Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken Off

alphadogg writes "It's free, easier to use than ever, IT staffers know it and love it, and it has fewer viruses and Trojans than Windows. So, why hasn't Linux on the desktop taken off? When it comes to desktop Linux, the cost savings turn out to be problematic, there are management issues, and compatibility remains an issue. 'We get a lot more questions about switching to Macs than switching to Linux at this point, even though Macs are more expensive,' one Gartner analyst says."

Comments

Way too confusing

[crazyjj]

How I am even supposed to begin to recommend Linux for the average user when there are 100 different distros, each with its own quirks and issues? Hell, even I don't have any clue where to begin on which one to recommend. And I sure wouldn't know how to support each one if they had problems.

At least with Windows, I can say "Use Home Premium at home, Professional at work." Even simpler with Macs. With Linux, I guess I would recommend Ubuntu, but a lot of Linux fans are even starting to bitch about that.

If you want simple users, make it simple to use. Linux is way too fractured right now for the average user. Get a consensus down to a single home distro, a single business distro, and a few specialized distros and then start from there.

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing. Outsiders are really turned off by what looks like a bunch of squabbling geeks fighting over their favorite Star Trek series (which we all know is DS9, anyway). Average consumers *do not* like stepping into the middle of a fight which they don't even understand. That's one of the reasons they like Windows and OS X (all the fighting over those is kept behind the scenes, for the most part).

Re:Way too confusing

[TechCar]

Also; Quality, easy of use, availability of (commercial) software etc are the better selling points. Frankly, free is one of the shittiest selling points for corporations. The cost of OS licenses is ridiculously small compared to everything else. Hell, employers have to pay almost 100x the price of Windows/Mac license to one employee per month, with taxes and benefits. If things work better with Windows/Mac then it's a no-brainer. With servers the cost are much higher, and Linux been used with them a lot more and has better compability, so it's less of an issue. But even still Linux has only managed to get about half and the other half goes to Windows Server, which admittedly is used more in internal-facing servers.

"Free" just isn't good selling point for companies. The time you need to waste with Linux costs a lot more than something that just works. Hobbyists might value their time less, but employee hour for a company costs A LOT.

Re:Way too confusing

[wjousts]

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing.

Checks weather report in hell, nope, not gonna happen today.

Re:Way too confusing

[wjousts]

Agree on the need for less, simpler distros. The problem is that one the greatest strengths of Linux, that if you don't like something about it you can just change it, has led to it biggest problem, that there are hundreds of slightly different flavors that the average outsider can't make head nor tail of. I'd say it's ironic, but some grammar nazi will jump all over me and tell me I'm using it wrong (which I probably am).

Re:Way too confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

availability of (commercial) software

this x100 is half the battle; the other half is management of desktops (basically admins having to relearn, which will face resistance).

Re:Way too confusing

[rainmouse]

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing.

I'd agree with this idea, maybe Linux needs the software equivalent of the Council of Nicea...

Re:Way too confusing

[RanCossack]

Hobbyists might value their time less, but employee hour for a company costs A LOT.

I thought a lot of what you said made sense, but -- hobbyists don't value their time less; they just enjoy their hobby. It's different from a company.

Re:Way too confusing

[sconeu]

The cost of OS licenses is ridiculously small compared to everything else

Yes and no. The cost of OS licenses is ridiculously small. The cost of OS and app license *COMPLIANCE*, on the other hand, can be huge *cough*BSA*cough*.

Re:Way too confusing

[Barbara, not Barbie]

And then there's the problem of distros breaking on upgrades, and the prevalent WORKS_FOR_ME && WONT_FIX responses towards bugs, the really lousy bug-reporting scheme (I tried it with KDE, my cpu went to 100% and never even loaded the desktop, requiring a reinstall from scratch).

Then there's the lack of social skills among the "self-anointed." Plus their childish insistence on labeling it GNU/linux (do you call it a Firestone/Mustang)? Or M$. Yes, we see what you did there, and no, after the 5,000th time, it's just stupid.

Pointing out the problems invariably gets you labeled as a shill, an astroturfer, or worse.

Pointing out the problems with the GPL - or worse, pointing out that the GPL doesn't even respect the 4 freedoms listed on the home page of the FSF - brings out people who blindly repeat what "everyone who really is a true believer knows."

It's not a religion or a cult, but you could have fooled me.

Re:Way too confusing

[tripleevenfall]

The issues with Linux have not changed in the past 10 years. It's disappointing that no progress has been made.

Sure it's easier to install than it used to be, but for most people it's not as simple as putting the disk in and running the installer. You'll end up with devices that don't work and that Joe Average can't troubleshoot.

Despite the fact that it's become easier, it's still not easy enough for the general public. Compounding this problem, the "Easy" bar has moved significantly further away now that OSX and iOS are becoming the consumer platforms of choice.

The desktop platform is, for average consumers, on the way out. There's really no need to worry about it now. The resources poured into Linux for desktop PCs would be better spent building a competent, truly private, truly free, easy to install and again, truly free - distro of Android.

Re:Way too confusing

[dgatwood]

Dude.... DS9 was way too bogged down in politics. TNG FTW.

Besides, it's not just fragmentation. The fact of the matter is that Linux isn't designed with any sort of binary compatibility in mind, and consumers don't have the patience for trying to learn why compiling the latest Foo application produced some obscure error about C++ symbol availability... or worse.

This problem came to a head for me when I had to port an app to a newer version of a library to avoid breaking everything else on the system; the library in question was, IIRC, a popular sound library—the sort of library whose existing API should never just suddenly go away and get replaced with a different API. For me, it took all of about fifteen or twenty minutes; for a non-programmer, it would take all of about fifteen or twenty years, all because they couldn't be bothered to include a three-line compatibility shim as part of their new API. And that right there is why Linux will never make it on the desktop as long as the hacker mentality prevails.

What most consumers want is to know that for the next several years, they'll be able to get new apps without having to upgrade their OS, and that those apps will be simple, drag-and-drop binary blobs that "just work". Anything less than that, and Linux won't go anywhere.

Re:Way too confusing

[0100010001010011]

I just installed Linux Mint Debian Edition. It's 100% compatible with Debian Testing. I run Debian Sid on every linux machine in my house (HTPC, server, sheevaplug, sound server in the basement). I've tried other distros. My girlfriend has Ubuntu and every single update she bitches about how they changed something. First they forced Unity. Then they managed to make unity worse. She's going to give the latest LTS a chance before switching to Mint or back to Windows.

I wanted to see if I could finally replace my Mac. I'm very, very impressed and think I may finally switch to a Linux "Desktop" (it's my laptop). MATE is excellent with Compiz.

But the one problem with Linux is what everyone touts as its biggest advantage: The paradox of choice. When I was setting up scale (aka Expose) on Compiz I could drag the speed slider all the way from 0 to 50. What they ment, fuck if I knew until I tested it. And could I really see a difference between 5.3 and 5.5? No. Say "Slow, Medium, Fast". If nothing else hide it behind a "advanced user" dialog.

A perfect example is the pointer acceleration/speed in the mouse dialog. XP has 10 discrete spots. MATE has infinite. I spent almost 9 hours getting the desktop how I wanted it. The average user doesn't want to do this, but if they DO want to change something how about we not overwhelm them with choices.

Re:Way too confusing

[s0nicfreak]

Simple: "Use ubuntu." The average user isn't deciding what they will use at work. And who cares about what the Linux fans say? Do you want the average user to be able to use their computer, or do you want to appease the Linux fans? The average user isn't going to hear the arguments. Ubuntu is simple to set up, simple for the average user to keep up to date, they can browse the web and make word-compatible documents and, basically all the things the average user wants to do except watch netflix. They won't NEED to call you for support. When my mentally disabled brother was on Windows, I got a call a week where he had some virus or something he couldn't figure out. I switched him to Ubuntu and he now calls me for help about once every 6 months. If a mentally disabled person can use it, the average user can.

Re:Way too confusing

[nyctopterus]

I think you have a point, but I think the biggest problem is that most people just don't see the advantages. Their question will be 'what will Linux let me do that I can't do on Windows/Mac?'--and there isn't a clear answer to that. There will be things they can't do to do: run many popular games and applications, but the benefits are nebulous.

Answer that question satisfactorily, and I think you'd see some people switch.

Re:Way too confusing

[dynamo52]

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing. Outsiders are really turned off by what looks like a bunch of squabbling geeks fighting over their favorite Star Trek series (which we all know is DS9, anyway). Average consumers *do not* like stepping into the middle of a fight which they don't even understand. That's one of the reasons they like Windows and OS X (all the fighting over those is kept behind the scenes, for the most part).

Not only that but another big turn off is that documentation often tends to be non-existent, incomplete, confusing, or simply wrong then, to make matters worse, when inexperienced users venture into the forums looking for guidance, the replies are usually along the lines of RTFM emphasized with varying degrees of condescension. Very rarely will you find a simple, clear set of instructions on how to perform a specific procedure. New users need hand holding but the Linux community will more often than not just throw them to the wolves.

Re:Way too confusing

[Microlith]

The issues with Linux have not changed in the past 10 years. It's disappointing that no progress has been made.

Perhaps this is because what you believe to be "issues" are not believed to be by the people doing the work?

for most people it's not as simple as putting the disk in and running the installer. You'll end up with devices that don't work and that Joe Average can't troubleshoot.

And when Joe Average has problems with Windows he's equally stuck.

it's still not easy enough for the general public.

And the people working on the various Linux distributions generally aren't targeting the general public. Faced with the marketing machine that is Apple and the monopoly that is Microsoft, what value is there?

The resources poured into Linux for desktop PCs would be better spent building a competent, truly private, truly free, easy to install and again, truly free - distro of Android.

So long as Android is developed behind closed doors it can never be "truly free." It will always go where Google will take it, and they've got the money and the vendor access to ensure their version is always what is used.

Re:Way too confusing

[ArsonSmith]

"...Linux for the average user when there are 100 different distros..."

There are at most 5-6 distros for the average user. Counting every special single distro is at best ignorantly misinformed. More likely intellectually dishonest or outright FUD.

Re:Way too confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not a fair comparison at all. The average user does not install Windows
or OS X, it comes pre-installed.

Heck, installing Linux from scratch on random hardware can be far easier than
doing the same with either Windows or OS X. Many drivers work right off an install
disk.

Comparing apples to apples, stick to assuming users buy their computers with
Linux pre-installed.

Re:Way too confusing

[arth1]

I'm not doubting your story, but that you can draw a a valid conclusion from it.
Fewer support calls doesn't necessarily mean that something is better - it could also be that it's not as useful or attractive, and that less use means less calls.

(Linux Desktop user here. It's great for me, but I have no problems seeing that it isn't great for everyone.)

