it just works and does everything she wants to do without her having to call her son about it. It's not so much that she thinks this wouldn't be possible with Linux, it's more that she doesn't even care and/or have a good idea of what Linux even is. She's not buying an operating system, she's buying a magical box that lets her access the web and that stores her photos. Even Windows would beat Linux if new Windows systems didn't come pre-loaded with so much crapware...

    1. Re:It's not the OS alone... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Baloney...

      I run at least five flavors of Windows and hafter as many Linux distros, am pretty solidly in the Ubuntu camp. I have a Mac and an iPhone and am going to be buying more for a laundry list of reasons.

      HOWEVER, the first thing that struck me about the Mac and the iPhone was how much they did NOT "just work." I was ready to be converted. Oh, please, let me for once just buy a !@#$ing box and be able to plug it in and start working. It was NO different to me than setting up a Windows or Ubuntu box. The OS wasn't fully configured or even current. I had to install everything myself only to find it wanted to automatically run 2.9GBs of patches, rebooting about six times in the process. I didn't have a working computer until the next day.

      The difference is that Apple has an army of well trained baby sitters who will, for a fee, put up with this crap for you and coddle your ego telling you what a special, pretty smart and interesting person you are and then hand your shiny box back.

      I refuse to pay for that sort of saccharine bullshit, so I'm left with a computer that is just as much a pain in my ass as any other.

    2. Re:It's not the OS alone... by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Informative

      2.9GB of patches and 6 reboots on a brand new machine from Apple? Bullshit.

      I'll take a single, or perhaps two reboots if there has been a firmware update for the machine in question (some of the firmware updates for the iMac require two reboots) but normal software updates really don't require 6 reboots. If you get way behind on updates, the software updater goes for the combo pack, which rolls them together precisely so you don't have to reboot multiple times. The updater also doesn't "surprise" you by hiding updates that have dependencies on ones you have installed previously - it puts them alongside those updates (and will grey them out if you deselect a dependency) and installs them all at the same time (if you choose) when you click "install".

      Six reboots? PEBKAC error I think.

      Or hyperbole.

      The only thing not "fully configured" about OS X on a new box is your name, address and username. Do you expect that all to be set up for you by Apple before the machine ships? The only thing you need to do is tell it who you are (optional) set up an admin account (mandatory) and click "ok" (and just tell them you're *sure* you don;t want to try Mobile.Me for free, since it asks you again if you skip over it). That is the sum total of the setup required. Perhaps you're talking about pairing the BT keyboard and mouse if you have them. It prompts you as soon as it boots for the first time if it doesn't detect a USB kb and/or mouse.

      I have set up more than enough Macs in my time, since the dawn of 10.0 beta (and before) to know that setting them up for people is a question of asking "what username and password do you want, and what is the password for your wireless network (again, Apple does not know this information in advance - you do have to provide it yourself, so I guess more evidence of 'not configured').

    3. Re:It's not the OS alone... by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      I call crap on your statement that Windows beats Linux in any way. I have had a lot of non tech people use my Linux desktop without any issues. The only thing I had to do is create the user...
      Btw, the only subset of people, that I ever let use my Ubuntu desktop, that had any issues with Linux were the tech people. For others, it works and they don't care.

    4. Re:It's not the OS alone... by evil_aar0n · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This strikes me in the same way as the rabid OS X fanboi that said that any OS X failure was _my_ fault, because OS X _never_ failed. Baloney. Why do they need patches, then?

      I've set up close to a dozen Mac OS X machines, over the years, and have never had any experience close to what you mention. The worst one was when a MBP of mine died and I had to set up my replacement from the dead unit's HDD. I was shocked at how easy that was. I connected the HDD to the new laptop, which recognized that it had an OS X installation on it, and it proceeded to ask if I wanted to initialize my new MBP from that drive. After some time to copy files, it was ready to go, configured almost exactly as my previous unit. There were some things I had to handle manually - HP scanner shit, which is buggy, anyway - but it was automatic, for the most part.

      I don't know how you ended up in your situation, but yours is definitely an outlier case.

      --
      Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
    5. Re:It's not the OS alone... by Theoboley · · Score: 1

      Six reboots? PEBKAC error I think.

      I prefer the PICNIC error.

      --
      Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try
    6. Re:It's not the OS alone... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > For example, my mother needs a web browser and something that gets her photos off her camera.

      Great example. Apple's bundleware app for this purpose chooses to destroy whatever organization
      you might want to impose on your own data. It 'flattens" everything and gets n00b users to the
      point where they think it makes sense to burn their photos to CD and shove them in a box rather
      than dealing with iPhoto.

      AppleTV does this same nonsense too.

      There's a certain utility to being able to go into a store and pick up a box. OTOH, you can also
      go to the web and have something shipped to you.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    7. Re:It's not the OS alone... by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Baloney...

      I run at least five flavors of Windows and hafter as many Linux distros, am pretty solidly in the Ubuntu camp. I have a Mac and an iPhone and am going to be buying more for a laundry list of reasons.

      HOWEVER, the first thing that struck me about the Mac and the iPhone was how much they did NOT "just work." I was ready to be converted. Oh, please, let me for once just buy a !@#$ing box and be able to plug it in and start working. It was NO different to me than setting up a Windows or Ubuntu box. The OS wasn't fully configured or even current. I had to install everything myself only to find it wanted to automatically run 2.9GBs of patches, rebooting about six times in the process. I didn't have a working computer until the next day.

      The difference is that Apple has an army of well trained baby sitters who will, for a fee, put up with this crap for you and coddle your ego telling you what a special, pretty smart and interesting person you are and then hand your shiny box back.

      I refuse to pay for that sort of saccharine bullshit, so I'm left with a computer that is just as much a pain in my ass as any other.

      Strange. The past three Macs I have bought all worked right out of the box. Sure, you have to choose your language, create a user account, select a time zone, whatever. But then you're good to go. Now, if you have a bunch of arcane devices, you'll have to install their own drivers. But all the hardware in the computer will be working already.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    8. Re:It's not the OS alone... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, you mean preinstalled Windows box asks for MORE than your name, time zone, and passwords, and don't work right out of the box?

      I call bullshit just like GP, because a modern preinstalled Windows box asks EVEN LESS than a new Mac box - they don't ask you for a name or password 90% of the time, as they're set up for "Owner". Special drivers? Oh yeah, only for arcane devices!

    9. Re:It's not the OS alone... by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, you mean preinstalled Windows box asks for MORE than your name, time zone, and passwords, and don't work right out of the box?

      I call bullshit just like GP, because a modern preinstalled Windows box asks EVEN LESS than a new Mac box - they don't ask you for a name or password 90% of the time, as they're set up for "Owner". Special drivers? Oh yeah, only for arcane devices!

      I have never bought a preinstalled Windows box, so I am unable to comment on that. In fact, you might notice in my previous post I made absolutely no mention of anything other than Macs.

      But he was talking about the OS not being configured, and having to install a bunch of crap himself, and taking a day before it's usable. In my experience, this has never happened. Every Mac I have bought has been usable within minutes of plugging it in and pushing the power button.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    10. Re:It's not the OS alone... by Mista2 · · Score: 1

      My experiance was a little differnet with my Mac. I was already using Linux and Windows, so most of my apps were all cross platform.
      I simply switched on the new Mac I had bought, and after reading the handy pamphlet it came with that seemed to be the entire intorduction to the OS X UI, I logged in, connnected to my network, patched, rebooted and downloaded and installed all of the OS X versions of the Apps I was using in Linux. It all just worked. Probably about 1 hour of my life to get going. This compared to the Windows7 laptop I got from work, which took about a day to iron out all the kinks.
      Where I find Apple lacking is when you find something that should be really easy to do (like say, synch 16BG of unprotected music and video files over the network to a phone without needing a freeking cable!!!!, or share a single iTunes or iPhoto database with multuple users on the same computer) just impossible with their included software.
      Amarok on my Linux box is brilliant at these sorts of things, like adding all the metadata back to the .mp3 file so you dont NEED a database to share the track info, and scanning for changes in the music folders to auto add new tracks. Mount a folder on your media device in a location Amarock can see, and tell Amarok to copy music to it.
      On my netbook, Rythmbox was able to play tracks straight from my iPhone long before Apple let iTunes do it.
      While Linux is still more flexible, it will find a place on my desktops.

    11. Re:It's not the OS alone... by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, running or not running Software Update is such a hardship.

    12. Re:It's not the OS alone... by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Either you bought it out of the back of someone's truck, or you're a liar.

      You don't have to install anything "yourself" in a store-bought Mac. You plug it in, you turn it on, you watch the stupid musical animation for the millionth time, you type in some information and get it onto your network. Then once you're normally logged in, it might look and see if there are any updates that have come out since the installed OS was released. Apple pre-installs apps you order with the Mac, so you don't have to install iWork.

      The only scenario of having to "install everything yourself" and then having to download 2.9 GB of updates is if you bought a second-hand Mac whose previous owner had wiped the hard drive, and which came with a seriously outdated version of the OS. For instance, if it came with a 10.5.0 DVD, it would then want to update to 10.5.8.

      If that's the case, don't blame Apple, blame the tool you bought it from for not providing a fully-updated OS install. Steve Jobs can't telepathically update a wiped Mac that you're about to buy at a flea market.

      --
      September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    13. Re:It's not the OS alone... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

      XCode.

    14. Re:It's not the OS alone... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Good point on never mentioning it; I just saw it as implied.

      My real point still stands though. There's approximately the same amount of nonsense with either nowadays, which is to say nearly none. Mac isn't better than Windows in this respect, because there's just about 0 room for improvement.

    15. Re:It's not the OS alone... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I installed Xcode (with the iPhone SDK) right off the Apple site - 6.2GB disk image, but fully up to date. One reboot.

      It's not installed by default in OS X anymore. Did you install Tiger and then connect to the internet?

  148. The command line is in the same language by tepples · · Score: 1

    Indeed, some instances require Windows.

    The point being that there are far more home use cases that require Windows or Mac OS X than require Linux.

    Telling someone to break out a command line and type "sudo apt-get whateverthefuck" is like telling a Windows user to reinstall DOS and learn its syntax

    And why would you do that, rather than use a tool like YaST, Aptitude, etc?

    Sure, you could give equivalent instructions for Synaptic, but 1. they'd be longer, 2. you can't copy and paste "click here, click here, click here" from a web page, and 3. for how many languages do you plan to give them? If you give the English name of a menu item, how is someone who has the locale set to her native Thai supposed to know whether you meant this option or the similarly-named option below it? The command line is in the same language on all localized versions of Debian-based Linux.

  149. Future OS by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    Even if Linux doesn't gain a majority of users at some point in the future, there has to be something better than Windows and the latest Apple OS. In my opinion we need to start afresh and say goodbye to various kludges which only exist to ensure backwards compatiblity. We also need to 100% make sure we all work towards a common goal without a million spinoff branches (which is the current state of Linux). Programs which also work off the bat without depending (too much) on external libraries should be a goal too. We can still make things open source, whilst maintaining a 'main brand' that the majority people should stick to.

    Maybe something like QNX/Haiku would be good, I don't know.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  150. bah by Charliemopps · · Score: 2, Interesting

    2 things keep Windows in the lead - Office and Games. Office is quickly becoming a non-issue. Gaming is another issue entirely. But PC gaming has been on the decline for a while. If the gaming markets moves away from PC's to consoles in a major way we could see a real shift away from windows. I build PC's for people all the time, and usually the cost of windows exceeds the amount I spent building the entire computer. At the very least THAT has to change. In the past there was no way I could have gotten anyone to try out Linux, but recently I've had 2 different people say "Sure, I'll try it out!" and no requests to switch back. Especially if the users only use for the computer is surfing the net and email, there really isn't any reason to waste money on Apple of M$FT.

    1. Re:bah by El_Oscuro · · Score: 1

      Recently, my building maintenance guy asked me about replacing his broken Windows installation with Ubuntu. I didn't even know he had a computer. If I want to talk about beer, I know who to talk to, but Ubuntu? BTW, I still own him some home brews:)

      --
      "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
  151. The Desktop Apps Suck by water-and-sewer · · Score: 1

    I've got a third theory: the desktop apps suck donkeyballs. Disclaimer - I use Linux and am a staunch advocate. But the truth is, the desktop apps aren't great. They suffer from GUI oversimplification, over-complication, usability nightmares, crashes, slowness, and more. I'd love to use Koffice if only the font kerning issues were ever worked out. I hate evolution's rigid GUI; I can't change around things I'd like to. I used Kmail and mostly loved it, despite their insistence on not allowing a search filter based on date ("show me mail received within the last 4 days") and the new Kmail-on-Akonadi is utter crap: no new benefits, lots of new disadvantages.

    I use Linux for precious few desktop apps these days: SLRN and Mutt for Usenet news and mail, and Vim and Emacs for writing (occasionally Joe and Jedit as well). And I've begun learning how to make Linux useful on the server, where it belongs: web services, LDAP, and more. I like O3Spaces and Joomla and MediaWiki and more, all things where Linux excels.

    I agree the fierce ideology can be a turn off, I disagree that the fragmentation has made much of a difference, and insist crappy software is behind a lot of it: if the apps are there you'll figure out a way to install and make it work. If the apps suck, it's not worth dealing with compatibility, installation, and learning-curve issues.

    --
    If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
  152. Not dead... by spyked · · Score: 1

    ... it just smells funny.

    Seriously now, what?

  153. Really? by draxil · · Score: 1

    *checks* mine is working just fine thanks.

  154. Damn, I just installed Ubuntu 10.10 by KarmaRundi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really, like two weeks ago I bought a new laptop and installed Ubuntu over Window 7 and love it. Now you're telling me it's dead? S*!t.

  155. It's not dead! Or is it?... by dacarr · · Score: 3, Funny

    OK. So if desktop Linux is dead, it's moving pretty well on my computer, which tells me that it's undead. So I, for one, welcome our new zombie penguin overlords.

    --
    This sig no verb.
    1. Re:It's not dead! Or is it?... by herdingcats · · Score: 1

      warms my heart to see the classic /.-isms kept alive. or at least kept as zombies.

    2. Re:It's not dead! Or is it?... by El_Oscuro · · Score: 1

      I would also love to welcome our new zombie penguin overlords on my Website. Perhaps an an image of them in the Quake fashion would be appropriate?

      --
      "Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
  156. 2010 SHOULD have been realistic. by Petersko · · Score: 1

    "2010 is the year of the Linux desktop!!" isn't realistic, but neither is "Linux on the desktop is dead!!"

    Since 2000 was supposed to be the year of linux on the desktop, one would think that a decade late would be attainable. But here we are in 2010, and linux is still stuck in single digits. Loooow single digits.

    Linux on the desktop isn't dead, but I think what probably IS dead is the hope that it will one day capture any significant percentage of the market.

  157. Re:Business rules middleware? by mini+me · · Score: 1

    SQL itself is already designed for business people to easily translate business rules into database logic. What is the point of duplicating efforts?

    If SQL was designed for programmers, it would have been less human readable, but easier to query from code. The fact that people feel that we need tools to generate SQL, it is unfortunate that we did not go with an API designed for programmers from the start.

  158. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  159. In a related story by lushmore · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trolling articles are still alive and well.

  160. Re:Not by any chance by neumayr · · Score: 1

    Oh yeah, undeniable prove right there - Linux is _the_ desktop OS of the decade!

    --
    Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
  161. Maybe it's a poor programming target too... by firewrought · · Score: 1

    I'd love to fire up a rich IDE, pull in some standard widely-known libraries, create a program in a smart statically-typed language, build a Linux-native executable, package it up and publish it to the world via a distribution network ("app store"?) that's friendly to both open source and commercial interests.

    "But but but..." someone will say, "we have all the pieces, and you have tons of choices, and choices are good!" And I don't disagree with that, but there's no ONE de facto solution for targeting Linux that lets all potential developers play the same game instead of acting in isolated pocket communities. By contrast, it's obvious what you need to use if you're developing for MacOS (XCode, Objective C), Android (Eclipse, Java), and Windows (Visual Studio, C#). Maybe winning the desktop is not important to you (and that's okay), but Linux needs some focus if it's to stand on its own as a brand for programming.

    You may think that C++/AutoTool/Makefile/Dpkg is the answer (and that might be the closest thing we have), but those tools are difficult to learn, test, and use. We need developers who are experts in a wide variety of subject matters; making them be experts in an archaic build chain or obtuse packaging tools means that we lose them. Java and Python could be good bets, but there's still a bunch of fragmentation in regards to language/VM versions as well as the number of libraries (persistence frameworks, web frameworks, injection frameworks, etc.) that all do the same thing.

    --
    -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
  162. Very important for them to be commented by dfcamara · · Score: 1

    so other people can be referred here to know the opinions of the tech crowd about it.

  163. Why haven't you tried the obvious? by wisebabo · · Score: 1

    "Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have. "

    So why haven't you done the obvious and gotten them (or told them to get) a Mac?

    They don't come with bloatware/crapware/shovelware and the number of viruses/worms IN THE WILD is vanishingly small. Let's go through your other objections point by point.