Re:Way too confusing

[Beardo the Bearded]

Great, then we'd end up with a Nicea distro as well.

Re:Way too confusing

[serviscope_minor]

OK, not claiming there aren't problems, but you're comparing to commercial operating systems, right?

Ok...

And then there's the problem of distros breaking on upgrades,

So? That happens on Windows and OSX every so often. Score, zero all for being crap.

WORKS_FOR_ME && WONT_FIX responses towards bugs, the really lousy bug-reporting scheme (I tried it with KDE, my cpu went to 100% and never even loaded the desktop, requiring a reinstall from scratch).

So are you one of those people who clicks on the "report to microsoft" button and then gets a response? Bug reporting for commercial operating systems is even worse, as in, nonexistent.

So we have maybe 1/2 for linux distros for having a (crap) bug reporting system, versus proprietary operating systems for having even worse ones. Also, we're talking about end users, right? When their OS of choice craps out, they don't file bug reports, they find suckers^W technical family to fix it for them.

So, why are we even on this point?

Then there's the lack of social skills among the "self-anointed." Plus their childish insistence on labeling it GNU/linux (do you call it a Firestone/Mustang)? Or M$. Yes, we see what you did there, and no, after the 5,000th time, it's just stupid.

Because there are totally no bigots running operating systems other than Linux. Every had a person suggest switching to a Mac without even knowing what the problem is? I have. It would happen with Windows too, if OSX was the most common choice.

That's just a completely spurious argument.

Pointing out the problems with the GPL - or worse, pointing out that the GPL doesn't even respect the 4 freedoms listed on the home page of the FSF - brings out people who blindly repeat what "everyone who really is a true believer knows."

lolwut? If you're going to claim that there are problems with the GPL so serious as that, you really ought to back it up with, for instance, what the claim actually is, otherwise it sounds like trolling.

Also, you're comparing to commerical operating systems here. Have you ever even read the EULA for Windows? Ever tried pointing out problems with it to MS?

There are many reasons that desktop Linux hasn't taken off. If you think that any of the above are the reasons, then you're living in cloud-cuckoo land as far as I'm concerned.

Re:Way too confusing

[ZeroSumHappiness]

If we're comparing Apples to Apples shouldn't we be looking at iOS vs. OSX?

Re:Way too confusing

[sirdude]

I don't know why people are even considering the 95 out of 100 distros that can simply be written off for any number of reasons. There are only a handful of players of worth when it comes to a reliable, user-friendly desktop for average use. These are in no particular order:

-Ubuntu
-Kubuntu
-Mint
-Fedora
-Debian
-SuSE
-Arch

The above list can be trimmed down even further if you merge all the Debian derivatives. Everything else > /dev/null.

If I consider average users to be Mom and Pop types who are basically simply after a browser, spreadsheet and Picasa, I always install Kubuntu. The only hardware issues I face nowadays tend to be related to the webcam and printer. Those are usually solved pretty quickly.

IMO, the reasons why Desktop Linux has not yet taken off are:

-Bundling
-Power users are happy with Windows/Macs and its the power users who advise the average users.
-Work culture; people stick to known poisons.

Re:Way too confusing

[SomeKDEUser]

Bad distro? change distro! Are there too many? No: practically, you have ubuntu, fedora and opensuse. And lots of vocal advocates for tiny distros they and their three friends use. You mostly hear about them, but they don't amount to much (in fact, according to the WP logs, only ubuntu amounts to much).

Seriously, the GNU/Linux thing died years ago -- you can still tell the old farts by the fact they seem to care, but no one else does.

Pointing out problems is fine, and believe it or not, even appreciated. However, ranting that "your CPU went to 100% and never even loaded the desktop, requiring a reinstall from scratch" will not make people taking you seriously. Because to know your CPU went to 100%, without the desktop, you clearly know how to change the virtual console and launch top, and yet you were too ignorant to not do something as useless as "reinstalling from scratch".

So you either are lying outright or are taking rather large short-cuts in your retelling of the problem. Neither of which will get your bugs fixed.

As for the GPL and the four freedoms, WTF are you talking about ??!

Re:Way too confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

"Perhaps this is because what you believe to be "issues" are not believed to be by the people doing the work?"

This disconnect is why Linux, in its current state, will never achieve any foothold on desktop shares.

Re:Way too confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

Hobbyists aren't on the clock!

Re:Way too confusing

[Microlith]

No, this why you have companies like Canonical. They give structure to a platform that has no uberdictator to decide where it goes.

Trying to force an entire, wide community of people with diverse needs, opinions, and goals to act as if they were part of a single organization is nigh upon impossible, and trying to suggest that they should do as such is to completely ignore the reality of the situation. A real solution will only happen when that's taken into account.

Re:Way too confusing

[NatasRevol]

... consumers don't have the patience for trying to learn why compiling the latest Foo application ...

Heh. You can take out the 'why' and that sentence still works.

Re:Way too confusing

[Microlith]

"Barbara, not Barbie" is not here to argue in good faith. Her goal here, primarily, seems to be riling up people who like and enjoy using Linux, and otherwise think the GPL is a good idea.

For instance, in the last flamebait article I went back and forth with her as she (even now) continues to describe a flawed "workaround" that would allow proprietary vendors to violate the GPL in a way that couldn't be defended against. The logic is utterly broken, and seems more focused on hatred of and attempting to undermine the GPL rather than posing a rational argument or real technical flaw.

The irony of it is that as much as she hates the "cult" she describes, her own attitude and behavior don't paint her in any better light.

Re:Way too confusing

[mcgrew]

How I am even supposed to begin to recommend Linux for the average user when there are 100 different distros, each with its own quirks and issues?

Ignore the distros you're unfamiliar with and recommend ones you are familiar with that you think would match the person you're talking to.

Although I really see no reason why anyone worries about why Linux hasn't taken off. That's easy -- Windows comes preinstalled on all but Apple machines, and if it ain't broke, why fix it?

I can see why IT wouldn't, in many cases, want Linux. In the home, however, Linux is far superior to Windows. But Joe Blow has never even heard of Linux, or if he's heard anything at all about it it's a piece of crap hobbled together by a bunch of hippie nerds and you have to use a command line and you can't do half of what you can in Windows, plus you have to be a genius to use it and most hardware has driver issues. False, of course, but that's what Joe's heard, if he has heard of Linux at all.

When I talk to normal people about Linux, they're incredulous. Don't have to enter a password when you turn it on? And it comes back on with all your programs and apps open just like they were when yoou shut it off? You can leave it running without reboots? Impossible! Everybody knows that when you patch a program you have to reboot the computer!

Well, you do with Windows. These are only a few Windows annoyances that Linux lacks. Good luck even explaining what an OS is or what Windows does to Joe Blow.

Re:Way too confusing

[whargoul]

The issues with Linux have not changed in the past 10 years. It's disappointing that no progress has been made.

Perhaps this is because what you believe to be "issues" are not believed to be by the people doing the work?

Perhaps that's the problem

for most people it's not as simple as putting the disk in and running the installer. You'll end up with devices that don't work and that Joe Average can't troubleshoot.

And when Joe Average has problems with Windows he's equally stuck.

And Joe Average can take it down to $BigBoxComputerStore and get it fixed without having to worry about if they support his OS

it's still not easy enough for the general public.

And the people working on the various Linux distributions generally aren't targeting the general public. Faced with the marketing machine that is Apple and the monopoly that is Microsoft, what value is there?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought that's exactly what the target was (initially at least).

Re:Way too confusing

[Anonymous Coward]

In my work environment, it comes down to two words - Microsoft Office. Period. We are a Fortune 100, a mix of Windows PCs and Mac laptops. Centralized management is nice, but the critical thing everyone needs is Microsoft Office. Pay no attention to the fact that MS Office on the Mac is not the same as MS Office on Windows. If Microsoft forked LibreOffice and called it MS Office for Linux, Linux on the desktop would suddenly become a reality.

Re:Way too confusing

[SomeKDEUser]

You mean there is a legal loophole in the GPL, and the hundred of proprietary vendors which would benefit have formed a secret cabal to kill linux in one fell swoop if it were to become too troublesome?

My. I'll go back to windows, then. The risk is too terrifying.

Re:Way too confusing

[ebinrock]

Exactly, you get what you pay for. And you're right, EMPLOYEES are the single biggest cost to any company. As for me, where the situation is home use and free DOES matter, I decided to switch back to Windows after my little short-lived courtship with Ubuntu Linux, for a number of reasons: * For every little file move or copying of files, I HAD to get root access and type in a command. There was no GUI way to do some things (as far as I know). And there's really no way to correct a typing mistake in command line. That got to really be annoying. * I have a multifunction printer (print, copy, scan, fax) and the ONLY Linux driver that worked with it was from TurboLinux - $40 for the driver and it was only good for print. Couldn't use the driver over my home LAN like I can with my mfr's Windows driver. * OpenOffice messed up the formatting of some of my more intricate Word files. * Couldn't stream videos on Netflix, as Netflix requires the Silverlight plugin. * Some web applications require Internet Explorer to work (I know, I HATE proprietary web applications and extensions as much as the next person, but one doesn't always have a choice). * I still have to sometimes use local (non-Web) software on my PC, and that software is WINDOWS based. And so far WINE sucks; it crashed on every Windows program I tried to run in the Linux environment. * Sure, I could set up a dual-boot with Windows, which I did. But very shortly I got tired of switching back and forth between OS's. I was tired of having a "schizophrenic" computer, and just decided the heck with it, I'm just going back to Windows. So there you go. And plus, so far Windows 7 is running very smoothly on my new machine I recently built, so why mess with success?

Re:Way too confusing

[interval1066]

How I am even supposed to begin to recommend Linux for the average user when there are 100 different distros, each with its own quirks and issues?

Pick one, and deal with its "issues".

If you want simple users,

Prefer sofisticated users, but I get your meaning.

Linux is way too fractured right now for the average user.

Disagree. Instructed my sister on how to install it over the phone. She would have called for help with windows as well, so don't go there.

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing.

That's not going to happen, and I'm not sure its an issue if you just use one distro. Even so, how exactly does OSS infighting harm you?

Re:Way too confusing

[miknix]

It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing.

As I see it, this is just the Darwin's approach on software development:
1) Programmers fight between them on different ideas
2) Some actually fork() the project to implement new ideas
3) Several projects are now competing, if one of them doesn't have enough support for a while it ends up dying.
4 ) Repeat from 1)

I know this is not the most efficient way of development but at least the fragmentation allows new ideas (the pleases most programmers) to come up. Unfortunately this doesn't fully take in account the ideas of users because (non programming) users cannot directly contribute, they end up being at mercy of other programmers. This might explain the fact the Linux is a bit difficult for new users.