    Confusing distress - keep up with the Apple update schedule and there's only one distro to worry about. Even if you don't want to pay the (reasonable) update fee (for Snow Leopard it was $29), Apple supports their previous releases for a couple of years for free and it is a very rare piece of software that will require the new update.

    Poor documentation - well (for your parents at least) documentation is a non-issue because the Mac OS is so easy to use that most Macs ship with a tiny pamphlet. Of course for people who want to dig deeper well Macs have the slickest easy to use documents/help system around - they ARE the world leaders in desktop publishing/graphics.

    Software, Software, Software - Don't know what kind of special software your mom uses but one would think unless she's an engineer or some other sort of technologist, there will likely be a Mac version. If not, she could always use Parallels or VMware which are very large commercially supported environments to run windows software. For the rest of us, most (but not all) PC software has a native Mac equivalent like Microsoft's office suite.

    Little support (if not openly hostile) - Not only will your parents find a lot of people who also own Macs to provide day to day support (like how do I download a YouTube video?) but for anything more involved there's always the formal Apple Care. Don't forget the really really nice option of making an on-line reservation at the local Apple store and then meeting with an Apple "Genius" IN PERSON who will spend AS LONG AS IS NECESSARY (my experience) to figure out what is wrong! I don't know if they are, in fact, geniuses but they do seem to be much much better trained (and have access to much better resources) than your typical big box electronics store sales guy. Also I've never been asked if my Mac was still under warranty if it did not require an actual repair!

    Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user - Macs ARE different and may be little confusing to the uninitiated. That said, their ease of use is legendary (do we really have to go over this) and once your parents adapt to it, they will find that the Macintosh way is much more consistent than on any other platform.

    Before I retired my computer graphics company had a mixed network of Macs, Windows and SGIs and even though I had to keep them all going (and train people etc.) you can guess which ones I recommended to MY parents. The only reason why I might think you're still going the PC route is because of the alleged "Apple Tax". While some might say that is because of the superior quality of construction, even if it exists ask yourself: how much is your time worth? Even though I'm retired I still REFUSE to spend a day reformatting/installing a system because of some virus, life is too short (and getting shorter). So unless your religious convictions demand otherwise you'll find that "once you try Mac you'll never go back!". :)

    * One exception that I make to this above argument is: it actually depends on which country you're living in. I'm retired in Vietnam where the per capital income is in the (very) low thousands/year. In this case the "Apple tax" superior hardware or not, is just too high a price to pay for the locals so it makes more sense for them to install their pirated copy of windows and office suite that they paid maybe 2-3 dollars for. But in any developed country I don't see why people are using windows as their "home" computer.

  164. Nonsense! by Exitar · · Score: 1

    How can it be dead if it has never been alive?

  165. Re:Really I would say Linux on the desktop is a sa by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

    This hits the nail on the head, and was what I came here (late) to say as well. When everything is online that people want, the OS doesn't matter. A standards based browser is all that's needed.

    I can use all my social networking, Google Docs, photo uploads, IM, email, etc., from almost any OS. My 2 banks and my credit card all support any standards compliant browser. If I can get flash, (and here's to hoping HTML5 kills it) I can get videos from almost every site. (Is Netflix still being asinine about this? They may be a major hold-out.)

    Other than games, which are being served on a console for a large percentage of people now, there's little that requires a certain OS for most people's day-to-day use.

    Sure, corporate offices may be different, but they've always been different ecosystems. For home users, the "desktop" is becoming very irrelevant.

    Of course, we're also seeing the appliance-ization of computers. As everyone moves to smart phones and consoles which now have full internet functionality, there seems to be a major shift from traditional desktop PCs as it is. I'd argue that the desktop PC is more dead than the OS that runs on it. In fact, as the volume of home desktops plummets, being replaced by smart phones and consoles, the chance for Linux to play a significant role may increase. If you're not making a profit due to large volume, the next step is to cut costs. The Windows OS is one pretty significant cost.

    --
    Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  166. Other things that can kill free software by tepples · · Score: 1

    Free software lives until the last guy stops donating his time.

    Or until B. free hardware dies, which started in 1985 with the NES and its successor consoles replacing arcade-style home computer gaming and has continued through winmodems (and other peripherals whose makers refuse to deal with free software) and the US mobile phone market. Or until C. home users demand works for which a culture of donating time doesn't exist. Not enough people are willing to donate time to a high-production-value video game, for example.

  167. Antiparadigm by antiparadigm · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't say that linux desktop is dead.

    I would say that he does raise some points that I have noticed and think the community was turning a blind eye towards.

    The fragmentation is there. While this can be a good thing, a user that is not tech-savvy but wants to know more, or try Linux, may go to distrowatch and just be overwhelmed. I've found that when I try to talk to non-techies about Linux, they refer to "Linux" as a singular item. While that is the technically true way to think of it, the context of the questions quickly change to stuff that is distribution specific, and I have to launch a whole side topic about what a distribution is and all. About 3 seconds into this, I loose them and they just tune it out. I really think there should be a community effort to push a solid desktop out. Ubuntu is the clear leader in this category IMHO (I'm actually a fan of OpenSUSE). Yeah, I could skip the whole bit on distributions and just focus on the Ubuntu distribution, but would only cause confusion when they were out on their own and tried to look up "Linux" and expecting just a single result. Instead they get all sorts of information overload.

    As for the Open Source fanaticism, this is an interesting topic. Throughout college, I was a huge flag waver. I had Linux on anything and everything. However, afterwords, I had to adjust to the real world and it used all MS products. I am now really adept at C#, and familiar with a lot of MS concepts. I have 2 reasons for softening my stance on MS: 1) Those skills pay the bills. I live in a city where there is only one shop that uses Linux. All the rest use windows. Moving isn't an option since my fiancee and I have lots of family around here. 2) MS just works. I have to admit, that after I graduated, I thought it was nice to have all sorts of time to do "computery" things and all. For a while it was nice, but then I realized there was a world outside of computers. Do I want to spend a weekend setting up a Ubuntu/OpenSUSE box and get network printing going with file sharing or do I want to go Hiking? Yeah, you could just set it up once, but the distributions are released so frequently that you are almost always having to update and fix things. I just have my doze boxes humming along without thinking.

    I'm definitely not going to say I'm a MS fan boy by any means, but I have had my eyes opened up. Linux provides a good service to computer uses: It keeps MS honest. If users didn't have the option of Linux, I feel that MS would just start raking users over hot coals to make a lot more $ off their products. MS also has to stay on their toes in terms of features.

    I wouldn't take this article as what it tries to pass itself off as. I would take it as a person who just needed to write an article an did care if he started a controversy. I would use it as a call to arms to solidify the linux community and tone down the fan boyism. But then again, that is just my $0.02.

  168. Punk is dead, too! by Punk+CPA · · Score: 1

    Funny how things keep crawling out of the crypt. As long as there are Windows and disco (or its house/techno/blahblah descendants), there will be people who want something better.

  169. Desktop OS in general is dead by snowwrestler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does the desktop OS really matter that much any more? At least in the consumer space, I contend no:

    - File format interoperability has improved dramatically. Numerous apps on several platforms can now open MS and Adobe formats, for instance.
    - More and more functionality is delivered through the browser by servers.
    - As a result, after-market boxed software is less and less important. Core consumer functionality comes built into computers when you buy them (word processing, photos, music, video, etc). Aside from games, consumers simply don't go to stores anymore to buy the hottest new software.

    Mobile OS is still very app-oriented though. And Linux is doing very well there, in the form of Android.

    Desktop OS still matters a lot in the corporate setting because of custom business applications that have been developed on the MS platform for years. They would be a huge pain to port, and businesses will ride them for as long as they can. But even in those cases, when they develop new apps, there's a good chance they'll be developing server-based software running on Linux (even if the desktop OS is still Windows).

    So even though Linux adoption on the desktop might have slowed, that matters less and less in the big picture. The big problem with MS's domination of the desktop was that it was their chokepoint of control because it was the default environment for all developers. For consumers at least, that chokepoint is largely gone. The default environment for developers now is the server.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  170. What? by Vaylent · · Score: 1

    How is it dying? It's only grown since desktop Linux became viable. I've had Linux on my desktops for over three years now.

  171. Please dont bring moronic submissions to us by unity100 · · Score: 1

    taco. im telling to you. now, on to ranting about the stupid rant you caused us to read. lets use our brains and make an analysis :

    10 years ago, linux and open source were a non threats. since a while, microsoft is using EVERY means to prevent them. bribing local governments. national governments. handing out free licenses to schools in south america. pressurizing european union and governments to drop open licenses, and to turn away governments from linux. they are even making videos about open source. they even came up and said that, they didnt like piracy, but if piracy was to happen, they would prefer their o/s pirated. every other month a top microsoft figure barks or snarks about linux or open source.

    and situation phenomenally improved DESPITE these. notice the stressed word. DESPITE. proprietary companies are using EVERY means in their disposal to stem linux, open source, and IT IS NOT SUCCEEDING. 'every means' means a LOT. what kind of a lot ? lets see, this kind ; back in 1950s, lockheed bribed numerous nato countries' defense ministers to choose their f104 as the main fighter aircraft. they succeeded and in the end it became de facto nato fighter craft, and caused a lot of national air defense industries to go bankrupt, as well as a few american ones. also it killed hundreds of pilots on take off and landing due to incompetent design. however thats a side issue. then, another example is intel. they bribed desktop producers to use their cpu. what happened ? intel domination for decades. only recently they have been fined.

    these two examples show that, how a big company can wreak havoc and change history 'using every means at its disposal'. and, linux and open source, are things these are being used against now. yet, they are still succeeding.

    remove microsoft lobbying and meddling, you will see your desktop on the linux before you can say 'chair'.

  172. agree by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Though I'd say it was always pretty much dead. Linux on the desktop is fine for, say, a developer workstation. Or maybe something like a netbook or smartphone OS where the content is mostly managed and/or runs in a sandbox that's entirely shielded from the linux environment (e.g. Android). Anything else its less trouble to run Windows or OSX.

  173. I agree. by prestone683 · · Score: 1

    I whole-heartedly can agree. I was quite into computers and the 'hacking' thing back in the late 90's and early '00s, and I tried Linux a couple of times. I could never quite get it to install properly, work properly, and NEVER understood the whole kernel stuff. I tried and tried, and bought a handful of books. But I hate reading. I could never understand how it would take over if someone like me, who passed and nearly aced the CompTIA A+ and Network+ programs, and some Cisco training, couldn't get it working. It was a mess. And the terminal and command line? I thought the future was to stay away from all that typing crap? Trying to get Wireless working. HA! What a joke. And drivers? Unless you have a Soundblaster 16 card, and a stock ATI All-In-Wonder or 3dfx card, it would not work. It was a strenuous.

  174. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Desktop OS is dead.

    Apple will wind down OS X over the decade - the PC era is over.

    For users, this was heralded by the advent of the iPad, which will usher in 10,000 copies. For data centers, this came with large-scale, production virtualization.

    Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  175. I don't care what other people use for a desktop by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Linux has served me well as a desktop for 15 years. When I started it only had to compete with DOS (Windows 95 was unacceptable to me at the time). Now days I find myself using a Linux desktop/laptop as often as my Macs, and much more often than Windows 7 or XP. If you ask a different person, you'll get different results, but those are my results.

    For me, the year of the Linux desktop was 2000 when SuSE 7.0, Redhat 7, Slackware 7.1 and Debian 2.2 were released. Everything since then has just been a refinement.

    Perhaps the key to Linux being the desktop for you is if it has software for it that you find useful. I tend to just use compilers, web browsers, and chat clients. so Linux has been ready for me for quite some time. For gaming I generally prefer the console because it is on a big TV in front of a couch, I'm more of the gaming to relax kind of guy rather than a competitive FPSer.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  176. A nice morning troll by ThisIsMyName · · Score: 1

    Obvious troll is obvious.

  177. Linux doesn't have to succeed by dumb_jedi · · Score: 1

    I think Linux already succeeded at every market you can think of. Servers ? Check. Appliances ? Check. Smartphones ? Check. Tablets ? Check. Supercomputers ? Check.

    Oh, the desktop. It doesn't have to succeed, it already has. Why ? You don't need to have 99% of the market, you need to threaten the dominant player in a market. Think about what hapenned with Mozilla and IE. M$ was sitting on its hands with IE6 for almost three years. Then came FF and that made them release IE7 in less then a year. FF doesn't need 90%+ of market share, I sure hope they don't ever achieve it, it just has to set a new quality standard. If M$ stays still, FF or Chrome will steamroll IE.

    The very same thing can be said about Linux in the desktop. It doesn't need a big market share, it needs to stay a viable alternative to Windows. So we consumers get the best of both worlds: a good closed source non-free (as in beer) SO and a good free (as in freedom) OS, pick the one that best suits you!

  178. Remind me again.... by iceaxe · · Score: 1

    Why exactly is it important to me what OS Joe Sixpack uses?

    An oft-missed characteristic of using a Linux distro, or any open source OS, is that it doesn't have to compete on economic or 'market share' terms. It just has to do what I need it to do, and I see no signs of that ceasing in the foreseeable future. Operating systems producers that have to worry about things like shareholder value are burning cycles on things that benefit them, not me. If your needs happen to align with the things that shareholders care about, cool, good for you.

    I use a Linux distro because it does what I want, in a way that I like, and it doesn't hurt that it doesn't cost me anything. If it doesn't do what you need it to do, use something else. Simple, and no religious wars or market share statistics required.

    --
    WALSTIB!
  179. I can't help take the bait... by Greg+Atkinson · · Score: 1

    Despite the obvious incitement I can't help but take the bait. Let us for a moment grossly generalize and stereotype. Linux is not for the masses, with the exception of perhaps Ubuntu desktop Linux or enterprise Linux, but forget the debate. Forget the comparisons, the support, the fragmentation, the software, the games and the opinions. Which technological revolution was started by the person who did nothing but incessantly play games or spend their life watching movies and series? Who last heard their grandmother passionately relate a story of converting her cake recipe’s British units to metric units with an intricate combination of sed and grep? What petrol head ever built a kit car with the intention of competing with BMW or Ford?

    Linux is not a beautiful and unique snowflake. Linux doesn’t appeal to n00b because it is hard and unfamiliar, but I tell you what, every real user has learnt something and in most cases a lot. Linux may not have the volume of deployment, but it holds far more IT intellectual capital in its users than the mainstream OSes. Linux is about passion and innovation and doesn’t need global domination to be meaningful. It’s about learning something, extending someone else’s work and having the same returned. With Linux the pride of hacking is submitting a kernel patch or fixing a vulnerability just because you can, while the pride of hacking the world’s leading OS is in exploiting a vulnerability, just because you can.

    Feel free to class me as part the fiercely ideological open-source community. The author of this article and those that think as he does, are like those short sighted bottom feeders that think Java can be suffocated, but beware the revolution of the open-source geeks. While you’re numbing the minds of the masses with swish click interfaces and plug-in hardware, we’re the ones you depend on to build your devices and control your world.

  180. Ummm... by The+Fanta+Menace · · Score: 1

    I've been using Linux as my only desktop OS for fourteen years. It works fine for me. It's not even remotely dead.

    --
    -- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
  181. News flash 1 out of every 100 shlashdot readers... by croftj · · Score: 1

    report that the Linux Desktop is not dead on their desktop!!!!

    I am one of those few as well :).

    --
    -- Many men would appreciate a woman's mind more if they could fondle it
  182. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by AaronLS · · Score: 1

    I'm not going to play Oblivion on a freaking iPad, nor am I going to do it through a web app...

  183. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by bytesex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because ever more CPU-demanding app-development, and ever more screen-real estate (photo/film/games/tv) demanding apps are suddenly gone ? People don't need to type anymore ? I don't get it. I've heard 'photoshop through the web is going to be here in five to ten years' for the last fifteen years now. It hasn't happened.

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  184. Three non-DRM examples by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 1

    Linux has been a great win for what people use it for. Developing it to fit the needs of non-developers is a crap shoot; developers aren't casual users. Here are some things I've thought were missing.

    Quicken isn't proper double entry book keeping, but it's ease of use wins non-accountants over. It's hard to get that balance right though; even Intuit had to buy Mint when it's attempt to jump start it's Mac version failed to deliver. Other Linux tools have felt like a thin veneer over double entry hell to me. Trust such tools with my financial life? No.

    An automated software updater? Cute names probably works against keeping ignorant users up to date. "I know it's been years, but I won't trade in my Karmic Koala for a Natty Narwhal!" Software updates are critical for stability and security, but the Linux update tools I've seen either don't cover enough or they are way too difficult for a casual user to operate. Demanding re-installation basically means sending them back to Windows.

    How about training software instead of documentation? Despite the web's illusion otherwise, Mac and Windows users are not very advanced. It's one thing to offer a simple unified interface, but software to train the ignorant bosses of the world how to send email, backup, and print? Of the few such Linux attempts I've seen, some fail by mixing interfaces. But all have failed by going to the command line at some point. Even though they say "just type this, you don't have to understand it", the user's whole experience rides on them NOT making a typo. Way too fragile.

    Linux is unparalleled in meeting the needs of it's developers, but without people making apps for their ignorant bosses, middle school kids, and reluctant grandparents, it's audience with (perhaps rightfully) stay self-serving.

  185. I disagree. by CherniyVolk · · Score: 1

    First, the PCWorld column states that Linux is dead because of a lack of content.

    While I'll agree, desktop usage doesn't seem as wide spread as I would like it, a lack of content is NOT the reason for this problem.

    I've NEVER seen a platform so rich in content. There is no computer system or operating system that has more applications than a FOSS system (aside from perhaps a Mac OS X box which cators to both Blender and the commercial Maya... as an example).

    Secondly, a default install of any FOSS box would give the user far more content than a default install of Windows. The reason why Linux isn't taking the desktop by storm is simply because of one problem and only one problem.

    Microsoft Office and the lack of 100% compatible alternatives.

    This is the PRIME reason companies and individuals hold on to a Windows platform. It's the ONLY reason ONE of the FIVE machines on my company desk is Windows; the rest are Gentoo Linux boxes. Watch a DVD on Linux? I've been doing that for over a decade, what the hell is Mr. Strohmeye's problem?

    Lack of desktop adoption yes, lack of content Robert Strohmeye doesn't know what he's talking about.

  186. I don't care about yours, my is pertty alive! :) by alukin · · Score: 1

    I really do not care about authors desktop, where Linux is dead. On my desktop, on my notebook, on my pocket PC Linux is pretty alive and serving all my needs. The same with a lot of my friends and colleagues. :)

    Every paid internet box in every hotel is under Linux, and nobody cares.

    Windows is alive but only by inertia, momentum of market and inertia of people's thinking. 2'nd and
    even first fluxion of Windows usage is negative.

  187. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by bledri · · Score: 1

    The Desktop OS is dead.

    Apple will wind down OS X over the decade - the PC era is over.

    For users, this was heralded by the advent of the iPad, which will usher in 10,000 copies. For data centers, this came with large-scale, production virtualization.

    Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".

    Maybe for most people, but don't forget that part of the content to be created is the apps that run on all these devices. Maybe there will be some cloud-based programming suite, but I wouldn't count the desktop out for me, a programmer. Especially for iDevice apps which are essentially running OS X with a different GUI. Plus, we are becoming an ever more content consuming society, so there will be a lot of content creators. Long live the desktop/laptop/local-CPU-and-sotrage-so-I-can-work-on-an-island!

    --
    Some privacy policy Slashdot.
  188. Dammit by Vektuz · · Score: 1

    But... but... but I just switched to ubuntu like, 8 months ago and its been the best desktop OS I ever used! But then again, I do have this habit of climbing onto sinking ships...

    To be fair, I'd love to advocate linux to everyone I know, but e.g. the #1 reason they can't is that they use Photoshop, or Netflix, or Zune Marketplace, or whatever other flavor of application, so game over. The 'use gimp' argument is not even worth laughing at anymore. And the "use vmware" argument completely misses the point. And WINE just isn't good enough. And its not WINEs fault, really.

    So yeah. Its not about the OS. Its about the applications. The number one barrier is not that the OS doesn't boot in 10 seconds. It's not the wallpaper. Its not the desktop usability. Its not the price. Its not driver compatibility (anymore). Its not network setup. Its not web browser. Its not the window style. Its not where the indicators are. Its not what edge of the screen the menus are on. Its not the presence or absence of a dock. Its applications (or lack thereof).
    Until that changes, we'll get nowhere. Nobody mainstream cares about software freedom. Nobody mainstream cares about security. They only care that Netflix doesn't work and they can't sync their Zune, and Team Fortress 2 runs at 30 fps (or not at all) instead of 200fps.

  189. The cult of UNIX by couch_warrior · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have been a devotee of Linux for nearly 15 years. I have faithfully followed first redhat, and now the fedora releases. All my PCs at least dual-boot, if not run native Linux all the time. I even TAUGHT Linux for a major computer company for a while. In my informally gathered experience, there are three things holding Linux back- 1) The cult of UNIX mentality - this is a belief, deeply held by many OSS fans, that it is morally wrong to make software easy to use. If it was hard to code, it should require effort from the user to make use of it, otherwise how will they appreciate your hard work? Microsoft on the other hand got it a loooong time ago. Ease of use isn't just nice to have, it is the one overiding factor that outweighs all others in software design. Flexibility just confuses most users. security is a sick sad joke that only security wonks care about. Until the Linux community embraces the overwhelming truth that ease of use is ALL that matters, they will be doomed to be a hobby OS for out-of-touch tech weenies. 2) Endlessly re-inventing the wheel. I think Redhat/ Fedora is now on their third version of the X-windows package, and there is talk of scrapping the whole thing for a new windowing paradigm. Every six months I do a version upgrade, and my desktop breaks, my icons disappear, my scripts stop working because the directories have changed. For the love of sanity PLEASE knock it off. If it ain't broke, DON"T FIX IT!!! If you want people to really use Linux, focus on a consistent user experience, keep the magic behind the curtain, and stop screwing up the user interface. 3) Fear of licenses. Every time I upgrade fedora, I have to spend hours getting my Xine video player, web browser, and games to work again. Give up the insanity guys. The world is not going to change to suit your whiny childish prejudices. There's all kinds of industry standard free software out there that EVERYONE uses. You are just marginalizing Linux by not supporting it in your distros. 'Nuff said.

    --
    "Sic Semper Path of Least Resistance"
    1. Re:The cult of UNIX by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      In my mind, the problem will never be resolved because of a cultural "deficiency" in the IT community. There's this kind of elitist "we can, you wish you could too" attitude that gleefully locks out other users. Paraphrasing a quote I read from an open source developer not bothering to answer a noobie's question, "it was hard to write, it should be hard to use!" I honestly think a lot of IT guys LIKE being a part of a minority and see no value in putting forth effort to make their work easily accessible. Back when I was working a lot with open source projects, I can't count the number of times when I asked for documentation on an API was told to "read the header comments". Until the community realizes that you're writing software for your grandma and not YOU, Linux (on the desktop) will continue to be a fringe player.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:The cult of UNIX by PraiseBob · · Score: 1

      On point 1, I agree that many developers don't put usability as their top priority. But that doesn't apply to Gnome and KDE teams, which have had usability at the top for a long time.

      For points 2 and 3, you need to take a long look at Fedora before you point the finger at linux as a whole. Seriously, these things don't happen on my ubuntu desktop.

    3. Re:The cult of UNIX by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Precisely, the beauty and power of UNIX is that the software is intended to be easy to use for people and bots alike. "Desktop" OSes like Windows are only intended to be easy for people, and that's frankly not something that should be encouraged. You can't build on top of software that's *only* people-friendly. It's a dead end, or as Mike Gancarz wrote, it's a captive interface.

  190. Correct Title: Desktop is Dead, Linux wins Mobile by cwgmpls · · Score: 1

    If you follow the arguments in the article, the accurate conclusion is that desktop is becoming irrelevant, and the future is in cloud and mobile computing. Then there is an entire section on how Linux is winning in mobile, with projects like Android and WebOS. The correct title would be "Desktop is Dead, Linux wins Mobile".

  191. The Land of Negative Hyperbole... by prometx42 · · Score: 1

    I agree that this "prophecy" will probably fulfill itself; for you. For me, I am not put off by the slow adoption of Linux as a desktop OS by the entire rest of the world.

    I am, primarily, just greatful that, pretty clever, groups of people around the world are diligently building and refining an alternative that is working very well for me, personally. Also that, I believe, they will continue to do so.

    I kinda don't want Linux to "become" Microsoft, actually...

    It ain't really broke, and I'm not bucking for mainstream adoption to "fix" it...

  192. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Right. That's my point. On Slashdot, we're the crew that held onto their Workstations, as cheap Intel PCs flooded in.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  193. It's not dead...It's pining by grapeape · · Score: 1

    I have to agree though the Linux on the average desktop ship sailed a long time ago. I thought with Ubuntu it actually had a shot but that had to go get fragmented to...for the masses its just too much of a mess to really be practical. Oddly enough one of the biggest hurdles I have had in trying to convince people to at least give it a shot is the concept of not needing a full upgrade. The concept of updating=new version just doesn't seem to compute with many people. If its doesn't have a box and new obvious features immediately apparent they seem oblivious. That said its no more dead than its ever been, geeks will still use it and it will continue to advance but I just cant see it ever really gaining traction with the average home user. Then again...thats not really a bad thing.

  194. "Desktop Linux Is Dead" but trolling for..... by couchslug · · Score: 1

    ....page hits is thriving!

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  195. Then desktop Linux appears to need stores by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What the repositories don't contain much of is payware

    As I understand the article, the lack of a reliable way to deploy payware on desktop Linux is contributing to the death of desktop Linux because not all genres of application are conducive to relying on donated labor.

    it's not a store.

    Three major game consoles (Wii, PS3, and Xbox 360) have a store. Three major handheld game platforms (iPod touch, PSP, and DSi) have a store. Two major smartphone platforms (iPhone and Android) have a store. Windows has several stores, including Steam, Impulse, and GOG. Not to mention brick-and-mortar stores that sell copies of software on CD-ROM or DVD-ROM. So if the repositories aren't stores, what is?

    1. Re:Then desktop Linux appears to need stores by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Something like this is a store. A repository has no infrastructure to do access or license control, it's just an open mirror. Anyway, you can see by the glorious selection in Ubuntu's store how popular the idea is...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  196. It is free as in freedom but not free as in beer. by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

    Even if the license is $0.00 there is cost. It takes time & resources & knowledge to deploy. None of which are free.

    For many people the $30 windows license (HP doesn't pay full retail) is CHEAPER than the cost to learn, patch, and use Linux.

    TCO is what matters and TCO of linux on servers relatively low compared to TCO of windows. There is nothing to suggest the TCO for Linux desktop shares that benefit. Even if it does the TCO for a business (which can standardize platform) and TCO of home user is going to differ.

    Windows works simply because it is good ENOUGH and cheap ENOUGH. Until Linux is vastly superior in either benefit or total cost that isn't going to change.

  197. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by arth1 · · Score: 1

    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

    Remember NC's like the JavaStation and Sun Ray, thin X terminals, or Oracle's belief that we would all use thin clients by the year 2000?

    The main problem with thin clients is the same today as it was back when -- latency. You simply can't push something to a server and back again faster than the speed of light.

  198. Oh Nooo. by semi-old-geek · · Score: 1, Funny

    I better stock up on some copies before they are all gone.

  199. Bullshit by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 1

    This is bullshit. All you need on desktop today is a web browser. There are web browsers for Linux and they work. You can communicate, watch movies and listen music in your web browser, but you can also use separate applications for communication, music or movies. And everything works on Linux. And you can give configured Linux box to newbie and he or she will just use it.

    Maybe you still don't get it, but people are not spending half of their lives playing 3D games. They just use web browser, some kind of communicator and various mutimedia viewers / document editors.

    I understand that after 2000 lots of people changed their priorities, Slashdot almost died (Digg is dying now), many companies changed their profile, but in the background you can see that Open Source and Free Software is stronger than ever. Look at mobile phones, where is your Windows now? I also understand that Internet is full of Apple fanatics and (hidden in closet) Microsoft fanatics. But the truth is that Linux on desktop just works. No matter how loud you will cry your frustrations.

  200. Re:Business rules middleware? by tepples · · Score: 1

    SQL itself is already designed for business people to easily translate business rules into database logic. What is the point of duplicating efforts?

    It was designed that way before it was scaled up to modern businesses. Nowadays, there need to be meta-business rules for security, so that one business person can't add business rules that affect columns that break other parts of the business or violate the customers' or suppliers' privacy. Just giving everyone in the company a phpMyAdmin prompt doesn't really cut it. And by the time you're implementing business rules in stored procedures attached to triggers, you might as well be programming.

  201. w3schools is a niche website (used by developers) by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

    It is hardly indicative of the internet at large.

    http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=117&qpnp=25

    Mac is 5%. Linux is ~1%. Other is ~3%. Windows is 91%.

    It is even more sad if you break it down as:
    Windows XP ~60%
    Windows Vista & 7 ~30%
    Everything else ~10%

  202. Re:Why can't they just come as independent package by wexsessa · · Score: 1

    You mean like PC-BSD's PBIs?

  203. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app."

    People have been claiming this (at least the on-line part) for a long time, though. I seem to remember software company executives in the 90's drooling over the thought that you'd pay them a monthly fee to access their word processor and photo editor apps from your thin client at home.

    --
    [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
  204. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".

    And why would I want to do word processing online?

  205. Desktop Linux is just kicking by kokoko1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well I am using Linux on my desktop work and home from last couple of years. Here is a good news last month we got new HP laptops at our work and 4 of my co-workers ask me to install Linux on there new shiny laptops. Guess what, now they are using Linux as there primary OS and running M$ as guest under Virtualbox. They wouldn't be using M$ if our company were not having the mail on Exchange and one of company portal which only works in IE.

    Its all my pleasure to see those folks using Linux on daily bases, installing Linux updates and learning commands. I feel proud coz they watched me using Linux over the years and when they were struggling with there OS infected with viri, malwares etc and my system never piss on me. And finally here we go now they are using the rock solid OS.

    For me Linux is just penetrating in our companies desktop :)
    Long live Linux.

    --
    http://askaralikhan.blogspot.com/
  206. Re:News flash 1 out of every 100 shlashdot readers by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    Someone else posted that 3 out of 100 desktops run Linux. So get with the program slashdot readers.

    --
    Nullius in verba
  207. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Vancorps · · Score: 3, Informative

    As someone that is current in the process of deploying virtual desktops I beg to differ.

    Client terminals had to become powerful enough to connect modern peripherals and device pass-through means that a virtual desktop has no need to compromise. I can plugin my USB camera to my thin client and it'll appear in the VM. I can watch full-screen flash inside the VM on the thin-client with no jittering playback. Hell, even Autocad and Photoshop work marvelously especially through desktop streaming. With remote desktop applications you're usually limited by the precision of your mouse, compression makes detailed work almost impossible, a virtual desktop does not have these limitations.

    I don't think workstations are going anywhere anytime soon though. I do however think that Apple is screwing themselves royally by not allowing OS X to be in a virtual environment as many of my Mac users are getting sick of hardware failures leading to their downtime when their Windows and Linux coworkers can just swap machines and reconnect to their VM and be up and running in as long as it takes to plugin the new hardware. Apple has always been weak in the enterprise market. I'm finally seeing pushback much to my delight as a few of my Photoshop jockies are switching to Windows so they can enjoy all the benefits including SSL VPN driven access from offsite without compromising performance.

    In short, latency is no longer a problem for 99% of cases. Server virtualization isn't so cut and dry, but desktop virtualization is definitely going to take over as it solves many common corporate problems such as data leaving the building, ensuring regular backups, maintaining a consistent work environment, storage consolidation, and many other problems are non-issues with a virtual desktop. If a particular user needs more disk space I don't need to replace a hard drive, I just allocate more storage to them. With thin-provisioning I don't even have to care if they're using it provided I don't overprovision and run out of disk space but adding another shelf to my tier 1 NetApp storage is easy and takes all of ten minutes to do.

  208. Re:It is free as in freedom but not free as in bee by icebrain · · Score: 1

    That's why I gave up trying to learn Ubuntu. I started using Windows back in the 3.1 days and managed to get pretty good at making it do what I wanted.

    Then, I decided to make a home server, and wanted to use a Linux flavor to keep costs down. I installed Ubuntu, and immediately hit problems. Every single thing I wanted to do (set up shared folders, make the UPS work, encrypt hard drive, etc) took hours of poring over forum posts and different websites. The UPS still doesn't work. And forget about making backups or running server-side applications like a music player or FTP host. After 100+ hours of messing with Ubuntu, my server is nothing more than a glorified network drive.

    I just don't have the time to spend learning it and making it do what I wanted. All I want to be able to do at this point is make regular backups to a regular external HD (much less an encrypted one), but I can't even figure that out.

    And finally, to hell with the command line. I gave that up with Windows 95 and never looked back.

    --
    The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  209. Linux Desktops by munky99999 · · Score: 1

    Linux Desktops are at the highest levels EVER. If that's not the exact opposite of dead... I just dunno.

  210. Do pretty much everything except run (app list) by judeancodersfront · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Netflix, iTunes, MS Office, random work program, random school program, random games, etc.

    Some say this is just because of market share but there is more to it. The open source ideology has made the small marketshare of Linux even more unappealing. You can't expect much support from proprietary companies when you denounce them as morally inferior.

    Stallman was wrong in his expectation that hobbyists could compete with commercial companies. Sorry but I do not consider Tux Racer to be a competitor to Gran Turismo. Stallman went too far, it's time for everyone to admit it. It is ok to prefer open source but there is nothing wrong with proprietary software.

  211. Walled garden, Linux printing, DMCA by tepples · · Score: 1

    I think you're confusing "require" with "prefer". For the "average Joe" who surfs the net

    Comcast puts unrecognized modems in a walled garden until the customer downloads and runs a .exe file. I don't know how Mac users are expected to get their cable modem linked to their service.

    checks email, types up documents

    And prints them on what? I have yet to see either A. a home inkjet printer with a penguin on the box, or B. sales staff in a national electronics chain who know which printers do and don't work with Linux.

    plays solitaire and free cell, and views DVDs/YouTube/pr0n

    Of course you can play DVD on Linux as long as you don't live in the United States, home of MPEG-2 patents, Dolby Digital patents, and the DMCA. Who will fund their emigration?