Re:Way too confusing

[nine-times]

Average consumers *do not* like stepping into the middle of a fight which they don't even understand.

Lately, I've been thinking this is a key thing, and it's something that gets glossed over in discussions among techies. Sorry, but I think even you miss the mark a bit when you're asking for a single distro. The problem isn't exactly a technical one, but that the migration requires people to seek out a confusing set of decisions with minimal apparent benefit.

I've been arguing for a little bit now that part of the problem is that people like to break their options into dichotomies. Especially when faced with a complex choice they don't understand, people will tend to narrow them down into "the normal thing that most people choose" and "the quirky alternative that might have benefits". Everything else gets brushed aside or ignored. Whichever option a person chooses, the other becomes "the thing that stupid people choose". It's why you have Apple vs. Microsoft, Intel vs. AMD, and Democrats vs. Republicans. So right now, Microsoft and Apple are filling those two roles, and there isn't really room for another player.

Aside from that, there are two major problems, and both come down to a lack of commercial support. The first problem is that if you go into a random store and buy a computer, you probably won't see any Linux computers. If you go to Dell's website or HP's website, they aren't advertising Linux computers. There isn't really comprehensive support from anyone. The only real way I can see this being solved is not increased community support or individual component OEM support, but through system integrator support. For example, if Dell made their own distribution that was designed to work on all of their hardware with full driver support, then you'd have some seeds for change.

The other problem is commercial software developer support. The big problems that I've specifically seen in my career are that there's no Microsoft Office for Linux, and there's no Adobe CS for Linux. Linux advocates will tell you that there are FOSS alternatives, but having supported serious business users of Adobe CS and MS Office, it still seems to me that the FOSS alternatives aren't yet capable of displacing the commercial suites. So one way that we could see Linux on the desktop is if Adobe created a Linux distribution designed to support Adobe CS with great color matching and font support, and then they included an office suite to match. If Adobe were to do something like that and then partner with HP and/or Dell, I think you could see substantial displacement of Microsoft for business users.

Of course, you also need to have a good replacement for the combination of Exchange/Outlook. I have yet to see a replacement that's comprehensive and satisfying for business users. Even Microsoft Outlook for Mac isn't very good, but at least it exists on the Mac.

Re:Way too confusing

[eugene ts wong]

A lot of the forum information that I find is out of date, or obscure. The closest that I see to RTFM is when the information is actually there.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but trying to emphasize that we need updated information. I think that there are a lot of helpful users out there.

Maybe we're talking about different forums, though.

Re:Way too confusing

[maestroX]

1. Don't recommend linux, linux finds users, not the other way around
2. Use linux at home and at work if possible and if you want
3. I don't want linux to be tailored for average users, I want it to be flexible, reliable and usable, just like it is
4. Infuriated, holy wars are akin to the development process of driven developers, let's keep ideas open and accept its place

In short, linux & co are most excellent products with hobbyist fringes. I like it. Why change a winning team? Because others choose to run Windows or MacOSX? Let them.

Re:Way too confusing

[tom17]

Case in point: A colleagues old desktop machine. He recently installed Ubuntu 11.10. USB ports would not pick up any USB mass storage devices. Couple of people had found the problem but it had not been fixed.

Still there in 12.04.

It's little random bugs like this that keep cropping up that play a part in steering people away from Linux. I myself am an avid linux user, but I have been waiting for that 'perfect desktop' and it never came. I have even gone so far as to *not* wipe Win7 on my latest laptop...

Re:Way too confusing

[tendrousbeastie]

Yeah, but that (Linux pre-installation) doesn't happen. And the topic is why Linux hasn't taken off on the desktop, so the differences are relevant, even if they're not equal or fair.

Now, your point just extends the question to why Linux hasn't begun to be pre-installed on retail computers?

Re:Way too confusing

[mcgrew]

And then there's the problem of distros breaking on upgrades

Luckily I haven't run across that problem in Linux, and Windows breaking on updates was one of the things that pushed me towards Linux. I paid $125 for XP, installed it, got everything working, the next morning I had no internet access. Windows update had replaced a perfectly good network driver with one that was completely nonfunctional.

The last kubuntu upgrade introduced some annoying quirks to its file manager, but they seemed to have worked themselves out after the next bugfix upgrade.

and the prevalent WORKS_FOR_ME && WONT_FIX responses towards bugs

Oh, come on, you're able to get MS to fix bugs? How do you go about doing that?

Then there's the lack of social skills among the "self-anointed."

Well, to be fair, I'm sure the programmers at MS are just as much a bunch of ass burgers as Linux programmers, but Microsoft has a marketing department and hires socially skilled but technologically unskilled people for the marketing. Personally, I have no problem with the "self annointed".

Pointing out the problems invariably gets you labeled as a shill, an astroturfer, or worse.

You'll find this with any product, but it isn't the criticism but the way one criticizes. If you spell open source "open sores" you're going to be modded flamebait. Likewise, M$ can get you modded down. Hell, I've been modded down for bashing Sony, of all companies!

If a comment looks like it's been written by a marketer, it's pretty safe to assume that it's either a shill or an idiot fanboy.

Re:Way too confusing

[serviscope_minor]

The GPL guarantees all freedoms except the freedom to take those freedoms away from others. It is very explicit about that.

If you want the freedom to restrict others, tough! Guess what, you can't own slaves, either.

Also, your points about 3 is wrong. You are entirely free to make binary adaptations. You're not free to distribute them.

And then there's freedom 0 - the freedom to run the program for any purpose.

Note the keyword "run".

The GPL has no restrictions on RUNNING the program. That's not the same as DISTRIBUTING the program.

Re:Way too confusing

[Yunzil]

if he's heard anything at all about it it's a piece of crap hobbled together by a bunch of hippie nerds and you have to use a command line and you can't do half of what you can in Windows, plus you have to be a genius to use it and most hardware has driver issues. False, of course

Wait, which is the false part?

Re:Way too confusing

[mcgrew]

Quality, easy of use, availability of (commercial) software etc are the better selling points.

That is true, but what's not true is that Windows is higher quality or easier to use. Windows is a pain in the ass to use. It's poorly documented (but so is most FOSS unfortunately), buggy, insecure, and maddening. Everything that takes two clicks in Linux takes ten in Windows.

You mentioned commercial software, why would you want to pay for commercial software when there is a free alternative that's just as good? Granted, if you're an ad agency and need Photoshop, Gimp won't do, but those are edge cases.

The time you need to waste with Linux costs a lot more than something that just works.

No, the time you need to waste with WINDOWS costs a lot more than something that just works. Two examples: OS installation and BlueTooth. In most Linux distros, boot it with the install CD, answer a few questions (where are you? What kind of keyboard, etc) and walk away doing something else while Linux installs. When it's done, reboot once and you have a functional computer with most if not all the software you'll need. With Windows (the last MS OS I installed was XP so it may be different now) you have a question every two minutes for a half hour to an hour (including that maddening DRM string you have to enter), so you have to sit there. Then when it's done, its drivers are installed, one at a time, with a reboot required for each. Then you have to install applications, with each one of them requiring a reboot.

To install Linux and apps on an OSless PC takes ten minutes of your time with Linux, all damned afternoon with Windows.

I got a bluetooth dongle to shoot pictures into my Linux PC and Win 7 notebook from my phone. It worried me that there was an installation dick for Windows, but not for Linux. IIRC it took fifteen minutes to half hour before I had the dongle working on the notebook, but when I plugged it into the Linux box it JUST WORKED. No installation needed.

Anybody who thinks Windows is easier or more useable than Linux has either tried a very shitty distro, or has never tried it at all and just parrots MS marketers.

Re:Way too confusing

[digitig]

Case in point: A colleagues old desktop machine. He recently installed Ubuntu 11.10. USB ports would not pick up any USB mass storage devices. Couple of people had found the problem but it had not been fixed.

Still there in 12.04.

It's little random bugs like this that keep cropping up that play a part in steering people away from Linux. I myself am an avid linux user, but I have been waiting for that 'perfect desktop' and it never came. I have even gone so far as to *not* wipe Win7 on my latest laptop...

That's my experience too. I want to use Linux, and I keep trying to get a Linux installation on which everything works (I've just posted a couple of forum messages for help getting the USB mouse to work and to get sound to work properly). Whenever I want to fiddle about to get another thing working I boot Linux. When I want to get something done I heave a sigh and boot MS Windows.

Re:Way too confusing

[DaveV1.0]

Several years ago, everyone was on the RedHat/Fedora bandwagon. A year or two ago, it was Ubuntu. Now, it is Mint that all my coworkers are playing with and is the flavor of the week. What will it be next time? Some distro that no one has heard of yet? And, when one recommends Ubuntu, someone else will recommend Mint, or Red Hat. That is a serious problem.

You may have a point with bundling, but you are way off base when it comes to the power user thing. Power users use what works and recommend what will work for the person asking. If they have problems with Linux, they aren't going to suggest it for the average or below average user.

And, for work culture, you forget that most business use popular, off-the-shelf software that most people either already know or for which the maker has spent a lot of time and money making an easy to use interface. What really kills Linux on the desktop is application and hardware support.

Re:Way too confusing

[Zan Lynx]

Now, if this was Windows I would be forced to reinstall. In Linux, I could switch to a shell prompt (i.e. Ctrl+Alt+F4 worked). With that I was able to add, remove and upgrade components/the system so the GUI login prompt worked again and I had a functional system

The fact that most people are ignorant of Window's recovery tools does not mean that the tools don't exist.

Get your Windows DVD and boot into the recovery console. From there you should be able to trigger a system recovery rollback. Tada! Fixed.

Re:Way too confusing

[aztektum]

Well it all started when Microsoft strong armed vendors into using their OS as the shipped OS. After it was everywhere, no one wanted to switch.

Re:Way too confusing

[MBGMorden]

I'd agree with this idea, maybe Linux needs the software equivalent of the Council of Nicea...

http://xkcd.com/927/

For better or for worse, tons of infighting and quibbling over all sorts of different things IS Linux. If I wanted a really nice, polished Unix system that had an authoritative body managing everything to make sure it stays that way, I'd just use Mac OS X.

What you're arguing for is basically like walking into a nice restaurant and claiming that they'd make so much more money if they just reduced their prices, and to do that they could cut some ingredient quality and pre-cook some foods to save time and the like. Eventually you get to the point where you've recreated a Taco Bell out of a nice restaurant - and that wouldn't even be a problem except that if Taco Bell was what you wanted, there was already one right down the street.

Let Linux be what Linux is. There's plenty of us who enjoy it just fine as is. Heck the ONLY thing I might get from an increased user-base would be more games, and I'm already doing most of my gaming on consoles anyways, so it's a moot point.