    All of those others that have specialized sewing apps or do corporate taxes as a hobby at home -- yeah, they might "require" Windows.

    You forgot those few video games left that aren't FarmVille.

  212. can somebody show him ubuntu plz? by anton_kg · · Score: 1

    microsoft troll must die

  213. This by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    This is why Linux will be adopted slowly, if at all. It's not about the hardware, or the OS capabilities (presuming it's competent, which Linux is), it's about the software. Practically every main profession has a couple of absolutely necessary (read: would be more expensive to retrain than the entire IT department's 10 year budget) to the business. Whether it's Photoshop or AutoCAD or whatever; it has to exist nativly on the platform. Nobody is going to put their butt on the line for a workaround - even if it's one that almost always works.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:This by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      I agree about Photoshop, AutoCAD or other specialized apps.

      But Ubuntu is quite useful for defined subsets of workers.

      And for business-type applications (HR, financials, that sort of thing), it seems prudent to use web-based apps (local or SaaS) even if you're a Windows shop.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  214. More wishful thinking by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

    Desktop computer sales are starting to stagnate but laptop sales are plenty healthy.

  215. Actually... Your example points at less users... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    ...and more desktops. Per user.

    That is a total of: 10 linux desktops in use in _ONE_ household

    Exactly. One household.

    Compared to Windowses and OSXs where a great number of desktops are for business use - there is a huge lack of eyeballs (ads, entertainment...) and hands (apps, tech support...) per desktop in your case.
    Add to that the fact that most apps on Linux desktops are free of charge - and the actual market share comes out to FAR below 1%.

    Cause, there ever was only one reason for talking about market share - how much money is there in it.
    Desktop Linux? Really, not that much.
    Business Linux... a whole different kettle of fish.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  216. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Sheik+Yerbouti · · Score: 1, Troll

    Tablets are a fad and won't even be around in 5 years. The suckers that believe Steve's BS already have one the rest of us have moved on already. And the ones that did buy it even admit now that it's a toy and they don't really use it much. After they showed up at the coffee shop and could not figure how to hold it and nobody told them how cool they were for having an iPad they are ready to move on too.

  217. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by jimfrost · · Score: 1

    There are actually several fairly decent image editors on the web now (there weren't even a year ago), like pixlr.com. I'm not uninstalling my copy of Photoshop any time soon, for lots of reasons, but every passing day these programs get closer in functionality and for a whole lot of uses they're already there.

    Regardless, I think content creation is going to need a PC or something like a PC for a good long time to come. The combination of high-bandwidth and precise input (keyboard[1], Wacom tablet) and horsepower is enough to take something like an iPad out of the picture completely for a lot of things. Of course, not very many people actually *do* those things, and for some very common tasks -- like constructing a presentation -- an iPad could well be superior. (I've done it with Keynote; It's *almost* there, but several UI annoyances are big enough to make me go back to the desktop. I could totally see using it exclusively with a few UI tweaks though, and in some cases it's already a lot better.)

    [1] Of course, you can get a keyboard for an iPad if you want one. That kind of negates the beauty of the device if you ask me, though.

    --
    jim frost
    jimf@frostbytes.com
  218. Pay repos? by tepples · · Score: 1

    There's nothing stopping non free developers releasing debs/rpms of their software - even better is when they have repositories that can be added to to the package manager

    Do apt and yum repositories yet support authentication and authorization, such that only people who have bought a license on the publisher's web site can download and install the software?

    People who aren't using those distros can probably figure out for themselves how to get it running on their system.

    Or if you can't help them, they'll whine to the credit card company and ask for a chargeback.

    1. Re:Pay repos? by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      Do apt and yum repositories yet support authentication and authorization, such that only people who have bought a license on the publisher's web site can download and install the software?

      Linspire's CNR appears to have solved that problem.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNR_(software)

      Or if you can't help them, they'll whine to the credit card company and ask for a chargeback.

      Sybase were able to sell their software with a "use a supported distro or you're own your own" policy without much issue.

      How many people ask for a chargeback when software the purchased to run with Wine doesn't work?

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
  219. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Dreadrik · · Score: 1

    Well, in that case the Linux desktop will be pretty successful, considering the amount of people, me included, that just wouldn't accept a cloud-based OS with a touch interface.

  220. GNU/Linux, you insensitive clods! by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    The obligatory "I'ts GNU/Linux that is dead on the desktop!"

  221. Very Much Alive by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    I seriously doubt that Linux is anywhere close to being dead. I think Linux will grow and do just fine. Oddly the virtual boxes may be the greatest asset to Linux platforms as it becomes easier to run Windows apps. It is obvious that Linux is a superior platform and with Microsoft dominating the market many people will prefer Linux. If it ever gets to the point where desktop Linux distros really are under threat it will be by some new and unknown OS that suddenly takes center stage.

  222. Re:I love it and I hate it. What to do? by jabelli · · Score: 1

    http://www.truecrypt.org/downloads solves your #1, or get Windows Ultimate.

  223. Re:Why can't they just come as independent package by metrometro · · Score: 1

    This post is, like, totally understandable to the desktop user community.

  224. Re:My 2 cents by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

    Sorry, you clearly don't know Linux that well or, dare I suggest, you've never actually used it. Here's why:

    Installing something simple on Linux often requires downloading 2 GB worth of supporting libraries

    Absolute nonsense! It is still possible to download a single CD image (, some of which may be out of date, or have compatibility problems.

    Rubbish. Yes, there used to be issues with "dependency hell" on Red Hat 5 about ten years ago. However, package managers have improved considerably in 10 years, probably as much as OS X has improved in that time - this simply does NOT happen any more on most distributions.

    I would also add that I myself have been a user of Gentoo Linux for many years now. This is a "roll your own" distribution that compiles each new package against the libraries it requires that may or may not be already installed on your system. Yes, very infrequently there are dependency issues due to a bug in a package, but the forum is very active & someone usually comes up with at least a workaround in a very short period of time.

    No standard physical interface (android), hardware, or even ABI means that I can't just download a "Built for Linux" binary and run it. Chances are the software will make idiotic demands of me like downloading obscure-library-version.1.2.3.4beta4-pre7.

    Same as above - maybe some time ago with older package managers.

    And let me make you a challenge here - post up an example of an actual installation where this happened to you, then I'll believe you. Until then, I treat this as a sweeping statement based on FUD you've taken in elsewhere.

    Linux is getting better for this, but I still can't download a "Linux" distro, and then pop in *HOT PC GAME OF THE YEAR* and run it.

    That's right. It's because there's not a Linux version of the game. Why is that Linux's fault? It's like me saying "I bought an Apple Mac but can't pop in a Halo III game disk and play it."

    Until Linux can run Windows games better than Windows can, Linux is never going to make any more inroads against Windows games except where there is already a MacOS version.

    This is actually statement that can be written as "Linux won't beat Windows for games until more Windows games are written for Linux". Again, an obvious statement written by somebody who actually doesn't know what to say here.

    Android is going flop. So many reasons why, but I'll file most of them under "Do you really expect these idiot phone manufacturers to actually update the OS?"

    I'll answer this statement when there are *LESS* Android devices being sold than IOS ones - until then, it's patently a statement from a peturbed but rabid Apple fanboi.

    And that's why I'm using Windows or MacOS.

    You know something? If you had the guts or backbone to say "I don't use Linux because the learning curve is too high" or "I don't use Linux because I feel Windows and OS X are easier to use", I wouldn't even bother arguing with you because you'd be perfectly entitled to have that opinion.

    But why do you feel qualified to talk about "libraries" and "package managers" on Linux when here you say you don't use it? That *SHOWS* you're not arguing from a position of knowledge because you just don't use Linux.

    Linux as a Desktop OS will never happen unless all the forks die off and we're left with only one de-facto flavor of desktop linux that will (like Windows and MacOS) come with all the neccessary parts to run ANY linux application.

    I hate to say this but it *IS* being run as a desktop OS. Maybe in the USA there are more Apple than Linux users but here in Europe, Linux on the desktop at least equals Mac usage, maybe even beats it. Please don't confuse iPhone, iPod or iPad sales with Mac sales - Macs *STILL* have very small penetration.

    Fugly user interfaces and library hell are Linux's major failing points.

    I don't claim to have used a Mac much because in 30 years of computing I've never found a good

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  225. Re:My 2 cents by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

    Sorry, finger trouble. This is what I meant to say here:

    Installing something simple on Linux often requires downloading 2 GB worth of supporting libraries

    Absolute nonsense! It is still possible to download a single CD image in 700MB for some distros. So why would *ANY* application need three times that size in libraries?

    some of which may be out of date, or have compatibility problems.

    Rubbish. Yes, there used to be issues with "dependency hell" on Red Hat 5 about ten years ago. However, package managers have improved considerably in 10 years, probably as much as OS X has improved in that time - this simply does NOT happen any more on most distributions.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  226. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Desktop OS is dead.

    Apple will wind down OS X over the decade - the PC era is over.

    Wrong!

    In people's homes, certainly desktops will continue to lose some marketshare to alternatives.

    In offices? Not so much. Sure, you have (and will continue to have) some office workers who continue to use laptops in docking stations as essentially desktops, and some that just use laptops as such period. I don't see much if any of that market moving to tablets anytime soon, and the migration of the things those people do to web-based solutions is just not happening very fast, where it's happening at all. At this point, most of what's going to internal web apps or virtualized workstations in the next decade already has.

  227. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by bigrockpeltr · · Score: 1

    well the folks here are trying and its pretty neat but still no full blown photoshop

    --
    $ unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep
  228. Offline laptops by tepples · · Score: 1

    Until Windows Internet Explorer gains support for new HTML5 technologies allowing a web application to work offline (localStorage and CACHE MANIFEST), very few web applications will have a useful offline mode. This means it'll cost an extra $59.99 per month for mobile broadband to get anything done on a laptop on the bus ride to and from work, the mall, etc.

  229. Honestly, I'm not terribly concerned about this by DeadTOm · · Score: 1

    The main reason Linux doesn't have the virus and security problems that windows does is that it's not so widely used. That's just fine by me.

  230. I don't really care by maxm · · Score: 1

    The real reason for linux is the freedom for me as a developer. But in a modern world where I have to edit video, make music and edit pictures, Windows or Mac is a required choice too.

    Having to spend $100 on a windows desktop does not matter a bit to me. Nor to most other people I would expect.

    As a software developer on the server end I am happy that there is a relatively lightweight desktop interface on my dev machine that runs virtualised in Virtualbox under Windows 7.

    If open source developers are a big enough audience to keep that alive, then that is good enough for me.

    I could not care less if my mother switched to linux.

    --
    Max M - IT's Mad Science
  231. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by jc42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I seem to remember software company executives in the 90's drooling over the thought that you'd pay them a monthly fee to access their word processor and photo editor apps from your thin client at home.

    Heh. I know quite a lot of people who've tried this, and quickly learned the downside of any sort of centralized or "cloud" computing model: If you miss a payment, all your stuff disappears. Sometimes permanently.

    And most of the ISPs who provided the early online storage to customers turned out to have contracts saying that putting a file on their server automatically transfers the copyright to the ISP. I know several friends in bands who tried this and learned the hard way that they had assigned the copyrights to all their work to their ISP, who found things that they liked and used in ads. Other people stored pictures of their kids, pets, etc. on "their" web site, and found the ISP using their photos in ads. Remember the fuss when msn.com was caught doing this, and MSN's reps quoted that passage in their contract?

    I also have a couple of friends who lost a parent who had been keeping personal info (pics, diaries, etc.) on a hosted site. They were a bit upset to find that after the parent's death, they had no legal access to anything on the site, because the parent hadn't thought to will it to them. And after a few months, the parent's "site" was purged and lost forever.

    Going back a bit, one of the original reasons for the rapid adoption of "personal computers" in work environments back in the 1980s was the growing problem of corporate data centers that more and more controlled what employees were permitted to do on the mainframe. Departments learned that if they wanted the computing capability that they needed, the easiest way was with a little computer that the department owned, and which the data center had no control over. This is a continuing battle in corporations everywhere, with no end in sight.

    It's an old story. If you don't own the machine(s) that hold your data, you don't own the data, and you have no say in how it may be used. If this means anything to you, you'd be an idiot to trust your data to an organization that views you as a source of income. You need, and will always need, a computer system that you completely control. (And you need it backed up - on your own hardware, not on someone else's. ;-)

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  232. Exactly: VM is totally the hotness by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Most of the people at work with a Mac can bring up a virtual machine running Linux.

    I have a VM linux and a VM XP up and running under OS X the majority of the time. I do server support through the linux VM (same version of linux the servers run under, simplifies some things, particularly pre-release testing), and I do Windows software development in the XP VM. meanwhile, OS X handles my web browsing, document work, personal databases (OmniOutliner... my favorite program ever), music (both listening in iTunes and performing... Logic Pro is awesome), my RSS feeds, my notes, my IM, my auroral monitoring application, my photography (Aperture)... this is all on a multiple monitor, 8-core machine with 8 GB, and it never chokes.

    One thing I don't do on this machine is games -- I have PS3, XBox 360, Wii, and earlier versions of those platforms in the home theater, and that's where I game, period. I don't have to worry about some game manufacturer destabilizing my OS (any of them), or what video card I have, etc., yet I have awesome gaming capability on a great display.

    My setup is kind of expensive, but then again, it earns me many times its costs over and over again, so it seems to me that the expense is completely justified. I get to stay home most of the time, work in shirtsleeves with a cat on my lap, and enjoy high performance in pretty much just the places I need it.

    Contemplating going to a single-OS box, even one I'm very familiar with, like one with the linux we run, seems like stepping back several years. Can't see any reason I'd ever want to do so. And as for the web or the iPad taking over (and yes, I have an iPad and use it a lot), no. Not a chance. Perhaps the iPad's distant descendant, but the iPad... it's "something else", though a very nice something else. In its current form, it has no more chance taking over the computer's role than electric cars have of taking over a Fender guitar amplifier's role.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  233. You're right. by brouski · · Score: 1, Troll

    You'll play it on a gaming console.

    --
    Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
    1. Re:You're right. by TheEldest · · Score: 1

      Not if you like mods...

    2. Re:You're right. by Japher · · Score: 1

      Or if you like upgrading to a better video card or CPU, or playing RTS and RPG games, or using a keyboard for FPS, or any one of many other reasons desktops will thrive as gaming platforms for the foreseeable future. I guess you could argue that consoles will come with keyboards at some point to make some of these things easier but I don't think that's a fair position. You'll still have trouble with upgrades, mods and other customizations.

  234. (psssttt.... I see dead desktops!) by beandaemon · · Score: 1

    Wow, I must be totally having an out of body experience, RIGHT NOW, because if I'm not mistaken. I'm actually using a linux desktop. Wait a minute, that can't be true. They're dead...I must be invisible! (runs out into the street....I CAN DO ANYTHING!!!)

    1. Re:(psssttt.... I see dead desktops!) by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      Thank you for being "that guy" that totally misses the point. The point isn't that some geeks and some businesses and even governments around the world in different parts aren't using Linux on the desktop. Sure, you *can* use Linux on the desktop. The point is simply that there hasn't been *widespread* adoption, and even more to the point, that there are systemic/market forces at work which appear to have a deterrent effect on the probability that Linux would become more widely adopted any time soon.

    2. Re:(psssttt.... I see dead desktops!) by beandaemon · · Score: 1

      Wow - 20 seconds on slashdot and I've already had my first no sense of humor comment. You'll forgive me if I don't use widespread adoption rates as my relative yardstick of a system's quality. Mom and Pop's grocery store may never be Wal-Mart size, but I can't say that bothers me, nor do I intend to stop shopping there, should they refuse to expand. People want to spend cycles debating linux's legitmacy as an OS based on market share? OK - have a good time with that, really. I'll be over here going on with my life.

    3. Re:(psssttt.... I see dead desktops!) by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      Again, you're arguing against what the author didn't say. The author didn't make any claim that adoption rates are a yardstick of a system's quality. In fact, the author specifically said that Linux's quality is great. Well, what he said was, "Over the past few years, modern Linux distributions such as Ubuntu have utterly transformed the open-source desktop user experience into something sleek and simple, while arguably surpassing Windows and Mac OS in both security and stability."

      Nobody is arguing that Linux lacks quality. Or legitimacy. The author is just exploring what he thinks the reasons are that Linux didn't gain more widespread adoption. Is that a waste of time? For you, perhaps. Other people want to see more people using Linux, so they can experience the freedoms and benefits of it's open culture, and without understanding the root causes of why it's not gaining more popularity, we can't really begin to address that problem.

      That's not to say I agree with all his conclusions, but I just hate that every time you come to a slashdot story, you can almost predict the ways in which people will argue against things they apparently *wish* the author said, or they just completely make it up so they can argue against it.

      As for my sense of humor, I post my share of 'joke' posts, but it's not funny when the post makes a joke of a point the article doesn't even deal with AT ALL. It's just ignorant.

  235. Anyone else notice the irony? by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

    It seems incredibly ironic that today Slashdot has two simultaneous threads, one telling us that Linux is dead on the desktop and another telling us that Liinux is pushing Microsoft out of the corporate IT data center.

    Perhaps its just that today even grandmothers have become a super-users, who do all their IT work in the cloud.

  236. This will not end well. by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

    not at all.

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  237. Redheads by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Not to mention, the sex is fucking amazing!

    So are the divorces.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  238. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by wootest · · Score: 1

    You're right. You're very right. That doesn't mean *every* other point is wrong, though. The PC era won't be over for a long time, and the laptop has won the war in the office, but businesses are also the first to look, point and drool at the iPad. Some didn't like Tablet PCs when they came out, and most simply focus on what it has the potential to do that laptops don't. (Nearly all those things has to do with its form factor and the human mind.)

    It does a serviceable subset of what many people do with their laptops (yes, except for Flash games, etc) and serves its "light pad in a meeting" niche well. Some people will move to an iPad instead of a laptop, and a laptop instead of their desktop at work.

    I'm also amazed at the idea that the iPad has to fully supplant the laptop before it gets anywhere. The Web doesn't fully supplant the desktop OS yet, and I'm guessing no one would call that a failure. It's about doing enough things well enough and a few things that nothing else does.

  239. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

    Games, film, and TV are covered by consoles and STBs. Coding counts as a specialized field, and not one that mass-produced consumer desktops (as opposed to workstations) need to be appropriate for.

  240. Linux = Monster by LeotheQuick · · Score: 1

    There are many reasons why Linux has failed on desktop. First of all, "Linux" as we refer to a modern "complete" distro, is a Dr. Moreau style monster, patched together from pieces it is statistically improbable that all of these pieces are going to a) be free of bugs and b) fit together properly with the whole picture in mind. Try as Canonical, or any organization might, they will always end up kludging some of it. For example, plaintext configuration files. As stable as my ubuntu system "seemed" to be, let's hope to hell there's no parse errors in my xorg.conf or else it'll never start up again.

    In fact, plaintext configuration is a perfect example of where the desktop and server worlds collide. This problem can be seen all over the place. The first time I saw it was when the kernel developers introduced the preemptive kernel which you could tailor for desktop systems so that when you were doing a compile your desktop wouldn't be completely unusable. It still never achieved the type of low latency desktop that these other operating systems are capable of.

    The nail in the coffin for me is the desktop. Not that all that effort put in to make things more "window-sy" wasn't appreciated, but they need to get their priorities straight. I remember suffering under the burden of nautilus' horrible desktop icon alignment for years and then installing the new GNOME when it came out, only to find the only significant changes noticeable to the end user were that by default double clicking icons would open new windows instead of a single one, and they added a cd burner, which crashed my desktop every time I used it. Years later, the CD burner works, the default window opening scheme is BACK to 1 window by default, and the icon alignment code STILL HASN'T BEEN FIXED. I mean, how hard is it to factor in the panel when drawing the icon grid?

    The average linux user will scoff at these comments, perhaps, claiming the importance of icon alignment is low. But that's exactly it - that's what the end user notices! The Linux desktop has always, ALWAYS lacked the sort of professional polish that these other operating systems have. The community advertises reliability, but while the kernel stays up the desktop goes DOWN, and to the end user that doesn't mean squat. Personally I think desktop Linux could make it, but I definitely agree that it isn't currently. If Canonical can't do it, then who can? What entity will be able to put forth the sort of Herculean effort that it would require to circumvent all these problems?

  241. Interesting... by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    The Linux desktop is dead because of one thing and one thing alone: mind share. With virtually $0.00 of marketing effort, the only way Linux could become the prevailing desktop is by going viral. It never did. Plain and simple. The public have to be sold. That's what they're accustomed to and that's what works. They don't 'buy' anything if they aren't told they need it.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  242. Phenomenal security and stability? by heffrey · · Score: 1

    This made me laugh. Linux is much the same as OSX and Windows in this regard. If any of the 3 is weak then it would be Apple's piss-poor security process. That said Linux is a total hodge-podge when it comes to security, witness the Debian OpenSSS bug to see how badly it can go wrong.

    Bottom line, Linux needs to find a differentiating factor in which it is actually discernibly different.

  243. Really? by LihTox · · Score: 1

    So what, we'll all be using the same desktop OS's forever? Fifty years from now it'll still be Mac vs. Windows?

    This is the tech industry: things change all the time. Who knows what will be the dominant OS in the future: maybe it's still Windows, maybe it's Linux, maybe it's iOS, maybe it's something that hasn't been invented yet. Until then, Linux or its descendants will always be around, which is pretty good for something that's "dead".

  244. Re:Hm. by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    "So... Linux is dead."

        Wow, it's amazingly easy to argue against the things you *wish* somebody said instead of what was *actually* said. How can a site billed as "News for Nerds" be filled with people who have such a basic lack of understanding of language and discourse? Here, for the reading impaired, I reproduce the actual quote, as it appeared in the slashdot summary: "The dream of Linux as a major desktop OS is now pretty much dead." (Why do I suspect that reproducing it here will have no effect, as the people who ignored it in the summary will just ignore and re-interpret it here, too, to fit their whim?)

    That is a *much* different statement than "Linux is dead". Most of what you said after that only applies to the statement you wish the author had said, instead of the author's actual statement. The author didn't argue that Linux won't continue to be developed and updated, that it's 'not viable'.

    You make one statement which does seem to speak to the article as written, and I even kind of concur: "Linux was always a niche system, and personally I don't want it to get too huge. That can only lead to massive marketization and commercialization, neither of which will be good for Linux."

    I don't know that I necessarily agree fully that larger marketshare would be a *bad* thing for Linux, but I will say that being in a niche that is large enough to continue developing and innovating, while small enough to largely avoid being a target of viruses, trojans, and worms, certainly has an upside.

  245. Desktop Linux was not killed by Microsoft by Animats · · Score: 1

    Microsoft didn't kill desktop Linux. The newer OSs for mobile devices did.

    A decade ago, Linux was in the #2 position. The Mac wasn't going anywhere, phones didn't run applications, and the PDA world wasn't very relevant. Linux had a window of opportunity when Windows XP was late.

    Linux isn't in the #2 position any more. All the growth is in the the mobile devices sector, where ease of use is paramount. Even though some mobile devices have a Linux kernel underneath, that's not what the user sees, or what developers write apps for. The Mac has made a comeback. The "netbook" and "tablet" industry tried Linux, and didn't like it. Linux on desktops has become irrelevant.

  246. Dead? by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

    The only aspect of this story that is credible is that it is certainly true that if you look at the gaming market and markets for "productivity software" sensu latu, what Linux lacks is a lot of widely (nearly universally) used software that can run across distros, with limited or no effort.

    The funny thing is that if the various distro vendors really made an effort to get together and make it much, much easier for developers to create cross-platform builds for more open-source software and programmers to adopt more standaridization regarding I/O for porting data across platforms and programs in a truly open software spirit, this situation could change drastically in no time at all. Unfortunately, everyone thinks their way is best, so it won't happen.

    The problem with the Linux desktop is basically that open source developers have used their "freedom" to push the snowball in many conflicting directions, so it has little chance to gain momentum against commercial entities who are really focused only on one thing, profits..

    The irony is that if only one of the most voracious of the various IT corporation, Oracle, would be actually willing to support a more open, more truly community-based Java Community workgroup for Java that makes it a truly write once-run anywhere language with a full range of API's over the entire domain of possible computation, it could pretty well own or at least direct nearly all of the IT that is not truly open-source. Fortunately, for the rest of corporate IT profiters, Larry Elisson's shortsighted greed will prevent it from happening.

  247. You missed the point by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    "In a nutshell, Linux is not as simple as windows is, but has it's own MAJOR advantages. The longer I look at it, the more user friendly it becomes. It probably is NOT for your grandma, nor girlfriend(or boy friend for that matter) or a dog or whoever/whatever it is for. It's for you! It's for your security, for your sanity, for your performance."

    When you are trying to make your Linux box the default to all your family and/our friends, the OS need to be simple to use. When you are creating one server is fine, but when you need one desktop to all on your home, you are in trouble.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  248. Remove "linux" from the OP title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The days of the desktop are numbered. (No seriously, stop laughing, for real this time!) As widgets in Win7 and OSX become more sophisticated, and app-based economies begin to proliferate the desktop will be come a much simpler device and no longer the big noisy box we have all come to know and love for the past 30+ years. E.g.: Apple TV interface = iPad interface = iPhone interface. However, I see the coming of the Great Simplification a perfect vehicle for the linux kernel.

    There will always be workstations for content developers and engineers, but I suspect their #s will continue to decrease.

  249. If Linux is dead on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If Linux is dead on the desktop then this post is written from the graveyard :-)

    Wakeup digitaldc. Linux is getting reborn pretty much every 8 month or more.

    1. Re:If Linux is dead on the desktop by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      Get back to me when I can walk in to any retail computer store and walk out with my computer with Linux installed a couple of Linux software packages in my bag. My first experience with Linux was Slack 2.x in the mid 90s, I loved it. As time went by I grew tired of having to worry about what hardware I purchased or having to search down source to compile to do what I wanted, and I'm a developer. I always hated the Mac OS and then Apple did something wonderful and came out with a new UNIX based OS and I haven't looked back. I run Linux in virtual machines for testing but really have not used it as a desktop in over 7 years.

  250. Linux is Dead? by digit1001 · · Score: 1

    I wish someone would have told me this before I quit using my Mac and XP desktops at home. What should I do now, look for a copy of BeOS?

    1. Re:Linux is Dead? by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      Well you're one data point invalidates several other million. Well done.

    2. Re:Linux is Dead? by digit1001 · · Score: 1

      Well in the case of "death" I would say one point confirming life WOULD invalidate the the statement.

  251. Updating.. by tempest69 · · Score: 1
    While I might not be a fan of the Mac. That is one part that they don't screw up every time. I remember supporting Windows 3.1 and Windows 95 back in 1995. The control panel was different between the two, but no big deal. As the years went on I was still supporting windows boxes on a semi-regular basis. But they kept moving the damn controls around--- EIGHT versions later and they haven't found a spot to let things settle. So I would need to look around a windows box to find some obscure controls that were not in the same place as before. Or have some new "friendly" system asking me questions blocking my access to just changing a setting somewhere.
    Then there is Linux I remember using the command "pump" to renew my ip address, not a big thing rarely used it, then one day I needed it, and poof it was gone (still on redhat at the time). Anyway I was looking for the some reference to pump and noooo, it was like I was a crazy person. Ahhh but I could find the replacement online you say.. NO because PUMP was gone and I couldn't renew the IP address. Pulling a tool and not mentioning that it's functionality has been usurped really cranks me.

    Apple bugs me, but I do like that they don't change the UI every release.

    Storm

  252. the underlying reason by Burz · · Score: 1

    , it's more that she doesn't even care and/or have a good idea of what Linux even is.

    "Linux" is un-knowable to most people. Desktop Linux has 8 or 9 user interfaces, so how is she going to get to know it? It has no defined face, therefore no identity among average desktop users.

    Geeks have been chasing after a mirage in "desktop Linux". And that's a bigger problem than you might think. Geeks got the "desktop Linux" notion before the pros did, and it became hostage to Geek politics: Thou shalt not standardize the UI (many of us hate GUIs), thou shalt not create an SDK (that's for people who stick to developing apps, who are weenies and n00bs), thou shalt not promote a standard default IDE (again for weenies/n00bs). Thou shalt always cater to system-level developers and tinkerers, who can always decide to create the next PaintShop when they have some extra time because GUI stuff is so simplistic (so much so that we rarely 'sink' to that level).

    Incidentally, the mobile world doesn't have these geek desktop political hangups.

    You can see the contrast right at the Linux Foundation: They have an SDK for mobile, but not for desktop. And their LSB is some sort of weird non-platform specification deeply affected by the desktop politics; Its so unhelpful that web developers look far more toward a 4-letter acronym (LAMP) as a platform definition than they do to LSB.

    Android has it "going on" not only because of its large corporate sponsor, but because it: A) doesn't have "Linux" in its name, B) has an SDK and IDE both encompassing the GUI (this makes Android a real consumer platform), C) was fitted to saleable hardware implementations early in its life.

    1. Re:the underlying reason by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > "Linux" is un-knowable to most people. Desktop Linux has 8 or 9 user interfaces

      Not quite.

      It has 2 major competing desktop interfacres.

      Of those, each can use the apps from the other or any other variation.

      Your remarks would have more impact if they didn't start with an obvious lie.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:the underlying reason by Mista2 · · Score: 1

      Damn, I guess my 4 year old daughter is going to have to disagree with you. It has a mouse, icons, Windows just like Windows PCs. She can find here applications from her login (by clicking on the user icon we setup for her) and launch Firefox, and get her favourite websites (bookmars synched by xMarks) She uses Tux Paint - which is brilliant with a stylus for young kids, my laptop is an HP tablet running Linux Mint) and can find her movies and TV shows in XBMC. Yes there are some setup differnces between FluxBox, Gnome and KDE, but these days, distros like Ubuntu is really as easy to use out of the box as OS X or Windows, especially if you have no preconcieved ideas about how your PC should look.
      She can also do all of these things on my Mac, or my wifes Windows PC. Because the Apps are what is important, the OS is just the tool that lets them run on your computer.
      For me, the OS chice is more important because I never again want to be enslaved to one platform, so I use all three major ones 8)

      Oh, and one other killer Linux feature - the repositories. Once a week I patch everything. On Windows and OS X it aways seems like every little app is pestering you for an update, Windows especially. - Java needs and update, Acrobat needs an update, Your browser needs an update, Windows is going to reboot in 5 minutes unless you say otherwise for an update.
      I have NEVER had my linux laptop suddenly prompt for an update in the middle of a presentation or right when I want to shut down to go home, or have to wait 15 minutes for a patch to apply when I boot up.

    3. Re:the underlying reason by Burz · · Score: 1

      Not it's not a lie. Look at Linux Mint which prides itself on being a better Ubuntu. The number of DEs they actively support is sickening.

      Ubuntu itself supports 3, but 2 was already way too much for them (consider how awful Kubuntu is compared to KDE on other distros). And the fact that apps will run under various DEs is not the point... people keep encountering the different DEs and getting confused by the windowing and docking systems, plus they end up running code from both DEs if they're not careful and wind up with a slow machine. Expecting the apps to run with different DEs also stalls vertical integration, making the apps seem broken in lots of small ways or indifferent to users' desire for conveniences.

      Not that it matters so much, when the OS is starved for apps to begin with.

  253. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Yes. We agree - because we are the technical/creative minority.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  254. 2011 will be the year of desktop Linux by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

    Of course so was 199x-200x. I remember this crap being posted in the late 90s... geez guess what, it is never going to be a significant presence on the desktop.

  255. rderoko by rderoko · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well I guess the Redmond Washington PR department must have gotten a new influx of cash so they can spread their message of joy throughout the world. I have often wondered how to get on that gravy train, I have an opinion on just about everything !

    1. Re:rderoko by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      That is it! Microsoft AND Apple are quaking in their boots from the type of posts you see here today!

  256. That would totally NOT work by Burz · · Score: 1

    Who wants to do the tech support for commercial products on "Linux"? Even on a particular distro like Ubuntu, you don't really know what GUI the end user will have to navigate with. There is no easy way to have the user check the OS version and there are new versions coming out every 6 months.

    Further, directing someone to change system settings is precarious beyond what it usually is, because the GUIs that make the changes either don't exist or work poorly (written with the wrong assumptions, I dare say).

  257. A market for it by NetServices · · Score: 1

    There is a market for it. As soon as a vendor throws itself behind a desktop GUI that can compete with XP/Win7 (and there are several for *nix that do) and they support it - it will happen. By support, I mean public forums as well as REASONABLY PRICED paid support I predict it willt take off. I believe there is is an market for it if they give it a chance. The Windows market wasn't created overnight. Microsoft had to dedicate time and resources to give it a chance.

  258. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    With respect to losing a dead parent's data: the executor/admistrator of the estate has legal control over that sort of thing, and your friends should have arranged with him to take care of the matter. Most companies are quite respectful of these things once they see the court papers.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  259. 3Ms -- Macs, Movies, Music by thebian · · Score: 1

    We should only talk about desktops in the home, for routine use, maybe home office. Because big business is a different thing. If their IT departments could figure out from getting out from under MS, they would save cash and aggravation, but that's another story. I don't think any big company has an IT department that is willing or able to cope with change. And then, games at home are a different thing. So, the 1% or 2% is in fact a little larger than the gross numbers make out.

    But Linux still has a problem. It's not grandma and usability (whatever that is) as such but it's with software licensing and formats -- lawyer stuff.

    I tried for two years to like the Mac. I bought a Mini and tried living with. Apple. It's not great. The hardware isn't so durable to be worth the premium they charge. The system is only perfect for Mac zealots, and impossible to alter for anyone else. The X-windows setup is awful.

    But it does play mp3s and commercial dvds, and Safari opens 99.9% of all the web pages I've wanted to see. I just got tired of having my sound break with every other kernel update, and I know how to fix it. I can imagine that Linux is useless otherwise.