Re:Way too confusing

[CosaNostra Pizza Inc]

Okay so you threw in the towel on linux in favor of...an outdated version of Windows that, given ~18 months, will no longer have any support or receive any updates. Well, whatever floats your boat. I've been using different distros of linux for 12 years. During more than half that time, linux has been my primary OS. In fact, I have a laptop that dual-boots Ubuntu and Windows Vista. Vista is an abortion so, all the more reason I enjoy linux. At work, I have Windows 7 and am forced to use MS Office 2007...I hate and can't get used to Ribbon so I prefer using LibreOffice. I've seen previews of Windows 8 and I think Metro sucks. Apple computers have nice hardware and a very polished UI but that doesn't excuse the outrageous cost...Also, I don't like Apple's walled garden approach to everything it sells...Also, to put it mildly, I'm not really into the whole culture of Apple fan-dom. So there you have it. i'm sticking with linux at home.

Re:Way too confusing

[Sycraft-fu]

"In the home, however, Linux is far superior to Windows."

No it isn't, because it fails in a big way with media, meaning sound and video. Windows "just works" when it comes to things like that. Most onboard audio cards are UAA so they don't even need a driver, but quality WDM drivers are available for all audio cards and Windows actually has a functional audio standard and support so once installed all that works great. Likewise, there is a fully functional video acceleration layer in the form of Driect2D/3D with a consistent driver interface for graphics cards to use, and all the providers have drivers that work with it. It provides not only things like 3D graphics, for cards that can handle it, but acceleration of the UI and importantly these days hardware H.264 decoding, which nearly all chips have.

So what that means is Windows has no problem even on modest hardware playing full screen 1080p Youtube videos. Just install Flash (or use a browser like Chrome that includes it) and go. No issues, it plays at full speed, you can even do video playback while doing other things like sliding the window around and it doesn't miss a beat. You can have a video playing with sound, and music playing from another program and they mix seamlessly.

Linux? Not so much. You CAN get a Linux system that can do that, well mostly, but getting an arbitrary system to do it is far harder. Linux has all kinds of problem when it comes to audio and video.

Gets even worse if you start talkign media production. Say Joe Blow has a nice AVCHD camera and wants to make videos to upload to Youtube. Don't say this isn't a "normal user" thing either, the vast quantity of crap on Youtube attests otherwise. Well on Windows it is real easy. It has a built in program (Movie Maker) that can do basics, but you can easily get all sorts of programs like Vegas Movie Studio that do a real good job. It is as simple as plugging in your camera, importing clips, editing, and then having the software upload them to Youtube.

It might be great for a home user if all they do is check e-mail and surf the web, and if surfing the web doesn't involve too much in the way of video. However you find home users often do a little more, and Linux falls down on it.

Re:Way too confusing

[DuckDodgers]

Not bullshit. If you do business, you have to track finances, period. Your accounting department expenses are an inescapable cost.

Tracking software license compliance is an added cost. So you don't weigh software costs against the $0 cost of free software, you weigh software costs plus license management and compliance costs against the cost of free software. I understand the reality that many essential applications run poorly or not at all on Linux, there is a lot of division in the free software community, and many end users would rather saw off a limb than forego Microsoft Office. But I spent the last six years at a company with less than 20 employees, and for us managing Microsoft software licenses is a royal pain in the neck, and adds a lot more to our operating costs than the actual licenses themselves. Microsoft seems to have a corporate edict against user friendly license management, and it suits me fine - we get more done in less time with Debian on our servers, so the COO gave the go ahead for a gradual transition to Linux.

I'm sure a Fortune 500 company can hire a few employees whose entire job is license management, and the cost is statistically insignificant in the overall company budget. For small businesses, the cost really is significant.

Re:Way too confusing

[celtic_hackr]

What a load of bull.

Let me sum up Barbara-not-Barbie's complaint about Linux.

Linux has no native SimCity4 release.

Based on her post, she claims to have years of experience with Linux, but hasn't learned how to export her data from her mail client, webbrowser, and other applications to import in a new distro. Nor knows how to create a home partition that doesn't get upgraded. But complains about problems when trying to use upgrade functions, that have warnings in the most pronounced ways possible to not use them in many places popular with Linux folks. Then when she couldn't come up with a problem for Mint invents some phony BS about them not knowing which direction they are going. WTF!? So, Ubuntu with it's near infinite flavors is more stable? I've not seen anything but rock-solid stability in Mint. Total BS. Barbara-not-Barbie gets -5 street cred for just the Mint comment. Then she slams Linux servers, which are so unstable they run half the Internet. Well, howdie do Bill! Glad to see you coming out of retirement, for another pot shot at Linux.

Sorry, this is all the troll feeding time I have.

Re:Way too confusing

[SomePgmr]

Agreed. Even in our small business (two small locations), I couldn't get away with anything other than Microsoft Office.

People flip every time I roll out a newer office where a few button locations changed, or Microsoft removed some obscure feature. The employees are so accustomed to it (they really do know the suite inside and out) that they feel like you've tied their hands when anything changes. This is especially true with Outlook.

Beyond that there's also Creative Suite, but not everyone gets that, so it's less of an issue.

Re:Way too confusing

[HapSlappy_2222]

Also; "free" usually means "ramshackle" to corporate folks, and often even to regular joe end users. Think of it this way; if I offer a free car, and only charge to customize it for you, versus selling you a Lexus, which I can claim comes "pre-customized" (gogo stupid oxymorons) for the normal up front fee, using my own financing company, most people would expect the free car to be a piece of shit and the Lexus to be 100% legitimate.

There's also the fable about the guy who, after purchasing a new couch, put his old couch on the street with a sign that said "Free to good home." It stayed there for 3 weeks. He then put a sign on it that said "$500 or best offer" and it was promptly stolen that evening. People have just learned to distrust "free".

I've said it before and I'll say it again; without some sort of sustained advertising/marketing push, people of all walks just won't trust Linux enough to start using it broadly. There's no need to lie about the features, like so much marketing does these days; but there is a need to present people with valuable truths about Linux as a product in the way that they're used to.

Re:Way too confusing

[gbjbaanb]

Then she slams Linux servers, which are so unstable they run half the Internet

no, Linux servers run 75% of the internet.

So perhaps the header should be "When will it be the year of Windows in the datacentre?". We need more Sharepoint!

Re:Way too confusing

[pz]

Heck, installing Linux from scratch on random hardware can be far easier than
doing the same with either Windows or OS X

True, this. Installing Windows XP on a blank system to the point that it's fully updated and has all drivers loaded is a right royal pain in the butt. In my experience, most network interfaces aren't supported by the distribution disc, so I have to plug in my lone and highly valuable Intel card to gain access to the net. Then eons spent downloading the right drivers for that particular motherboard (and a dose of good luck). Then Windows Update, reboot. Update, reboot. Update, reboot, etc. I think I counted 11 reboots once. Uninstall network card. Reboot. Somewhere along the line validate the installation. Avoid Windows Genuine Advantage through all of that, too. Then install favorite anti-virus, answer inane questions about MSIE configuration, install MS Office. Update, update, update. Run AV to check that everything's OK. Defrag disk. Easily most of an afternoon. Maybe versions after XP are better, but I've not touched them, yet.

Doing the same for Fedora is much, much easier, as it involves one reboot, and a single, if large, update. Maybe an hour total, and far fewer interactions required by the operator.

Re:Way too confusing

[foobsr]

... Canonical. They give structure to a platform that has no uberdictator to decide where it goes ...

Indeed, there is Unity once Shuttleworth misses the idea.

CC.

Re:Way too confusing

[MacGyver2210]

I think you're confused. XP isn't outdated, it's just the only version of Windows 7 that actually works.

Re:Way too confusing

[Barbara, not Barbie]

I've pointed out the solution often enough.

1. Change from the GPL to the BSD/MIT/Apache family of licenses. This will attract real investment in real products. Enough code will filter back up the food chain to benefit everyone, same as the *BSDs continue to benefit, and maybe there will be fewer "but I can't switch because I have one program that won't run under linux."

2. Freely commingle open and closed code. Accept that if someone can make something good enough that people are willing to pay for it, it may be a "good thing."

3. Cull the deadwood distros. Ultimately, the forks that can't compete will die off, same as slackware did over the last year. And please don't say it's pining for the fjords - if you follow this link to the updated package browser it has been dead for a year.

4. Take a break from the race to see who can implement more stupid features quicker, and spend the time necessary to fix existing bugs. Products like Firefox, that continue to leak memory like crazy, are a good place to start. If it takes a year, so be it. Consider it a down payment on the huge code debt that this silliness has accumulated.

5. A stable ABI that people can develop against - one that won't be removed or broken every few years/months/every update.

6. Take a lesson from Steve Jobs - "For Linux to win, it doesn't mean that Apple and Microsoft have to lose."

Re:Way too confusing

[westyvw]

Dont forget it can go both ways. I have a laptop that has the wireless crippled, there is no driver for WPA. But on linux, since it followed the hardware spec of the intel board, it does do WPA. Or the fact that my windows boxes choke on these massive printer drivers, while cups works perfectly. Go figure.

Re:Way too confusing

[zeugma-amp]

I don't know much about OSX, but I know a clean install of Windows 7 takes a bit longer than a clean install of Ubuntu, mostly because of the extra rebooting.

I'd say it takes a heck of a lot longer, if you factor in all the stuff you get with Linux that you don't get with MS-Windows. How long is it going to take you to install all that extra software that you get for free with Ubuntu, or just about any other Linux distribution? Did your version of MS-Windows even come with an http, ssh, and (anonymous) ftp server? Some people might not want these, but I do, and it just comes with Linux. How about word processor(s), spreadsheet program(s), html editors, multiple email clients, a password management program, multiple browsers, image editors, batch image processors, multiple compilers, and an actual shell that allows you to do real work in if you're so inclined? All this stuff and much more is installable all at once with Fedora, Ubuntu, Mint, or whatever it is that you like to use, yet for the most part, they are separate installs in the MS-Windows environment, which in addition to being a serious pain in the ass, is very time consuming.

If your time is worth nothing, run MS-windows, and deal with all the separate programs, whose updates are all also tracked, downloaded and managed separately as well. Not to mention the time you'll waste dealing with various kinds of malware detection software.

Advertising and Marketing

[gatkinso]

Very powerful, virtually nonexistant for Linux on the desktop.

Re:Advertising and Marketing

[dzfoo]

One should wonder why it doesn't work in the case of getting Linux more widespread.

It did, which is why it is so common among the geek community.

The problem is that the average person doesn't really listen to his geek friend.

Re:Advertising and Marketing

[s.petry]

Investigate the cause? Really dude? I suddenly realize why you post as AC. Linux, Windows and MAC are all the same. Patch system, reboot.. OMG system does not work. Patches were the problem, investigation solved! The difference is really that I have about 2 seconds work to do when Linux kernels are the problem, compared to 2-4 hours on Windows or MAC (Honestly MACs rarely change kernels, so failure rates are very low).