    Still I went back to Linux on a new Desktop, but keep the Mini for music and movies via VNC -- the setup is probably not for everyone, but it works.

  260. Re:Linux IS dead. Long live Ubuntu. by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

    Grab your video camera, go to your local mall or busy street corner and start asking people if they know what Ubuntu is. Place your video on YouTube and link to it here. I await your evidence of spreading like wildfire.

  261. i actually LIKE Ubuntu by oakbox · · Score: 2, Informative

    I prefer Linux to Windows and OS X. Everything I plug into my computer just works or the software to make it work is just a few clicks away. The interface is pretty and both my new laptop and older desktop are still snappy and reactive after years of service (Windows just tends to get slower and slower, even with a reinstall). The whole mac needs to be replaced seemingly every 6 months because Apple came out with a new whiz-bang piece of hardeware. I need to reboot the windows computers in my office often because they are constantly losing the thread and locking up or forgetting where the USB mouse is or flipping the keyboard layout setting to 'UK' for no apparent reason whenever a user's back is turned. The Macs do strange and mysterious things with files and are (I'll say it out loud) NOT intuitive at all.
    In the last month in a relatively hertergenous environment, I have spent roughly 95% of my user support time on windows and mac issues. It's not because my users don't know what they are doing, it's just that the os they are using is failing them.
    Even esoteric and weird things I plug into my laptop are recognized by Ubuntu. This isn't 'It just works'. This is 'It works really well and intuitively'.
    The prospect of programming on an Ipad is laughable and while toting a netbook to a user convention is more reasonable that lugging around a laptop, I would go blind in a week and develop severe spinal injuries if I was forced to do actual work on one of them.
    Laptops and desktops will go away when computers can read our minds. Until that happens, I will keep using and recommending Ubuntu, because it works really well and intuitively.

    - oakbox

    --
    Not just answers, the correct questions.
    1. Re:i actually LIKE Ubuntu by oakbox · · Score: 1

      i wonder what you plug into your computer....

      :-)

      o Sony Bloggie
      o Nokia N96 - and it was able to connect to the internet through that phone with no additional installed anything in the Netherlands
      o Wife's iPhone
      o a drawer full of mp3/mp4 players and cameras

      I didn't catch the repeated 'plug into' theme until after I had posted.

      - oakbox

      --
      Not just answers, the correct questions.
  262. Computers are good for 2 things by toxonix · · Score: 1

    Games and porn... Seriously, I can't watch Netflix on my Ubuntu laptop? AW Jeezus! "Our apologies — streaming is not supported for your operating system"

  263. So what if the desktop Linux is dead? by colinmc151 · · Score: 1

    Rule ONE in the information technology (IT) field: IT will ALWAYS go with the lowest cost solution that does the job.

    Years ago I remember feeling upset because of IBM's seeming domination at the IT field, how IBM seemed to have a total lock on mainframe computers to the exclusion of almost everyone else. IBM seemed to be overcharging for what they were offering, while seemingly using ... questionable ... tactics to continue in that role. Guess what, IBM still has a near total lock on mainframe computers, but I (and most of the rest of IT) doesn't really care. Why? Well, there are still a few roles / jobs where BIG mainframes still do make sense, just not many roles, and those niches are getting smaller each year.

    Why the near death of the mainframe computer? Well, a number of upstart visionaries/entrepreneurs, like Paul Allen, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Ken Olson, Jack Tramiel, and Steve Wozniak among MANY others, showed that in many roles the mainframe could be replaced with far less expensive hardware / software combinations. These various people offered a lower cost solution that could do the job.

    So, where are we now? Well, Microsoft has a seeming near total lock on the desktop while using seemingly ... questionable ... tactics to continue that role. Going forward, where does Microsoft stand? Well, Microsoft are dead or dying in the server markets, and the embedded device markets. I don't know what will happen to desktop market, Microsoft may, like IBM with their mainframes, continue to dominate the desktop market ... and almost nobody will care.

    Microsoft can NOT compete on cost with Linux, so they will not be the mainstream of IT. It MIGHT be that mainstream IT will be Linux based smart phones backed up with Linux based servers, with Microsoft holding a lock on a steadily becoming irrelevant desktop market. Regardless as to how things play out, I do know that the least expensive solution will eventually win out as the mainstream IT technology and that may mean a small Microsoft catering to a small niche market...

    Colin McGregor

  264. The Desktop is dead by User0x45 · · Score: 1

    The desktop O/S is irrelevant. An optimized HURD kernel running flawlessly won't make a difference.
    Kids today, and adults tomorrow simply won't sit at desktops and be sys admins for their desktop
    computers. Think Nexus-One, Garmin 405, Nanos.

    Linux due to its flexibility will live on as it retains utilitarian functionality. Whether it is a desktop
    O/S pales in its ability to exist everywhere else.

  265. Nonsense by next_ghost · · Score: 1

    Strohmeyer is throwing the towel in a little too early. The main problem of desktop Linux is that Windows XP is a "good enough" system. For now, there's little incentive for average users to switch from XP to Linux other than user's own curiosity or catastrophic Windows breakdown. But eventually, XP users will be forced to switch. The year of desktop Linux will come when Microsoft forces its users to leave XP. I say that Linux will score above 5% in web statistics before XP drops below 50% of Windows market share and above 10% before XP drops below 25%.

  266. To quote Morrissey by fhuglegads · · Score: 1

    I know it's over And it never really began But in my heart it was so real

  267. Canonical hasn't done everything right by Burz · · Score: 1

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1826490&cid=33936156

    Also...
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1826490&cid=33936448

    In short, neither "Linux" nor Ubuntu are desktop platforms. They won't attract app developers because they lack platform-defining features and add severe tech support headaches.

    Seriously, people... I can't get over the dumbness displayed here over this subject. Android is very successful and Linux-based, so you need to look at the structural differences between Android and a distro like Ubuntu. Hint: the difference starts right within the Linux Foundation which supplies a mobile SDK but not a desktop one!

  268. as LAMP developer, Fedora 13 is great by lagi · · Score: 1

    installed it in 30 min on my workstation (clean install from Fedora 12).
    it had almost everything i need to start developing, only had to yum for some PHP extra modules.
    and had to install Oracle Java to get Smartgit and PhpStorm running. also got 64-bit flash player working in 64-bit Firefox and Chrome!
    sure Linux is not an OS to play games (and i tried), and that's only because lake of Game Development tools and API, but for Work and Education it's great and not DEAD at all.

  269. Ever heard of OEM license. by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

    I build PC's for people all the time, and usually the cost of windows exceeds the amount I spent building the entire computer. At the very least THAT has to change.

    If you mean the entire cost of the PC is less than windows license well that is utterly bogus.
    If you mean your markup is less than windows license well it really doesn't take any skill to assemble a bunch of components.
    Your markup (or lack thereof) is directly related to the lack of skill involved.

    Windows 7 Premium OEM is $95. Purchased in bulk it is much much much less. 3 pack OEM license is about $60 per PC. Large OEM (dell, HP, etc) get it for about half that.

  270. No clear answer by Max_W · · Score: 1

    Most web-applications run on Linux. Web-applications are sort of an OS now. I would even say that the Internet is the OS by now.

    At it runs of LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) mostly.

    As for me I use for work the GIMP www.gimp.org . It is originally the Linux application, but I use it on Windows. Sort of, - the best of two worlds.

  271. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  272. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by hedwards · · Score: 1

    Considering what the folks at OnLive have been able to achieve, they can already do that if they want to. I think the point is that Photoshop over the web isn't really that desirable. The latency is a real headache, and then you have to worry downloading those massive files to your hard drive.

    Which is to say that the main thing holding it up is the fact that bandwidth hasn't been increasing as fast as it was during the late 90s. Were it to kick off like that again that would likely change. But downloading images where a single file is hundreds of megabytes or more is taxing on current internet connections.

  273. The Reason and The Plan by simpz · · Score: 1

    The reason Windows still dominates is so so simple. People stay with what they are used to (esp what came with the computer) unless there is a very good reason to change, the gain must massively outweigh the effort.
    Most people just think for example, there is only Office as productivity software, all computers get malware, what's an Operating System and I like that flashy MS advert. Most people aren't computer people.

    They think changing will take learning and they don't have time for that, they think. It took them a long time to learn this computer stuff in the first place, so why change, when I'll be lost for ages again like when I first got a computer.

    Not being able to download and run cak.exe from random website is confusing to them.

    The view is, I'd rather stick with what I know and clean up the bogged down computer every so often, hell the number of people I know now that planned to just buy a new computer when it starts to go slowly is amazing.

    The above is the main reason. If we want to get people to change then there has to be massive obvious/superficial advantages.

    The first thing to do is probably target the PC gamer / modder market. They are basically low hanging fruit. They'd run anything that'd give them 2 extra FPS on the latest game.
    To do this we should be getting very fast video drivers (hopefully Open Source) the proprietary NVIDIA driver is good but they don't seem keen to equal the Windows driver for performance. And I'm afraid it means "finishing" WINE for key apps (and heavily optimising it for games).

    I know a lot of people object to WINE as it may stop people developing native Linux apps, and this is a fair criticism. But we must lower the barrier to switching, and this is I'm afraid the only way, people don't want to chuck all their old software to switch to Linux. And if market share grows, native apps will follow.

    WINE could do with a "Sugar Daddy" to "finish" it. Come on Google, you put money in so it would run Photoshop, why not invest money in WINE even just to annoy MS!

  274. Programs written by a family member by tepples · · Score: 1

    That's why homes are expected to do most of their computing on the game console.

    Game consoles do not run free software or homemade proprietary software for that matter. Where are homes expected to do most of their free computing?

    Keep in mind that I plan to keep an engineer-class machine at home, but I think that most users neither need nor really want such a thing.

    One shouldn't need to own an engineer-class machine to run programs written by a friend or family member who happens to own an engineer-class machine, but game consoles still have lockout.

    Well, I went the route of punching a hole in the wall

    How would you recommend that people who rent convince their landlords to allow this?

    A condition easily changed if necessary to retain student interest.

    Another anecdote relating to the suggestion of student discounts on time-limited licenses needed to write and run code on your own computer: My cousin started programming when he was in middle school. I doubt that a middle school administrator would agree to arrange for a discount on XNA Creators Club license because middle schools don't offer programming classes, nor did my high school offer them to freshmen.

    1. Re:Programs written by a family member by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Game consoles do not run free software or homemade proprietary software for that matter. Where are homes expected to do most of their free computing?

      I thought we were talking about the Microsoft model. The answer, though, is on any of the many solutions which run Linux. Some of them will be Enterprise-grade, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. One of the big advantages of Linux is LTSP...

      One shouldn't need to own an engineer-class machine to run programs written by a friend or family member who happens to own an engineer-class machine, but game consoles still have lockout.

      I don't disagree, but the market doesn't care very much. In spite of this, Open Pandora is looking like a victim of their own success, and Panasonic announced a Pandora competitor. The mind reels. I want one, though.

      Well, I went the route of punching a hole in the wall

      How would you recommend that people who rent convince their landlords to allow this?

      I rent. I just do it, and then I patch the drywall later and repaint it. Not everyone has those skills I guess, but it's pretty trivial stuff. If you can't teach yourself to patch drywall by doing it then you probably don't need to live in a house made of it. I guess that makes me an elitist prick, but I think anyone who won't learn to turn a screwdriver deserves what they get. Those who have no arms may have a special dispensation from on high the ivory tower up my arse. I painted apartments for rent money when I went [back to] college and I still have the equipment. Because I got tired of looking at the exposed insulation, I hung drywall in the addition to my house. The landlords expressed interest in doing this work themselves some five years ago when we moved in, just like the unfinished bathroom. My lady hung a bunch of crap all over that to hide it though, and the bath works fine, so I elected not to mess with it. Et cetera. My handiness was cited as a reason why we were chosen to rent this place, that and that we had our act together enough to actually get papers in, have references, blah blah blah. When light switches fail I don't cry about it, I just replace 'em, they're cheap at the Home Despot.

      Another anecdote relating to the suggestion of student discounts on time-limited licenses needed to write and run code on your own computer: My cousin started programming when he was in middle school. I doubt that a middle school administrator would agree to arrange for a discount on XNA Creators Club license because middle schools don't offer programming classes, nor did my high school offer them to freshmen.

      I don't think the Microsoft package is a great tradeoff but they are the IBM of today. Unfortunately, more people should be fired for choosing Microsoft. I vote (hahaha) that the beginning be the choad who picked Silverlight for Netflix.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  275. I don't want to go on the cart! by goodmanj · · Score: 1

    I use Mac OS for most things, Linux for scientific computing, and PCs for games and when I have to.

    Linux is dead, as a mass-market desktop OS. But Linux has always been dead in that sense. And yet somehow it keeps on going, keeps evolving and improving, always keeping pace with its competitors. I used Redhat back in the early '90s -- that wasn't an OS, that was a torture chamber. Today, while I prefer my Mac to my Ubuntu box, Ubuntu is usually a pleasure to use.

    So what if there aren't 200 million desktop machines running Linux? It has enough users to support an active development group, has had for 20 years, and its existence doesn't depend on the whims of some vice president of software development somewhere. It may be dead, but it's also probably immortal.

  276. Linux wins on usability too by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

    Over the past few years, modern Linux distributions such as Ubuntu have utterly transformed the open-source desktop user experience into something sleek and simple, while arguably surpassing Windows and Mac OS in both security and stability.

    ...and usability. I installed and played a new A list title on Windows last week and every minute of the experience made me want to scream. From the surprise reboot due to virus patches to the 25 digit "authorization" code that has to be entered manually, to the many step, go back to the beginning and try to figure it out again installation process, to the jerky video, to the clumsy user interface, it all trails the modern Linux desktop experience by a wide country mile. I swear, this is the last time I will ever run a game of any description on Windows, or any application that I am not absolutely forced to. These days that happens about once every two years, and fallilng.

    --
    Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  277. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    The Desktop OS is dead.

    Apple will wind down OS X over the decade - the PC era is over.

    For users, this was heralded by the advent of the iPad, which will usher in 10,000 copies. For data centers, this came with large-scale, production virtualization.

    Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".

    I really really hope you're wrong. Having the iPad take over would be one of the worst nightmares computing could face.
    Hell, I'd even rather have had a 90's-era Microsoft win.

  278. I don't care by pinkeen · · Score: 1

    I just don't care. I use linux as my primary and only desktop os for 5+ years. I don't try to convince anyone to use it. I wouldn't go back to windows. As long as there is a group of enthusiasts who make this happen and a group of enthusiasts who use it, it won't vanish. And to be true it is the only os where you can see the latest (maybe not the greatest after all) ideas concerning desktop, user interface paradigms, etc. It's the cutting edge. Period.

  279. Linux communities efforts by rboaretto · · Score: 1

    Take linux mint as example: If the efforts of all linux communities toward to, let me say, 'linux mint distro', I think that mint may survive on a macosx/windows world.

  280. Claranet Germany using GNU/Linux by Aquina · · Score: 1

    I currently work for an MSP (Claranet) and we are actively using GNU/Linux distributions (*buntu, Gentoo, RHEL, SuSE and more) and all perople in Operations, Development and Systems Engineering require skills in these systems. Further I had to migrate myself a few years ago and more perople around me stop using Windows in favour of GNU/Linux or Mac OSX (which is a broken BSD). There do also some BSD distros (yes distributions) exist like PCBSD or Desktop-BSD. I think the author of that news should have rather told us where he/she got that imfromation from. Finally I'd like to mention that the Spain government has a plan to migrate more than 50000 systems in schools and universitys from Windows to Ubuntu. And by the way... I'm a Ubuntu dev.;-)

  281. PC-BSD actually has what you want by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 1

    PC-BSD does what you want. Each package installer includes everything that piece of software needs - library versions, etc. The end of DLL hell.

    There's a catch; multiple applications using the same libraries have those libraries loaded into memory multiple times. Also, library bugfixes, etc., must be applied across each individual package.

    But, it does exist!

    --
    Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
  282. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by MogNuts · · Score: 1

    Not so fast on OSX. Don't know why people keep saying that they will get rid of OSX. If you look at the most recent financial statement, Macs deliver pretty much 40% of their money. It's a tie between IPhone and Macs. IPods are like the only remaining big chunk, and they're miniscule in comparison to the two.

  283. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by garyebickford · · Score: 1

    If I could, I'd mod you up again.

    --
    It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
  284. Can't host your own data w/o 'pipes'.... by lpq · · Score: 1

    In the US (and elsewhere), the ability to host your own data is greatly limited by small caps on upload bandwidth. That resource is still owned by ISP's who also, coincidentally will agree to host your 'content' for a price (and for terms of their 'agreement'). Seems like ISP's have a strong incentive to NOT allow you a good upload bandwidth, to make you dependent on remote hosting of your stuff.

    Until that problem is addressed, home location of data is mostly a dream except for very small amounts of stuff.

    On top of the above is the US-court view that at soon as you locate your stuff with any 3rd party, you lose your constitutional rights to have your stuff be safe without a warrant. That's the a large problem right there unless you want to add the overhead of encrypting everything -- but then forget easy access to 3rd party apps through conventional API's...

  285. InfoWorld / PC World lolz by xda · · Score: 1

    I'm starting to see a trend with PC World articles. I think they purposely title and write articles with the intent of angering their target audience. I'm only going to fall for it 20 more times.

  286. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Mista2 · · Score: 1

    Oh, shit, I had better remove Linux from my netbook, laptop, desktop at home, management workstation and all my servers I use at work if it is going to be a dead platform.
    I really hope it doesnt go mainstream, then it would be just like Windows and OS X.

  287. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by ultranova · · Score: 1

    Apple will wind down OS X over the decade - the PC era is over.

    Apple winding down OS X hardly qualifies as death knell for the PC.

    Your beloved PC? Now a "content creator's" workstation. Everything from word processing to simple photo-editing goes on line - or into an "app".

    So you're going to write text 8 hours straight, 5 days a week, on an iPad?

    Desktop computers aren't going anywhere, because they're large enough to have a decent display and keyboard. As an added bonus, they can also fit a powerful (by the standards of the time) processor and GPU, lots of memory, and a large hard disk.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  288. Re:It is free as in freedom but not free as in bee by fwarren · · Score: 1

    To each his own.

    In my case, every individual who I have switched over knows so little about taking care of their computer it has been a net gain for them.

    I am doing the work to keep the systems working, but it much less work than if I was helping them to keep windows running AND clean off the spyware every 3 months.

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  289. Just to clear the confusion by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    BSD's not dead of course - look only to the Mach kernel in OS X for verification.

    Excpet of course that the Mach kernel is ... the Mach kernel, not the BSD kernel. You basically just said 'Linux is alive, look at Windows' because Mac OSX has BSD subsystems just like Windows does after you install cygwin.

    BSD still isn't dead of course, but the OSK kernel isn't BSD its Mach, OSX just has some BSD userland components.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  290. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    Wow, spoken like a middle manager who knows absolutely nothing about desktops or server management.

    Everything goes online ... into an app ... that still runs on your PC cause in case you haven't noticed, all these 'web apps' do a lot of processing on the desktop and a lot of displaying on a monitor.

    Finally, the words you just spoke, I've heard at least 5 times in the last 20 years, and it still hasn't happened.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  291. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    I can watch full-screen flash inside the VM on the thin-client with no jittering playback. Hell, even Autocad and Photoshop work marvelously especially through desktop streaming. With remote desktop applications you're usually limited by the precision of your mouse, compression makes detailed work almost impossible, a virtual desktop does not have these limitations.

    Based on these statements I'm fairly certain you've never used RDP for anything in your life, or you think the performance of X is good, one of the two.

    Now that I've bothered to read all of your post, you appear to be more or less clueless. I don't think I can find one thing you wrote that is actually true.

    RDP over even a gigabit connection is noticable different, even in Win7 with its improvements. I can barely stand using a text editor over RDP, browsing sucks, flash is absolutely asstastic. Anyone using PS or ACAD over RDP isn't actually doing anything once they start the program or they would have shot themselves 15 minutes into it.

    I don't know anyone that runs a VM inside of Windows JUST so they can move the VM elsewhere if the hardware fails, thats what we have network shares and disk images for, welcome to the 80s when we solved these retarded problems without adding 18 layers of complexity and failure points in the process.

    You aren't moving 50 graphics designers to a terminal server either, you don't have one with the CPU power needed to power them, and building a cluster to support them would cost you far more upfront and in maintenance than just supporting 50 desktops.

    As for server virtualization ... how is it different than client without a display? Its not. You virtualize when you need a contained environment that doesn't justify a physical server for itself. You're wasting CPU power in virtualization.

    I don't know who you're 'rolling out a virtual desktop' infrastructure for, but I'm 100% certain they're going to come out a loser in the deal.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  292. Good news for fans of Linux on the desktop! by mr_mischief · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are trends that have gone on for years in the magazine publishing industry. One is that if Newsweek puts a bear on the cover, the stock market is going to go up. The other is that if PC World pans your technology, it's about to take off.

  293. Re:The desktop is dead by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

    Facebook runs on Windows Server actually.

    But you still make a good point.

  294. Desktop Linux just doesn't work by CreamyHoneyOats · · Score: 1

    Every time I tried giving the latest Linux distro a go, I've always been disappointed. My most recent attempt was last week when I wanted to install Ubuntu 10.10 on my work-station to use as a VMWare host. The install went fine. It detected all my drivers. All except my 2 monitors connected via USB adapters. I started googling for the right drivers and hit the same problems I always do when I turn to linux: hit upon 50 different forums with references to the problem, but all relating to slightly different versions of Linux, or slightly different symptoms, or describing vastly different solutions, most of which don't work. After messing around for 3 hours trying to get things to work, I turned back to Windows 7. Installed the OS in half an hour, and the 2 external screens 'just worked'. Had the VMWare player running and my guest VM spanning 2 of my 3 screens within the hour. Ubuntu/Linux is great in theory. A free, stable and secure OS. And it almost works. But it's that last 10% or 5% of things that you need to jump through a thousand different hoops to get going that drive people away. Also, the collection of apps available range vastly in aesthetics and quality. There's some good stuff out there, but there's also lots and lots of crapola that will drive anyone but the most devoted geek up the wall with config files, recompiling modules, package dependencies and all that crap. For very basic use (i.e. one screen, simple apps like web browser, OpenOffice and maybe a paint program), Linux is fine. But then again, almost any OS is fine for these things. You can put Android on a netbook that does this. Or MeeGo. Or probably even the new BlackBerry tablet thing. Or iOS. Or OSX. Or Symbian. Or whatever custom crap you can dream up of.

    1. Re:Desktop Linux just doesn't work by Spugglefink · · Score: 1

      But it's that last 10% or 5% of things that you need to jump through a thousand different hoops to get going that drive people away.

      I think I'd say Linux either just works, or it just doesn't. There's very little ground here. I remember pissing around for days trying to get some stupid wireless driver working, for instance. I decided to solve problems by spending money for more compatible hardware a long time ago, but even that is a crap shoot. I bought a printer once with Tux right on the box, but it was some of the worst driver hell I ever experienced, because it worked with Linux sure enough, if you had some three-year-old version of Red Hat. For other stuff, it's frequently the case that manufacturers change chipsets without changing model numbers or packaging, so you think you're buying something on the known good list, and you get something that might work a year from now, if the developers get the driver fixed. Then there's stuff that worked, and then it stops working, and then a year later it starts working again for no rhyme or reason.

      I think hardware is one of the biggest single problems for Linux on the desktop, and there's nothing the community can really do to solve these problems. Manufacturers either play ball, or they don't, and it's such a fragmented target market a lot of them just don't want to be bothered.

      I've been doing desktop Linux for nine years, and I'm still doing desktop Linux, but when the time comes to buy a new computer, I'm probably not going to bother going to the effort to procure something that doesn't have an OS pre-loaded, and I'm probably just going to buy something off the shelf from some big box store with Windows 7 on it, and leave Windows 7 on it. I predict not more than a couple years before I finally move on.

      As big of a troll as that article is, I can't fundamentally disagree with its underlying point. No, we had a chance, we thought, but it does seem that chance has passed us by. The best thing to come out of Linux on the desktop is all the FOSS apps that were originally developed for Linux, and have now migrated across all platforms; software like the GIMP and Inkscape, for instance.

      (Yes, yes, some pedant will point out that the GIMP wasn't originally developed on Linux, and Inkscape might not have been either. That's not really my point. The point is the best stuff to come out of graphical end-user-oriented FOSS stuff is that it runs on normal desktop operating systems too, not just the weirdo lunatic fringe stuff.)

  295. Re:Business rules middleware? by Cederic · · Score: 1

    That's a confusing question. Why translate business rules into SQL? Why not run the rules in Java on one of the many Oracle app servers (or, comically, inside the DB itself).

    Seriously, I don't even work for Oracle and I could architect a dozen solutions for your problem. Give your Oracle account manager a call, or (for the cheaper option) head over to Apache.org for some open source (but still very professional) options.

  296. Rare, bad possibility. Better alternatives. by lullabud · · Score: 1

    Having worked with linux, windows and mac os for over 10 years each on both the desktop and server space, it sounds like you had a rare instance where the loaded OS was old and some firmware patches had come out. I'm not going to deny that those instances exist, but in my experience they are rare. Six times is really, really rare. Once is common.

    The big difference between windows and linux/mac is that on a fresh Windows workstation, there is no automated way to just blindly accept all of the packages and install all updates. Pointing, clicking and babysitting is required to become fully patched. XP even requires you to install Microsoft Update to get more than just windows updates for Microsoft software. (Though I haven't had much experience with Win7, so hopefully this is different now.)

    The alternative? Linux and Mac both allow you to click a _few_ buttons or run a few commands and blindly update everything. None of this pausing in the middle of the install to see if you really want to install IE8, and if you do then also answer a few quick questions in new web browser windows. None of these pop-up notifications informing you that you can read more information about benefits of Windows Genuine Advantage, if you so please, pausing the process until you answer.

    sudo softwareupdate -i -a # Walk away from your OS X system.
    sudo bash -c "apt-get update && apt-get -y dist-upgrade" # Walk away from your Ubuntu system.
    sudo yum -y update # Walk away from your Centos system.

    There are graphical equivalents of all of these too, for the CLI-phobic, that require just a few clicks to do the same behaviors. The Windows graphical equivalent still requires much user intervention and babysitting, *especially* on a new system.

    On top of that, Apple makes update bundles more frequently than Microsoft makes service packs, so you end up installing a fewer number of updates which in turn minimizes the possibility of something breaking.

    Microsoft's stand-alone workstation update system has always been a sore point for me, I really hope they make it less painful. I do want them to succeed, and I do want things to be easy for their users, that way they won't have to come to me for help as much.

  297. Good - fewer virus, etc by kramulous · · Score: 1

    I hope that it is 'dead'. That way I can continue using it the way I do.

    The more people that adopt it, the more viruses, malware, etc etc etc that'll pop up. Then, what will I do to remain productive? BSD?

    1-2% is a pretty big number. Especially if you take a survey on the type of work that 1-2% do. I'd be very, very happy with that.i

    --
    .
  298. 2011 by tsa · · Score: 1

    The year of no Linux on the desktop! What a relief not to have to anticipate anymore.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  299. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

    My dad's a carpenter. Sometimes there's tools that are not worth buying for a one-man operation (say, a front-end loader) - that's when you rent it.

    I'm sure if there was a monthly "pay to use Photoshop" option, a lot of professionals would use it for the times they do need it, but not very many would use it long term.

  300. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Draek · · Score: 1

    Ahh, yes. I predict that by 2020, there'll only be 6 PCs in the whole world, with everybody else connected by a simple iOS or Android device to one of them.

    Face it, you're not the first nor the last to predict the death of the PC in favor of some locked-down alternative, and so far your record has been pretty lousy.

    --
    No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
  301. That's fine for a 4 year old who is hand-fed apps by Burz · · Score: 1

    and I suppose the proverbial grandma is much the same.

    Those are not good audiences to drive marketshare for general purpose personal computing.

    Finally, Windows is the dregs and has its position from its long history (as well as being a real PC platform). But technical excellence in the Linux world won't matter to people if they can't easily identify it.

    The market is with me on this and its moving towards OS X.

  302. The hardware is no longer stupid by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Cheap and nasty network printers have postscript or even PDF built into them now and are compatible with just about anything you can think of.

  303. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by w0mprat · · Score: 1

    Try typing anything of length on a touch screen keyboard - hell try touch typing.

    A mouse is still the most accurate input device, you can select a single pixel, or it can accelerate movement, a small few cm movement makes a larger on screen one. Touch screens are cute for specific tasks optimized for the platform but don't scale. Multi-touch is misleadingly titled, you cannot still do more than one input at once. With a keyboard you can be pressing keys or shortcut combos whilst the mouse is moving, and input mouse buttons and scroll wheel at the same time. Touch screens you can only do one gesture at a time, perhaps some software may support you using a second hand. But thats it.

    I've noticed almost all new laptops have multi-touch gestures on their trackpads, it won't be long before mice end up with multi-touch pads on their tops.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  304. Desktop Linux is dead because everyone killed it by billcopc · · Score: 1

    I run Linux on my laptop out of convenience/necessity. I use my laptop for two things: network testing, and web development. Linux of course has the richest set of networking tools and capabilities of any OS, lets me do whatever I want with great ease and flexibility. The web dev side of it though, it's ass. The only reason I stick with it is because, half the time, KIO kinda-sorta works, which is better than no KIO at all. I wish it worked all the time, but that is apparently too much to ask of the KDE dev team.

    Desktop Linux is dead because Gnome and KDE4 suck.

    And then we have the Mac. Since OS X, Unix geeks have been warming up to the platform, because for the first time ever, a snazzy UI has been built atop a Unix core. Actual designers were paid to conceive this interface, and held to some standard of usability and esthetic appeal, unheard of in the Linux world.

    Deaktop Linux is dead because OS X does it better.

    This relegates KDE and Gnome to the no-budget segment, people who either don't want (me) or can't afford (me too) a Mac. To non-hackers, every Linux GUI will be compared (superficially) to Aero Glass or OS X, which is to say, they always lose.

    At the end of the day, even the hackers want something that "Just Works" because we have shit to do that doesn't involve tweaking X configs and restarting FUBARed window managers every hour. The desktop is, above all, a work tool. If it makes my work easier, win! If it makes it painful, fail. Right now Linux desktops are still mostly fail.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  305. Mod me Troll I don't care, but: by w0mprat · · Score: 1

    I remember desktop Linux getting usable and stable back in 1999, at least it could do anything Windows or Mac could do at the time. I was quite excited, I figured a year or two of development from the FOSS community to polish and iron out bugs would mean a Windows killer was on the way.

    Indeed, it seemed unstoppable all you'd need to do was hand someone a live CD to cure their Microsoft related woes. Nothing paid, no licencing, and a good platform for development, I couldn't see how it cold fail.

    But a decade later, I've given up holding my breath. Every major Distro release I see minor incremental improvements, often gains are eaten up by brand new problems. It seems periodically everything is completely re-written from the ground up, to only be slightly better. Desktop Linux has been consistenly behind the major players, content to imitate. I remember seeing 3D desktop effects demo'd in August 2003 by Microsoft. It took until 2006 before Compiz, to actually be usable, only when Vista wasn't far away. Oh and only when the BETA versions of Windows 7 showed massive performance improvements did Canonical do something about how painfully long Ubuntu was taking to boot.

    There is absolutely no fucking innovation in the userspace, just autisticly copying Windows/OSX. Sure both Microsoft and Apple copy each other, but they both have a long list of GUI innovations and the patents to go with them in wider use today. Oh uh, the desktop cube thing and the tabbed windows I think are pretty cool. But these are Mac-ish, look cool in demos, great to show off to geeky girls in coffee shops when they notice my linux laptop, but I haven't really figured out what advantage they are.

    FOSS development is not wanting for brute force labor nor programming talent, dare I say this dwarfs whats available for MS or Apple to muster by a few orders of magnitude.

    But by all measures it's absolutely fucking autistic and has been counting words in the dictionary repeatedly for the last 20 years.

    Desktop Linux needs a clean-sheet rethink just as happens every 6 months it seems, except this time it actually needs some high-level right brain design. This is exactly what happend with Android, which is a linux distro done right - finally- and look at what's happening with that.

    While I still use Ubuntu quite a lot, I've given up on destop linux as a hobby, I'm now a Android nerd. And you know what? I'm happier now.

    While I'm still a PC user first and foremost, as well as a smartphone totting hipster, I hang my head in shame. Apple, Microsoft, OSS crowd are all too damn selfish, too far up their own agendas be it profit, politics or whatever. Aren't computers intended for use by people? More specificly aren't computers Tools for productivity communication and leisure for use by human beings? Should this not be priority #1 in design in development?

    As an IT guy I'm ashamed, no wonder we're hated.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  306. UNIX FOREVER by Pereclies · · Score: 1

    long live Unix, and the Macintosh OS X!

  307. Re:seriously? you guys posted this? by Stachybotris · · Score: 1

    Bad grammar on my part. My point is that, eventually, 32-bit native mode will be gone entirely and support for it in any type of emulation will also vanish. Of course, by then we'll probably be talking about having to support 64-bit apps on a 128-bit system, but who knows?

    Though, honestly, I don't really know what I was thinking when I hit 'submit'.

  308. "Just Works" != "Never Needs Updates" by Narcogen · · Score: 1

    Baloney...

    I run at least five flavors of Windows and hafter as many Linux distros, am pretty solidly in the Ubuntu camp. I have a Mac and an iPhone and am going to be buying more for a laundry list of reasons.

    HOWEVER, the first thing that struck me about the Mac and the iPhone was how much they did NOT "just work." I was ready to be converted. Oh, please, let me for once just buy a !@#$ing box and be able to plug it in and start working. It was NO different to me than setting up a Windows or Ubuntu box. The OS wasn't fully configured or even current. I had to install everything myself only to find it wanted to automatically run 2.9GBs of patches, rebooting about six times in the process. I didn't have a working computer until the next day.

    The difference is that Apple has an army of well trained baby sitters who will, for a fee, put up with this crap for you and coddle your ego telling you what a special, pretty smart and interesting person you are and then hand your shiny box back.