Like so many others, you are also bitching about FREE software. You do realize that the business model for SUSE and RedHat is that you can pay them for a stable Linux that is not in perpetual beta like Ubuntu or Pick-a-flavor Linux?

Two Words

[thebrieze]

Microsoft Office

Re:Two Words

[geogob]

That's only one Word.

Re:Two Words

[armanox]

You're assuming my parents even know how to use DVD's or an iPod. Or use Office. Aside from Mapquest, Craigslist, parts lookup, invoicing, and wiring diagram lookup, my father doesn't use the computer for anything else.

Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken off...

[s0litaire]

simple...

Games!

Get the games companies to release Linux version of their big titles (Modern Warfare series, Elder Scrolls series etc... etc...)
and you'll see more and more Linux desktops!!

Well that and AMD / Nvidia get around to shipping bug free drivers that is.. ^_~ lol

Re:Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken off...

[Dan667]

Games are still a huge pull on the PC (and a lot of people are sick of the vendor lock-in crap forced on them with consoles). Valve announced that they will be supporting Linux with their Steam Game Service.

Re:Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken off...

[JaredOfEuropa]

The death of the PC game market has been greatly exaggerated, for the past decade or so. But it does seem that the ability to run the latest red-hot games is much less of a factor in buying the next family PC than it was some years ago.

Re:Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken off...

[DarkXale]

The PC game market which out revenues the PS3 and Xbox360 together? Before taking into consideration MMOs?

Re:Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken off...

[Guppy06]

Get the games companies to release Linux version of their big titles

Give them money. The Linux market isn't big enough to justify the development man-hours it would cost.

And that's before you consider the Linux market's tendency to want to write their own GPL version of any application rather than actually pay money for closed source. Can we say "Penguin of Duty?"

need remote/cloud applications

[elykyllek]

It's an application compatibility issue at the moment. Just about everything I use is browser based these days except photoshop. If I could pay a subscription to something like onlive.com for remote photoshop access, my next laptop wouldn't be a mac.

Re:need remote/cloud applications

[ZeroSumHappiness]

But something is. For me, it's games and, to a lesser extent, Netflix. For a lot of office workers, it's Office (no, OpenOffice/LibreOffice is not equivalent when the whole infrastructure and training has been MS Office). For some people it'll be Netflix instead. Windows has a lot of killer apps and, unfortunately, the consumers have no say on whether they get ported to Linux.

Re:need remote/cloud applications

[Barbara, not Barbie]

For you, yes. But Photoshop is not the reason for most people.

Almost everyone has their own "Photoshop" - a program that is only available under Windows or a Mac. Witness how many people are still dual-booting. If dual-booting and VMs were rendered impossible, the number of linux installs would plummet.

Re:need remote/cloud applications

[darkwing_bmf]

I think his point was that everyone has some application that they want or need that Linux isn't compatible with. For him it might be Photoshop. For me it might be my library of games. For someone else it might be their account management software.

Basically users don't care about the OS, they just care about the things they want to do without changing all of their hardware and software to do it. For most people this means not switching to Linux.

Maybe It Has?

[stupor]

Maybe it has taken off and all this talk of it not taking off is just evidence of it having taken off?

Samzenpus, Official /. Troll

[Microlith]

Why do we keep getting these posts that are deliberately chosen to incite flamewars between pro- and anti-Linux people?

Do we need to have more unhelpful arguments like the one yesterday when Samzenpus posted a dupe of a response to a dupe from back at the start of the year?

Re:Samzenpus, Official /. Troll

[maccodemonkey]

"Why do we keep getting these posts that are deliberately chosen to incite flamewars between pro- and anti-Linux people?"

If the story was trolling, I'd agree, but in this case, it's fact. Desktop Linux hasn't taken off. And a discussion about why is actually productive and could help improve Linux, even if a few people have hurt feelings that something bad was said about their favorite operating system along the way.

Re:Samzenpus, Official /. Troll

[Microlith]

And a discussion about why is actually productive

The problem is that the discussion has been had many times, and the demand that is always made is that everyone give up what they're doing and go to work on some $unified_platform, with the decisions made by $unknown_dictator as if they were a single corporation. The problem is that unless you find a way to incentivize or inhibit people who disagree with how things are done, you will get differentiation. No one ever offers a solution to the people problem.

Re:Samzenpus, Official /. Troll

[ZeroSumHappiness]

It's flamebaiting more than trolling.

Year of the Linux desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe we need to plan a "year of the Linux desktop" to get people to migrate...

Re:Year of the Linux desktop

[Barbara, not Barbie]

Maybe we need to plan a "year of the Linux desktop" to get people to migrate...

... to Apple? Because that's what people want - something that works, not something you have to make a hobby of just to keep running between distro-hops.

Lack of advertising more then anything else

[Criton]

Most people do not know there is an alternative to windows or that it's as good as windows. Other issues confusion and people trying to fix things that are not broken such as completely redoing gnome in gnome 3 or brain dead things like Unity in Ubuntu which cause Mint to over take it as the most downloaded distro. Android is a good example of what can happen when people are exposed to an alternative OS. It's now the number 1 smart phone OS and Windows phone is more or less a flop.

Re:Common Execution Runtime

[tripleevenfall]

"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."

My YOLD came in '92

[dLimit]

Seriously, Who cares? My year of the Linux desktop came in '92 even though I was born in '93! I use Linux religiously and will evangelize it to anyone willing to listen to my gospel. But so what if Linux doesn't ever get mainstream. If people would rather use Windoz or Mac, it's their God given right!

Development Tools?

[darylb]

At work, I write code that has to run on Windows (multiple versions, multiple bitness), Linux x86-64, and Solaris SPARC 64. Maintaining compatibility across multiple versions of Windows and Visual Studio is trivial compared to Linux. Worse, GUI applications have more complex code execution paths that, under Windows, can be debugged without too much pain. On Linux, I cringe every time I have to fix a broken GUI.

I'm sure there are lots of Linux developers that are smarter than I am, but, really, Microsoft has pushed hard to make the developer tools usable and productive, so much so that they're actually worth the cost. The result is that it's easier to develop more apps faster on their platform.

Just one opinion.

Re:Development Tools?

[shutdown -p now]

Development tools used to be deficient on Linux back in the day (unless you're of the "all you need is vim, ctags and gdb" persuasion), but this hasn't been true for a while now. If you're looking at high-level languages, all three major Java IDEs run on Linux just fine, and IntelliJ also makes awesome IDEs for Python, Ruby and PHP. If you want C++, then Qt Creator is where it's at these days - lightweight and fast, convenient (especially if you come from VS - same shortcuts help a lot!), has integrated UI designer, very nice debugger with features such as convenient visualization of STL containers. Really, writing a Qt C++ app with Creator is pretty much as easy as writing a WinForms C# app in VS. The only deficiency I can think of is that their code completion is lackluster, but that has always been a problem with C++, historically. Qt Creator one is roughly on par with VS2008, and is good enough to handle Qt itself, if not quite everything in STL or Boost.

E Pluribus Unity

[XiaoMing]

IMHO, it's because Ubuntu was really the only distro that had a fighting chance at "mass" adoption (that number is relative, but considering how MacOX was sitting at 9% for an eternity...) with their tri-force of:

A pretty, and relatively user friendly interface,
A centralized software update suites that didn't requiring googling what to sudo apt-get for in a console
And pretty good brand recognition and media attention.

UNTIL they decided to completely over-indulge their own sense of relevance by forcing the mandatory Unity interface on users with some absolutely retarded idea that they would to do this for the huge wave of tablet adoption they were now going to see, since I'm assuming Desktop users are already totes in the Ubuntu bandwagon?

I think the real issue isn't that (consumer) Desktop Linux hasn't taken off, but that the people behind the main distro that actually had a fighting chance decided to chop some of the more useful limbs off of it to make it more...fingerable.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/102599-ubuntu-14-04-will-be-a-smartphone-and-tablet-os-so-what

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been using as my primary operating system for well over 10 years. For typical programming/office work it's just easier to deal with than Windows. This is especially true when my job requires to connecting to other Unix based boxes and the majority of my work is done on command line.. I feel neutered every time I have to go back to windows..

Personally I don't care what the masses like..

Linux missed the window

[Animats]

The great opportunity for Linux on the desktop was a decade ago. Back when Windows 95 sucked, Windows XP was late, and Windows 2000 cost several hundred dollars. That's when it could have happened. It didn't.

There was a second chance when the netbooks came in. But that, too, was botched. For a moment, it looked like the future of computing was a $99 Linux netbook in a bubble pack at WalMart. This terrified the industry. The EeePC Linux was badly broken, especially in the networking area. Microsoft frantically revived XP, and then, with the cooperation of the PC industry, tried to destroy the netbook industry. Companies which also produced PCs were told they'd lose their Microsoft volume discount if they sold a Linux netbook. Hence, the "Asus recommends Windows 7" branding. Similar pressure was applied to dealers. You can buy low cost Linux netbooks from suppliers in Shenzen right now, but try to find one at a US retailer. (The current ASUS EeePC 1001, at $200, which is a quite capable little computer. was supposed to be a Linux machine. It's only available with Windows 7.)

The linux desktop has taken off

[Anon-Admin]

First, the biggest reason that business does not look at changing is the cost of retooling. Most businesses are soo tied into windows that they can not even consider an alternative. They have thousands of not hundreds of thousands tied up in the windows infrastructure that would, for the most part have to be scrapped and replaced. From communicator, exchange, Antivirus, share point, you name it and if it is a Microsoft product then it is designed to work with windows. I have known several large companies that looked at moving to Linux desktops, once you worked out the cost of retooling, retraining, and the disruption to the end user, it was cost prohibitive.

Now to home use, I think Linux as a home desktop is far more prevalent that most people think. I know quite a few non-tech people now running linux as a home desktop. I have noticed that almost every software provider has listed in there FAQ "Do you provide a version for Linux?" If it is a frequently asked question then, IMHO, it is far more prevalent than many believe. The issue here is proof, with windows it is sales but buying a Linux desktop is not as easy as going to Walmart and buying a windows one. Top that off with the fact that all systems sold with windows count towards windows numbers even when they are wiped and Linux is installed. So the real question is how many linux desktops are there and what is the best way to identify them. Until those questions are answered we really have no way of knowing how big the population is.

The quality problem.

[Hatta]

Dekstop Linux hasn't taken off because people don't want a powerful OS that does what they tell it to. They want trinkets that keep them entertained. It's the same reason why McDonalds sells billions of hamburgers a year, why Home Ec is the chief focus of The Learning Channel, and why Kurtzmann and Orci keep getting work. People are stupid, end of story.