    I refuse to pay for that sort of saccharine bullshit, so I'm left with a computer that is just as much a pain in my ass as any other.

    You've constructed a nice straw man there in which "just works" means "comes magically preconfigured for my specific needs and never requires software updates".

    Computers get put in boxes and within a few days they are out of date. The longer it sits in the box before it gets to you, the more updates it needs. Apple periodically refreshes its lineup and new models get the latest software, but yes, you're going to need some updates.

    You may or may not be exaggerating the downloads or restarts required; I can't tell. I can only say that the numbers you quote are probably near the upper limits for what any buyer of a new, current model Apple computer is ever likely to experience. I don't think I've even come close to those figures in the last six months on OSX.

    How that compares to installing Linux, where you have to download the entire operating system unless you bought a computer preconfigured with it, I don't know. You don't offer any comparisons, so I can only guess-- although you yourself say it's "no different" than an Ubuntu box.

    "Just works" means that for the majority of tasks for which an average user requires a computer, the way in which the task is achieved is intuitive-- something that a user with minimal training can achieve without a lot of trial and error or consulting documentation. When referring to peripherals and accessories, it means that when one has a reasonable expectation that two devices should work together, that they do so with a minimum of trouble and effort, and in a way that matches the user's expectations.

    It has nothing whatsoever to do with patches or configuration. The phrase "just works" was never intended by anyone to mean "doesn't require configuration" or "doesn't require updates".

  309. Statistics... by Lalo+Martins · · Score: 1

    ...can mean whatever you want. Based on how much market share they gain each year, I'd say Linux is the MOST successful desktop OS. And I'll ignore any data you come up with to contradict me, because I'm an important paid blogger and you're just some dude on the comments.

  310. Article tagging by Trogre · · Score: 1

    I miss /. tags. This article would have been tagged 'flamebait' in record time.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  311. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Spinland · · Score: 1

    "it won't be long before mice end up with multi-touch pads on their tops."

    Magic Mouse has been around for a while.

    --
    "You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline." - Frank Zappa
  312. Find a Free alternative to each of these by tepples · · Score: 1

    I believe all software should be free (as in freedom).

    How do you propose that the development of a video game with production values comparable to major-label games be financed if the end product will be released under a license for free software and a license for free cultural works?

    Would I criticize that software, and/or recommend alternatives to others? Yes, usually.

    Let's try an exercise: Can you come up with a free substitute for each of these?

    • We <3 Katamari
    • Super Mario Galaxy
    • Super Smash Bros. Brawl
    • Animal Crossing: City Folk
    • Pokemon Pearl
    • Others that I've mentioned in a previous comment
    1. Re:Find a Free alternative to each of these by pxc · · Score: 1

      It's sad to say, but I probably couldn't care less about the licenses of those games. The platforms they run on are all generally so closed down that whether or not you're legally allowed to modify them barely matters.

      The other thing is that big, famous games tend to either continue or start franchises. Branding is a huge thing in gaming, much more than in other software, IMO. Even if there were a mechanically adequate replacement for any of these, it wouldn't necessarily satisfy.

      Releasing the source code (of at least the game client), and allowing re-use and remixing of skins and models, etc. of a game would be a relatively safe move for games whose revenue are based on subscriptions. For other games, I don't know that releasing them as open source from day one is as reasonable of an option. I think, though, that we can do a lot better in terms of openness than we generally are doing in gaming.

      To return to the phrase you pulled from my post: when good F/OSS alternatives to a piece of software don't exist, that would fall into the "unusual" category, where I don't make recommendations. I phrased it that way because I know that sometimes there are no viable alternatives.

      My desire to see more F/OSS in games isn't based solely in principle. Besides fulfilling a moral obligation not to eternally hoard information and culture from society, F/OSS games have allowed for some of the coolest mods around. I'm very into that, and I've had a lot of fun playing games that are largely based on the code of their predecessors. In the absence of the ideal licensing scheme, well documented APIs and the allowance of modifications in general has a similar effect.

      Allowing (some form of) derivative works is the driving force behind a lot of the value in games and series like Warcraft, Starcraft, Diablo, The Elder Scrolls, Neverwinter Nights, Half-Life, and recently/famously Minecraft. I've enjoyed modability in the handful of console games I've played that allow it as well. I dig SSMB:B's level editor, and you can bet that I've got my Wii rigged up to run the homebrew BalancedBrawl mod.

      Allowing members of the public to build upon your creative and technical works fosters the creation of some really cool shit. To do so in the form of giving them source-level access to your material necessarily allows them to do even cooler shit.

      It's not about the inherent value of any particular license. Freedom to derive is the thing I'm after, and I'll encourage that in whatever form it comes, be it powerful in-game scripting engines, feature complete level-editors, an API suitable for total conversion mods and entirely new games, or ideally, the raw source code itself.

  313. License mixing by tepples · · Score: 1

    You can release the code for a game but still sell the media.

    Which would require distribution of parts of the work under two licenses with contradictory goals. It's not entirely clear to me what "are not by their nature extensions of the covered work" in the definition of "aggregate" in the GPL means, nor could I dig up any guidance from the FSF on video game licensing on Google.

  314. Ask why Microsoft want to buy Adobe by akayani · · Score: 1

    Why do MS want to buy Adobe? When Microsoft 'helped' Corel, Corel sold off Linux and hasn't made any Linus software since.

    If Adobe took on Linux, something not that hard given they support the Mac, and included that Adobe project "Display Postscript" (which has always been an Adobe desire) MS would be on a road to death. You can't write software for Windows and be an enemy of MS. Not at the Adobe level, not in a marketplace where timing is so important, see Novell and Wordperfect.

    If Linux is dead on the desktop then it is because of MS not because of any other reason. I wouldn't be too concerned. It would only require Adobe to do what they really want to, create their own OS with Display Postscript and the world will instantly change. MS know that all too well.

  315. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Phoghat · · Score: 1

    Embrace the Dark Side, come into the Cloud! Doctorow: Not every cloud has a silver lining

    --
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  316. In other news by stonecypher · · Score: 1

    What really killed Linux was its corporate-averse licensure, the fact that the user experience is different every two machines you go to, and that KDE and Gnome are agonizing by Windows 3.1 standards.

    --
    StoneCypher is Full of BS
  317. Supported apps? Documentation? by ResidentSourcerer · · Score: 1

    Last week I needed some 5x8 printed cards. Crank up Abiword. Specify custom page, 5x8 inches portrait. Do my layout -- headline, 4 bulleted items, 3 paragraphs.

    Print from regular paper tray. Works.

    Print from manual feed tray with 5x8 card stock. Prints blank page.

    Two hours later after massive internet searching. Find lots of people with similar problems. And no answers. More time playing with printer settings, I email my text to my wife to run through In Design. 5 minutes later I have my cards.

    Similarly wanted a larger sign that would have to tile over 8 pages. On Indesign it was simple. On Linux I couldn't find an app.

    ****

    Wanted a quick and dirty database to track inventory at my tree farm. The kind of thing that even a noob can do in Access in half an hour, and then in an hour each pull all kinds of different reports out of it.

    The database part isn't bad. Lots of fine DB's in Linux. Indeed, at this level, I could probably do it with YellowPages.

    Easy to do forms for input? Easy reports for output? Nada.

    ****

    Wanted a spread sheet where part of it had a code for the tree. If you typed this code in column 1, then column 2 would hve the common name of the tree, 3 would have the botanical name, column 4, the price unit, column 5 the price per unit...

    Tried doing it in OOcalc. Tried doing it in Gnumeric. No documentation on the fancy lookup functions on one, and an average uptime without crashing of about 10 minutes on the other. Right now I don't remember which was which.

    ****

    Wanted a 3D landscape design program in Linux. One that has a decent database to go with it of trees & shrubs, their appearence, their growth habits. Not happening. Mind you, I've not found that in windows either.

    ****

    Wanted a way to create maps for orienteering. Oh. yeah. Linux doesn't do mapping software either.

    ****

    Had sound working nicely in Fedora 9. Upgraded to 10. Has never worked since.

    --
    Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
  318. Re:shortcoming of SQL by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

    string management and validation.

    ...is at the application level. Though MySQL has plenty of string functions available if necessary.

    Ease and certainty of restoring backups.

    This one might have a bit of truth to it.

    Comprehensibility of documentation

    I dunno, the official documentation is pretty comprehensive.

    Decently organized functions.

    If you're talking about stored procedures, maybe. Otherwise, MySQL is ANSI compliant for the most part, so very little should be new.

    A major effort at ironing out bugs, quirks, and exceptions to rules. Gawd, PHP is just a horror, and end users hate Java and Javascript, what a mess those versions are. Who the hell has time to overhaul their applications every time the publishers of PHP scratch their asses?

    And here you've gone off on PHP when I asked specifically about the database, and the rest of your issues follow suit.

    Databases are data entry applications, that means keyboard navigation. Keep your hands on the keyboard. The graphical mouseable interface is just death.

    Nope. Databases are databases. Data entry applications query a database. Like I said, if you want a purely text interface, you're welcome to code your own in C. MySQL isn't tied to PHP in any way.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  319. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by jc42 · · Score: 1

    Those are all good points. Actually, I hinted at the complexity of the issue in my overly-simplified bit of history of the adoption of small computers. Since a good deal of the history was people buying such gadgets inside corporations, with department funds, to defeat the control of the company's computer department, the actual situation was a lot more complex. In such cases, which account for a large fraction of the early purchases of "desktop" computers, the machines in question are actually owned by the same corporation that runs the central computer department. It was (and still is) an issue of corporate inter-department rivalry, with the central department wanting control over everyone's equipment, and the other departments wanting control over their own computing. If the central DP department were truly the "service" department that they all claim to be, the rest of the company would never have bought their own computers. The central computer could have done the job much more cheaply and reliably.

    But anyone who's ever worked in a corporate environment understands that this is a fantasy. Whatever it's called, a central computing facility becomes a corporate power center that doesn't work in its users' best interests. There is always a power struggle, between the centralized holder of information and the scattered users of that information. The main power the DP-center folks have is withholding or delaying access to data and processing. So the "logic" I described applies there, despite the fact that ultimate ownership is the corporation's. But the power struggle partly arises because of the heirarchical nature of the corporation. And in most corporations ownership is also heirarchical, with equipment sub-owned (to coin a term) by different departments. The central department naturally wants ownership and control over all the equipment, which may be feasible in a small company, but not in a big heirarchical corporation.

    Back around 1980, I worked as an outside software consultant at a big corporation (who shall remain nameless here ;-) that had the usual big IBM mainframe "owned" by the DP center. The DP-center folks of course viewed us as interlopers and dragged their feet whenever possible. One evening, a bunch of us decides to stay late and "explore" the system's file security. In the morning, we were able to report to upper management that we could read any file on the system. They were overjoyed, and promptly gave us a list of reports that they'd like have. We'd figured out that the DP center was a power center that top management couldn't control, and management was frustrated by the "inability" of the DP people to give them information that they knew was inside the computer. We'd given them back access to their own data that was being held hostage by the DP center, as part of a typical corporate power struggle.

    Some time later, we had a small discussion over whether we should inform IBM of how we'd cracked their file system. Our conclusion was a big "Nah!", because it was to our customer's advantage that our exploits continue to work. We'd been hired by top management, not by the DP center, after all. Also, other customers' management would likely pay us for implementing the same sort of "super-user" access to their own data.

    My part in the power struggle came about mostly because I added a number of routines to various report generators that compared the data in different databases, and produced a separate "dubious-data" report listing the inconsistencies it found. Most people's first reaction to this was to get very upset, and want to hide that report. Then, often within a week, it would occur to them that it was better if they got the problem report than that management see it, and they started asking if they could get just the dubious-data report as a separate run. Of course, they could. I also wrote the first interactive database-editing tools they'd ever seen, so they could actually sit down at a terminal and correct the errors in th

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  320. Re:It is free as in freedom but not free as in bee by mikechant · · Score: 1

    All I want to be able to do at this point is make regular backups to a regular external HD

    grsync?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grsync
    http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/grsync-simple-gui-rsync-easily-linux/

  321. Choose wisely by concolor22 · · Score: 1

    My stance: I only installed Lucid Lynx on my laptop because I'm sick of calling Microsoft and having to reactivate my legal copy of Win 7. I love Win 7, and would prefer to run it, but after spending Time on hold with Microsoft (going so far as to speak Swedish Chef to confuse their voice recognition software), I installed linux. Been working well so far. My question: If ALL the corporate desktops were taken out of the picture, I wonder what the percentage of Linux to Microsoft or Apple would be. In other words, when given the -choice-, what do people run?

  322. The point of this article? by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    Blah blah blah flamebait flamebait. I'm surprised it got through the firehose.

    I'm being perfectly honest here; Linux as a desktop system is working fine on four of my home computers. Two of them are even Windows hybrid systems, if you care to know.

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.
  323. The Internet is dead too! Oh, wait.... by Shompol · · Score: 1

    http://www.newsweek.com/1995/02/26/the-internet-bah.html
    PS: look at the date... Some "prophecies" just aren't worth the ink.

  324. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Those prognosticators did not make their statements at the end of a quarter in which 20 million such devices were sold - by just one vendor.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  325. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Slow ride.

    Take it easy.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  326. Wow, I get my very first Troll on that? by PotatoHead · · Score: 1

    Well, I guess that speaks to the overall state of Slashdot these days. Go look through my long comment history as back support for that comment.

    The core point I was making is that overall share doesn't mean much in the open desktop world. Never has, never will.

    I use a Linux desktop all the time. I do MCAD on it, and I program on it, and I know many, many others that do the same.

    Who the fuck are you kidding indeed?

    What? Did we offend the delicate sensibilities of the new up and comers here on Slashdot?

    I think I'll e-mail that one to Rob. Bet he gets a kick out of that troll rating!

    Just know it's not dead, until the base of users says it's dead. That's the big difference between closed, proprietary desktops, and Linux. Ask around some of the older schoolers, who will set you straight.

    Cheers everyone, and yes! My karma is still Excellent! (though with this trend, it may not be, and that's deffo not my issue)

  327. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by riondluz · · Score: 1

    desktop is the wrong analogy. It's more full-on computing vs appliance/device computing; regardless of form-factor. Currently about 6-in-10 people use computers. More than 1/2 are barely comp literate and would drop the learning curve for anything easier that came along. Combine that with the remaining 4-in-10 that mfgs are trying to drag into the modern electronic world and the result will be less emphasis on OS and more on app-stores; device size notwithstanding.
    Cheers

    --
    resist propaganda
  328. This was just to make sure Linux still alive. by lagi · · Score: 1

    it takes like 30 sec to load this page.

  329. Contributing just takes too long by dRn-1 · · Score: 1

    I was just about to rant about how "if I wanted to contribute to say... OpenOffice, because I saw something I could improve upon during my daily usage, I'd have to follow the mass of instructions in the OpenOffice building guide to do so. I can't just point my development environment at OpenOffice.org, open the project and start debugging. which for an OS that encourages contribution to the development of it's applications... seems to fail on the ease of contribution.", then add about contributing to a desktop environment say Gnome, and just getting the info took to long.

  330. Re:wrong OS? NO! Wrong QUESTION! by Vancorps · · Score: 1

    I think you need to practice reading comprehension there dude as you clearly have no idea what I was talking about. Specifically I said RDP wasn't good enough and so you need a virtual desktop which is completely different.

    Futhermore, you don't seem to understand the concept of a virtual desktop at all as you go on about running a Windows VM on a Windows machine which is stupid and pointless. I run Lenovo's at $230 a piece that come with Linux preinstalled. The Citrix receiver then connects the machine to Windows and they have access to all their local hardware including USB devices like cameras or flash sticks.

    Clearly you don't understand Virtual desktops or desktop streaming where you can indeed move 50 graphics designers to virtual desktops, not terminal servers. The best part with desktop streaming in that all the software is in the VM and not on the desktop, if the machine crashes because someone spilled coffee or any number of reasons then all the designer needs to do is connect to his VM from another workstation and he's back right where he left out without losing any precision. There is almost no latency in a virtual desktop session, it's the same as if you were on the machine itself. I've got Autocad people using it this very moment and they are quite happy as just last night I used the Citrix client on the iPad to show the owner the drawings from the next event we're doing.

    Before you call people clueless you might want to make sure your own camp is in order as you again show ignorance with your server virtualization statement. Some servers require lots of IO, mainly database servers and those servers have never been good candidates for virtual loads. The same goes with high performance webservers, video transcoding, HD capture, security surveillance, and a number of high IO or CPU intensive applications won't live well in a virtual environment.

  331. hopelessly dependent by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 1

    "You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."

    This quote very much applies to MS Windows and MS Office users ... all over the world.

    A computer technician who works in a developing country in SouthEast Asia confirmed this to me just two days ago.

    Desktop Linux - Don't give up! Your day will come! We = the ones already unplugged = will keep promoting you!

    And not being able to play a dvd makes Linux broken? Excuse me!!! For crying out loud!!! The dvd region code is what makes dvd broken.

    DVD video discs may be encoded with a region code restricting the area of the world in which they can be played.

    Most people don't even know and are completely unaware of this ...