In my neck of the woods it sure is taking off

[andydread]

300+ Ubuntu residential installations and many business desktops/laptops and counting. When I approach an infected Windows computer I suggest a migration from windows to Ubuntu. I charge the same price to clean windows or migrate to Ubuntu. When they realise that they don't have to keep paying me to come back and clean windows again and again they chose to go with the migration to Ubuntu and are quite happy with their choice. Almost every one of them have not heard of Linux until I come along and give them the option.

Re:In my neck of the woods it sure is taking off

[bbbaldie]

My experience too. But first, customers must be qualified:

• Do they run Quicken or Quickbooks?
• Do they require Office specifically, or could they get by with any office suite?
• Do they use any websites which (damn the developers) require IE?
• Do they need Photoshop?

If the answer to all four questions is no, then I build their system and provide an hour of training, and then make myself accessible over the phone. I very seldom get any calls afterwards. I do get raves from my customers though. :-)

Re:In my neck of the woods it sure is taking off

[DaveV1.0]

You just did the exact same thing and didn't answer my questions.

If you have 300 res and 20+ business customers in a market of 30,000 res and 2,000 business customers, then your numbers simply suck. By not providing any information about the market you exist in, your numbers are worthless. It is like saying one has 20 fish when there are 10,000 fish available.

How do you know none of them have migrated back?

Re:"Just Change It"

[TaoPhoenix]

We had a chance to get Linux On the Desktop in 2006 with Vista "that looked like Windows 7 (to come later) but crashed like Windows 95". So X% of users suffered, y% stayed on XP, Z% went to Mac. Let's just say "no one" (for LARGE values of "no one" in quotes) went to Linux.

But maybe we're on the edge of an even better chance. We're all being shoved off of XP soon, headlong into Windows 8 Metro. Metro will NOT look anything like Windows. It might not even run a lot of apps so the compatibility advantage weakens.

So just maybe, if we can get a couple of overall policy direction leaders that the techies really trust, (with no single one in charge for fairness?) then maybe someone who likes Disruptive business can tap a silent investor with a BIG pocket to churn 30,000 developer-hours to cleaning up the inter-operability problems in Linux. (Maybe some cross-distro middleware?)

Loaded sample population

[Sebastopol]

All of the +ve praise for the Linux desktop comes from... the linux community!

Try asking non-Linux people what they think of it, and maybe you'll get realistic feedback.

Four reasons

[Raul654]

Here's what I think are the five biggest reasons, in roughly descending order of importance:
1) Microsoft Office - like it or not, Microsoft Office is by a huge margin the dominant office suite. You have a presentation to give tomorrow? You better make sure it works on that Windows/Office computer that is connected to the overhead projector. Fuck ups in document formatting/compatibility will not be acceptable. Morale of the story: Until an open source program can read and write Microsoft office documents at damn close to 100% fidelity to their windows counterparts, this will be a HUGE obstacle.
2) Games - Despite repeated predictions of its imminent demise, the PC gaming market should not be underestimated. To some extent, this is a viscous cycle: the Linux community ignores the potential increase in market share from gamers, and software companies ignore the Linux market (because it's too small to be economically viable).
3) Poor UI choices - Unity. Enough said.
4) Package installation/management - Let's say a hypothetical windows-to-linux convert wants to install a program. If he's using a distro that uses apt/yum, and if what he wants to install is available in the repositories, and if the distro is configured to use those repositories by default, then he's in pretty good shape. If any of these conditions doesn't hold, then our user is screwed. This is one area where Windows is light years ahead of Linux. If you get a Windows installer and run it, it installs with a minimum of hassle, and you'll never ever be told that your compiler is out-of-date or to use certain compiliation flags or to manually install a dozen dependencies.
5) Lack of standardization in configuration - It is not helpful to google a problem and get eight different answers depending on which distro you use. Like the poor UI choices, this is largely a self-inflicted wound.

Re:Four reasons

[Dadoo]

1) Microsoft Office

I think you're overstating the importance of Office. My wife uses Ubuntu as her main desktop, and exchanges documents with people who use office every day. She claims she has very little trouble.

2) Games

I'll agree with you, that the PC games market isn't going anywhere soon. Linux could get into that market, if they were more programmer-friendly, which I'll go into in a minute.

3) Poor UI choices

Yeah, I think Unity's terrible, but my wife likes it.

4) Package installation/management

I honestly don't have a clue what you're talking about, here. If you want to install some software on Linux, you bring up the package manager, select the software you want, and it installs automatically. It doesn't even ask you for any money. What could be simpler than that? The only distribution that had problems with its package sources (that I'm aware of) was SuSE. The user could solve that by switching distributions. The computer manufacturer could fix that by selling units with Linux pre-installed.

5) Lack of standardization in configuration

Again, I think you're overstating this problem.

In my opinion, the biggest reason we don't have desktop Linux, is its programmer-friendliness when writing GUI programs. The first thing we need is a proper IDE. Linux and Windows programmers alike tell me nothing on Linux even comes close to Visual Studio.

The second thing we need is a single user-interface API. If you're going to write a native Linux application, do you write it in KDE, Gnome, XFCE, or something else, entirely? Yes, I know you can run KDE programs on Gnome, but you have to go to the trouble to make sure the KDE libraries are installed. Some KDE programs also require some services that Gnome doesn't run, and vice-versa. Having them both go to D-bus was a step in the right direction, but they need to go further. Desktop environment should be a user choice, not a programmer choice.

Inertia: the Ernie Ball story

[swm]

Ernie Ball ran a company (they make guitar strings).
One day the BSA shows up, armed marshals in tow, to do an audit.
They find a few systems out of compliance, and the lawyers negotiate a settlement.
These thing happen, right? Cost of doing business, right?

But then the BSA thought, hey, this guy has name recognition.
He's connected to music; the kids know who he his.
We'll make an example of him.

And they did.
They ran ads that named him as a pirate;
they got his case on the evening news.

Mr. Ball took exception to this.
So he went to his IT people and told them that he wanted Microsoft out of his company in 6 months.
So they switched to RedHat.
More into at http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html

My take-away from this is that Microsoft is running on inertia.
Not theirs: their customers'.
Microsoft persists because their customers don't have a compelling reason to switch.
But given a reason, switching to Linux is no big deal.

At any point in time,
most of the world is 6 months from Linux,
and Microsoft is 6 months from oblivion.

Followup about sound.

[0100010001010011]

It's the year 2012, fix sound.

Sound doesn't work out of the box. They have the abomination (IMHO) that is PulseAudio so I do an apt-get purge. Suddenly sound works.

So I go and try to play 2 things at once. [Unless you have ALSA setup a specific way with mixers it won't do it because only one PID gets to talk to hardware at once.] Wow it works. Maybe they started shipping a working ALSA config. I go check /etc/asound.conf. Everything is still set to pulse.

So I check task manager. Sure enough the pulse server is still cranking away. But by purging all the files it somehow magically started to work. So I re-install it.

I repeat the test. Somehow mplayer decides it wants to grab ALSA instead of pulse but ALSA then grabs the hardware, so pulse dies and can't communicate to ALSA (which is actually doing the hardware interfacing if I read my workflow correctly). So now I have no sound, again.

So I try it straight from mplayer specifying the hardware device and it works. Except only in mplayer. So now I'm going to spend another few hours dicking with either the dmix plugin or deciding to give Pulse a 5th chance.

Fork something or start something from scratch. Something like MATE/GNOME2. And make it 'just work'.

Re:Followup about sound.

[roman_mir]

Disclaimer: I've been on linux exclusively for about 3 years now, just stopped using everything else.

However that stuff you just said is gobbledygook to somebody not using linux at all. Why don't we also ask people to reconfigure a solar matrix with a tachion accelerator to increase the boson throughput while at it? Sounds about the same complexity.

This is akin to a person taking a digital camera and having to replace a few components inside, nothing big, just the electronic image sensor. Or maybe having to change the head gasket in their car's engine before they can drive it. Easy peasy. Everybody does it when they put their hands on a complex piece of machinery before they can use it, right?

Re:Followup about sound.

[Just Some Guy]

Sound doesn't work out of the box.

I'm amused that FreeBSD gets this one 100% correct "out of the box". As many processes may open and write to /dev/dsp as want to, and all mixing is automatically handled in software or hardware as needed. The best thing anyone could do for audio on Linux would be to give up on it, integrate what FreeBSD perfected, and be done with it.

too many choices - I'm so confused

[Locutus]

With Windows I know I can just pick Windows Starter if a netbook is needed and the netbook is a 10.1" screen or less. If it's larger then it's called an Ultrabook and that means Windows Home is an option if networking isn't a big deal or connecting to a Windows network. There's Windows Media Edition for all kinds of multimedia fun but the hardware needs to be beefy enough to support it. If the home computer is going to be used for work then I'll need to make sure to upgrade or get the Windows Professional version so it can connect to the network at work. If we get a site license then there's the Windows Enterprise version and that comes with a bunch of client licenses because I need licenses every client when connecting to Microsoft's server software.

With Windows it's just so easy and with Linux there are just too many choices.

LoB

Linux has won in my household.

[dougmc]

Let's see ... there's four Windows desktops and laptops and one Linux desktop/server in my household in common use.

But looking at other systems ...

Three Kindle Fires, running Android (Linux).
Two original Nooks, running Android (Linux).
Two smart phones, one running Android (Linux) and one is an iPhone (not Linux.)
One Boxee Box, running Linux.
One Chumby alarm clock, running Linux.
I'm not sure, but the cable company provided DVR might run Linux. (The DirectTV Tivo I had previously certainly did.)

In my household, it seems that Linux has already won. Just not on the desktop.

Re:Linux has won in my household.

[MMC Monster]

Let me count in mine:
2 iPhones
1 iPad
2 HTPCs running OpenElec (Linux)
1 MacBook
1 Desktop (Ubuntu 10.04)

So:
3 iOS
1 Mac OS X
3 Linux

More telling: My neighbor wanted me to set up a HTPC after he saw mine in action. It's running OpenElec (Linux). I installed it 5 months ago and he hasn't called for tech support since.

Because it does not work for Mom and Pop

[cryfreedomlove]

I'm the tech support person for my parents. They are smart people but I know a lot about Linux and I sure as hell am not going to be leaving a desktop Linux machine under their Christmas tree when I consider the support calls that would be coming my way. They love their Mac and supporting them on the Mac is easy. Most computer users are like my parents. They are not passionate geeks like me. Linux is for servers and passionate geeks.

The OS doesn't matter

[Eponymous Coward]

What is compelling about Windows or OS X or Linux? These days, not much. Operating systems have pretty much become fungible. A corporation is going to pick the platform that runs the necessary software and that their staff can support. Lots of places now let employees choose the platform because often all that's really required is a modern web browser.

Individuals are going to pick what friends or salespeople recommend. I personally haven't recommended anything other than Apple hardware in the past few years just because if they call me looking for help and I can't solve their issue, they can always take their machine into the Apple store.

Instead of answering why Linux hasn't succeeded on the desktop, I'd like you to answer why it should? I don't really see anybody actively targeting desktop Linux with the goal of gaining market share. What I see is mostly people scratching their own itch without any regard to what might be useful to a very wide userbase.

The average-power user.

[jellomizer]

Linux works great for Grandma,
Linux works great for IT folks.

Linux sucks in the middle. That is why Linux is Strong in the Server area and in the Mobile Phone area. However lacking in the desktop area.

The key features for the Middle, that isn't really all that easy in Linux.
Adding new hardware. Some stuff just works, other stuff is a real big pain. Mac and Windows (due to its popularity mostly) has the hardware vendors supply them with drivers, or when you get the hardware you have an easy to use install for the drivers. Linux you may be able to find the drivers, but you have many versions and you need to do a lot of research to see which one is going to do what you need it to do.

For example my Wifes Dell Inspiron 9 mini (Netbook) with Ubuntu display 800x600 while the screen native resolution is 1024x600... I cannot use the normal GUI to fix that. The instruction on how to do so, are cryptic and sometimes don't work. while the 800x600 stretched bugs the heck out of me. My Wife doesn't care, so I wont do much to fix it. That is after I spent time to get sound working on it, after an upgrade.

I am sorry but compared to Windows and OS X, Linux is a Free Desktop OS and it shows. Put it in a server great, put it in a phone just as good. The desktop is the troubled area.

Part of the issue I think, is they are spending too much time copying what Microsoft does or what Apple does, and the Open Source democratic structure doesn't have a few good people to say it sucks or it is good.

People want it to just work.

[hessian]

Nerds like to fiddle, geeks like to tweak, but the average person does not see the computer as an end in itself. To them it is a tool to be used as a means to achieve other ends, and to that end, it must just work.

They do not want to spend long time configuring software. When a problem arises, they want a relatively singular solution. They don't want more options, they want better-organized options with good documentation and a support structure, and a clear "there's a right way to do it" hierarchy.

Linux is a hobbyist's system. Sometimes, it can take a week of hacking to get a soundcard to work. Often, software isn't a matter of being a tool, but a custom library that requires scripting. The normal user is not concerned about this.

Further, in the grand tradition of communities that sabotage themselves going back to the Amiga and Apple II communities of yore, the Linux community is self-sabotaging. First, it likes to imply a dichotomy between "knowledgeable" users and by implication un-knowledgeable users, when the actual dichotomy is more like hobbyists versus people using the computer for something else. Second, it is downright hostile to users when they make requests for technical help. Finally, it spends most of its energy on "fun" projects and ignores vital upgrades to existing but incomplete projects, including documentation.

Linux is a great achievement, and my life is better for it, but it has a long way to go to be ready for the desktop. Of course, one company adopting a distro and putting in the work to make it competitive could change all this, but with the community so hostile to anything corporate, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Linux has a golden oppurtunity it will miss.

[Zombie Ryushu]

Believe it or not, Linux has an absolutely golden opportunity to deliver a 'better than Windows' experience to consumers it will more than likely miss. some of these issues are application developers fault. Others are Linux itself's fault. A few things:

- Stop doing Jacked up things to KDE, Gnome, and similar. No more Mandatory themes per distribution. Mandriva does this with ROSA, I had to make an RPM just to replace the ROSA theme.

- Harmonize RPM and DEB. An RPM be it a Suse RPM, or a Mandriva, or Fedora RPM should generation-ally, be able to be installed on any RPM based system that uses RPM. Same for Deb, although Deb is better than that.

- Application developers: Target SDL when making games (OpenGL for 3D). Do NOT use the deprecated X11 Video, Joystick, and similar input. Some Linux games still use these conventions which can result in crashes.

- For Retro Gamers: Linux is in a better emulation position than Windows on a few fronts with a few exceptions: Those being: Atari Jaguar, Sharp X68000, PC-9801. FM Towns/Marty. Fix this, and Linux has absolute supremacy in the legacy hardware emulation realm no 'virtual console' can match.

Linux has the ability using Wine to take ground and hold ground at all cost against Windows. Wine and Samba are the best example of this. The resilience of the Samba 3.x NT Domain backward compatibility issue has shown that Linux CAN alter Window's behavior. In the Samba realm Samba 3 took NT Domains, and to over come the lack of BDC support, added LDAP and Kerberos that was standard, creating Open Directories with multiple PDCs, forcing Microsoft to maintain backward compatibility far beyond what they wanted.

Now; with the entrenched position of AD, the same thing can happen again, Samba 4.0 can extend AD by tacking on OpenAFS Cell Clusters, and other things, and overcome AD's technical design limitations in the same way; creating a superior AD experience under Linux.

Wine stands to one up Windows 7 and XP for game compatibility with 9x. Try and make 9x games and XP games that don't work right hold ground over Windows 7.

In the new game arena, make sure that Wine can stand it's ground on Steam. make sure new games work Wine even without the creator's consent. If possible, try and get them to run better on Wine.

Ensure Linux has tools to clean Windows machines. Especially remotely that does not mean reformatting the machine.

Ensure that Linux can seamlessly run Android products. As with Wine, an Android API translation layer should be availible for Linux.

Hardware wise: With a Bluetooth Module, you should be able to seemlessly pair any PS3 Controller, Wiimote, and 360 Controller without Human intervention. This does work. But it takes Human intervention. I have to install drivers and an applet, and I have to launch that applet MANUALLY. If I have a Bluetooth module, or the 360 Dongle, it should work, perfectly, with the proper Quadrant lights, the first time. Currently I can make this work, by hand. But I shouldn't have too.

I have a feeling people will screw this up. They always do.

Re:"Just Change It"

[sam_paris]

Sorry to burst your bubble but any app that runs on Windows 7 will also run on Windows 8. It's totally backwards compatible.

Desktop LInux will take off

[hey!]

... when it is installed in a flying car.

Inconsistent to nonexistent support options

[RoknrolZombie]

At the risk of being flamed (wearing my fire-retardant underwear, so bring it) - I recently migrated my desktop AWAY from Linux for a variety of different reasons, many of which were outlined above. Like what? Well, multiple monitor support was always the big one for me. I haven't used fewer than 4 monitors on my home desktop for the last 5 or 6 years, and with Linux it was a constant battle to keep things working correctly. Why? Well, because NVIDIA (or ATI, doesn't seem to matter much) couldn't be bothered to update their code for the new kernel, or Xorg hasn't been updated for the last 4 kernels so if something doesn't work, then tough. Now, I can sit here and bitch about the plethora of issues that I was constantly having to fight (the aforementioned monitors, for example) - for example, virtually every upgrade broke X (multiple monitors, remember), but even beyond the issues that would sometimes take days or weeks to resolve there were larger issues at work. Such as? Unsupported packages (that are nonetheless required for a working setup). Devs that have no interest in supporting their own code, offering (more often than not) the standard "RTFM" (even if the issue isn't addressed, or their "manual" is a paragraph on what their software is supposed to do). The consistent elitist treatment afforded new users (and I haven't been a "new" Linux user since 1994).

This is just a handful of issues off the top of my head that prevent me from pushing Linux on anyone. If someone has more time on their hands and not enough stress in their lives I'll suggest it, but beyond that, NOBODY should have to put more hours into fixing a computer than they're able to put in on USING the damn thing...Linux is simply not mature enough to let that happen.

For teh fanbois out there: I am neither an M$ nor Apple shill...TBH they can all burn and I'd be just as happy. But the simple fact is that they are both more appropriate for end-users than Linux (both from a maintenance standpoint, as well as a support standpoint). If Linux were capable of competing in the Desktop market I would likely be just as happy to use it as any other OS...but it simply can't (and probably shouldn't) compete in that market...continuing to try to push it for the Desktop market (especially before it's ready) is only going to hurt the cause, not help it.

Attention anti-choice idiots

[GameboyRMH]

Attention all anti-choice idiots who said "fragmentation":

GET OUT

fads and ignorance

[whitroth]

Let's start with ignorance: corporate management frequently has no idea you can buy linux support... or that they may already have people in house with that knowledge. And the eternal "no one ever lost their job by recommending IBM, er, Microsoft"

For home users, the amount of FUD is massive. Just the other week, I happened to hear a public radio talk show, the Kojo Naambi show, who apparently has a weekly computer segment. They had a techie... who when someone texted in to suggest open source software, said that he'd looked at open office, and it had a terrible interface, and that what did you expect for something that was free.

Terrible interface? In what way? And is it worse than The Ribbon idiocy?

Home users also have a lot of inertia. How many years do they run the same o/s without even security upgrades? What's going to push them to go buy or install a new o/s? And the stores - buy a new computer without Windows? Huh?

Which distro? I've worked with a few, and the obvious to me answer is a stable one, NOT a cutting edge one. I *loathe* fedora, for example, and gnome 3 is S0 K3WL F0R K1DZ. Actually *do* something other than play with the eye candy?

And Ubuntu's descent into k3wl with Unity is a take aim with .45 with both hands, shoot foot. Now shoot other foot. I mean, menus that disappear with a wave like a sheet in the wind? That pop up with an explosion? That's certainly the way it is on a 14 yr old's of my aquaintance....

OpenSuSE or RHEL or CentOS. Yeah, they may be a few years behind the latestgreatest... but they tend to be very, very stable. They don't have 80 updates this week... and another 20 on Friday. They may not support the hardware that came out this week... but if it came out six months ago, there's a really good chance it's supported.

Finally, I've had my computer-challanged fiancee on my CentOS box, and she's had as few or fewer problems than she has on the Vista box she has at home (yes, I'm *trying* to get her to go to Win 7, if she *has* to stay in Windows, but there's that $100+ on an o/s to spend....)

So, what's the issue with "which distro"? Just look at what's used most.

              mark

Whats The Holdback?

[faazshift]

There are hundreds of distros of linux, each with its own niche feat. Linux in these days has become far more user-friendly than ever before. However, as I see it, there are a few things that prevent it from becoming a majority in the world of operating systems. First, theres a lack in aggressive marketing. With windows and mac, there are huge, wealthy organizations backing them and aggressively marketing them. Linux largely depends on smaller organizations and person-to-person advertising, which just isn't getting it into the worlds eye like it needs to be. Next, windows comes pre-installed on many computers and laptops. It seems that the average person is more inclined just to stick with what they already have installed than to switch, even if there is a better option. Lastly, the world in general is just too uninformed when it comes to technology. We have a lot of older people that are just starting to learn what a computer is and are, in all likelihood getting trained to use windows. We see a similar trend in the school-system. Most schools still train students on windows machines, leaving them out of the loop on what other options are available. If a person actually knows the pros and cons of each OS option or is familiar enough with technology in general, it would seem to me they would be more open and inclined toward something that is free, powerful, opensource, and all-around better, such as linux. Just my two cents (or maybe three).

Do we need this every two tweeks?

[loufoque]

I feel like there is a post like this on slashdot every two weeks.

Linux has already taken off years ago, and most savvy people are using it. I understand some people can be frustrated because they can't get the cool operating system their savvy friends use to work, but do we really need to be repeated that so often?

Let the sheeple use whatever they're happy with and get off my loan.

It's all about the apps

[MpVpRb]

So, I look at what I use frequently

AutoCad, Photoshop, Illustrator, Altium, Visual Studio, AVR Studio and all of the other various specialized device interfaces, like Home Theater Master MX-850

All are Windows only. And PLEASE don't tell me there are open source alternatives..even when they exist, they are pale imitations of the originals

About the only stuff I could do on Linux is, Firefox, Thunderbird and Open Office.

It sucks

[grumbel]

Overall the Linux desktop experience is a shitty experience, it's really as easy as that. And no, I don't mean the lack of games or commercial software, I just mean problems within the Free Software world itself. The complete lack of quality control, inconsistencies, stuff not working properly and so on. It simply looks and feels like what it is: A product cobbled together by thousands of people with little or no agreement on any consistency. It doesn't help that the Free Software world likes to hit the reset button every five years to switch to a new, yet completely incompatible and still completly unfinished desktop expierence.

Wanna improve things? Get together and define one distribution independed packaging format. And while at it, make it flexible so that it doesn't require root rights to install software, make it easy to share software with it, make it easy to get access to the source and modify it. Then start working on having apps cooperate with each other, give me flexible data import/export everywhere, so that I don't have to manually transfer my podcast subscriptions item by item when I want to switch players. Cleanup /home/ so that everything is in ~/.config/. Enhance the documentation system so that it's trivial to find out what files an application uses and where it stores your data (yeah, strace is great, it's not a replacement for documentation). And so on.

At this point I don't expet Linux to ever succeed on the desktop. It was a mess 10 years ago and it's still a mess, with very little improvements in the mean time, instead a lot of useless reinvention of the wheel.

Regarding the astroturfer accusation...

[Benfea]

...I'm afraid it's a valid concern. Not because of anything you said, but because Microsoft really does pay shills to post at places like this and pose as a regular person. It's not just Microsoft either, as this is a very common marketing tactic nowadays. We have no choice but to be skeptical of anyone who says anything positive about a product from a large corporation. That's not to say that all positive comments about products from large corporations are automatically the output of paid shills, but as a community we should be immediately skeptical of such things.

In a perfect world, corporations would not use this tactic, and thus we could immediately dismiss the "yer a shill" accusations whenever they come up, unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. We live in this world. Any such positive statements must be treated with skepticism.

The difference is in the validity of the arguments, and in this case, I happen to agree with yours.

More to it than just linux. Remember 2007?

[quixote9]

I think it was 2007. Linux was taking off all over the place. Governments were talking about adopting open standards. Schools and municipalities were deploying Linux. You could see it really starting to take hold.

Microsoft's no stupider than everybody else. They could see it, too. And I seem to remember they dropped the price on Windows to $3. (That was on whichever version was old, but still dominant at the time. XP?) Not in the US, but elsewhere, where the danger was highest. Then they also really, really, really pushed to prevent adoption of open standards and, if that wasn't possible, to water those standards down to something that interfered less with their business model.

And, as far as I can see, they've successfully held back the tide that time.

Which isn't to say that the problems with Linux people have identified upthread aren't right. They are. Linux does have problems with lack of advertising and sudden holes where important stuff ceases to work. That is very important and something we really need to get our act together about. But the real problems shouldn't blind us to the equally real problems that have nothing to do with Linux itself.

CmdrTaco said it best

[Pausanias]

I think he said it best. Linux on the Desktop will never happen because Mac came along.

Before OS X, many many people were dying for a Desktop OS that looked beautiful but still gave them their beloved UNIX-style command line and familiar tools (emacs, vi, gcc, etc.). They wanted a UNIX-style OS which had drivers that actually worked instead of requiring wastage of huge amount of time googling this and compiling that.

OS X came along and fulfilled the wish of many. The only people left were those who wanted a UNIX-style OS that was libre; that was a vanishingly small number compared to the first group, whose desires were more than adequately fulfilled by OS X.

http://slashdot.org/story/07/10/11/1527219/rob-malda-answers-your-questions

Re:Actually, it HAS taken off

[dkleinsc]

Actually, Linux projects and distros and companies have realized the advantage of installing the OS for the user, which is why they've tried to compete in the pre-installed OEM market. The reason they haven't succeeded there has nothing to do with technical quality or a desire to provide Linux installed already, and everything to do with Microsoft telling the OEMs that if they sell Linux pre-installed on any consumer systems Microsoft will make their life miserable with regards to all the Windows machines they're selling (In theory, this is illegal anticompetitive behavior, but in practice the US DoJ looks the other way). That's why the Linux netbook market, which had been going fairly strong a couple of years ago, is now almost non-existant.

Re:Opportunity Cost.

[gfxguy]

Interesting post. I'd like to say that 10+ years ago I was a very frustrated computer user, both trying to use Linux AND Windows. I'm not a system administrator, so it was very frustrating trying to get video cards, audio cards, and modems all working correctly regardless of which OS I was using. I've had absolute nightmares trying to get things to work in Windows, whereas I'd find plenty to help me online when it came to Linux, but it was still a nightmare. If you buy a computer with the OS pre-installed, it's one thing - if you build your own box, it's entirely different.

I did settle on Windows for a time when it became too frustrating to try to deal with both... but when someone recommended Ubuntu 6.0 and I tried it, it was just perfect - everything worked out of the box, and the desktop experience was, for me, at least as good as Windows. I was back to sloppy focus and snapping windows in no time, and writing scripts that would open up all my work applications (editor, browser, terminal) in all the exact right positions and dimensions with one (double) click of an icon.

Things then went back and forth. Over time I used Windows less and less (mostly because I played games less and less). Over the years I'd upgrade Ubuntu distributions and get the latest and greatest stuff, and it just worked.

Then "updates" started breaking things. Suddenly the sound wouldn't work. As time went on, configuring wi-fi became a nightmare. A couple of versions later it would work out of the box again... only to fail again on the next release.

Then came Ubuntu 11.04. Don't even get me started about the UI - the unified menu breaks the sloppy focus paradigm, that clicking a program icon to open a new instance brings me back to an existing one instead was very problematic. I figured "this is the new paradigm" and gave it the valiant effort of over two months of use. At the same time at work, I got a Mac and noticed the similarities between the two... all things I didn't like. Now I'm running Ubuntu 10.04 both at home - as a VM on Windows, and at work - as a VM on MacOS.

I don't need a lot of horsepower, so this works fine for me... and when I do need to use Windows or MacOS, I just minimize Ubuntu and go, but I still find it less than ideal. I will try some other distributions, perhaps. Debian, since that's what it's based on - maybe Xubuntu.

As far as Windows goes, we have to admit it's gotten a lot better than it used to be. My wife and daughter both have 7 (I recently upgraded their computers); my son has XP and plays video games constantly and has had very little non-hardware related problems. My "system administration" for them has gotten to be very minimal. I sense it wouldn't be any worse with Linux, but they wouldn't be able to use the software they need.

Ultimately that's what it comes down to, though. I wouldn't run Linux on a VM if there were no Windows software I needed. The worst is my company switched vpn from Cisco (supported by vpnc on Linux) to "ework," a browser based solution that I've not been able to get to work on Linux... so I run it on Windows then launch the VM. A sad solution. I'm still not completely happy with either Linux or Windows.... but I do lean towards Linux, and I'd say that, over the years, I've spent as much time trying to get Windows to work as I have trying to get Linux to work.

I'd like to add one thing - regardless of the discipline, people who are experts or hobbyists often expect that people should know more about whatever discipline it is. Accountants expect us all to spend our free time evaluating stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and planning financial strategies; mechanics expect us all to know how our cars work; people who teach fitness classes expect we'll all have hours of time every day we can dedicate to exercise; people "into" computers often think that everyone should know everything about how their computer works.... we hold the people who just want to turn it on and work in disdain, we think they should take

Because it's UI is stuck in the 80's... CLI

[ukemike]

Linux is really more like Windows 3.0, the real action with win3.0 was in DOS. The real action in linux is in the shell. All the GUI stuff is just pasted on top of it.

really 2 main reasons

[Locutus]

It has nothing to do with advertising really but far more to do with the money the large OEM vendors get from Microsoft as part of their "Marketing Program". This money is out side of the licensing costs/deal but still tied to it. Microsoft pays vendors for putting those Windows stickers on the packing boxes, keyboards, and computer chasis along with logo's on the web pages and in the purchase literature. Lots of money.

And then there are the preloaded software kits companies like Adobe and others have contracts with the OEM's for so time-limited or entry versions of their software is installed on the computer already. The OEM's make money off that too.

I guess there is a 3rd primary reason too and that is the fact that Microsoft's _people_ will come knock on your door if you start putting Linux on some of your systems. They will smile, sit down with you, as an OEM, and place your existing licensing cost sheet down on the table and then ask if you think shipping Linux systems is really financially worth your while. Smiling, he'll say to think hard about it while tapping his finger on your existing cost sheet for the Windows OS license.

That's about it so even if customers ask about Linux, the vendors really can't put Linux on the systems unless they are the small fry guys and even then they'll probably talk you into putting it on with a 2nd disk or as a 2nd boot option on the same disk. The big guys can not cut off all that marketing money and reloaded software money when that is where they make their profits from.

LoB

I'll probably get downmodded for this, but...

[ToiletBomber]

Have you ever considered the possibility, that some people might not want Desktop Linux to take off. But not for the reason you would think. See, if everybody started using desktop Linux, then, just like what has happened with MacOS X, malware will start appearing for it in ever increasing numbers. Lots of Linux users I know use it as a safe haven from Windows and all it's malware. I don't think they want to see that haven suddenly infested, and have to do something like switch to a different distro every few months/years/etc in order to keep their haven...

macs

[buddyglass]

Macs are great for small businesses. Less malware prone than Windows (though Linux still wins here), built-in non-crappy warranty service at the Apple store (handy if you live near one), employees are familiar with them already, employes generally like working with them (free morale), and Time Machine is handy for automated backup. You can put graphic design, sales guys and developers all on the same platform, assuming you're not developing for Windows.

Not about the difficulty of using Linux

[aztektum]

All the problems people grouse about with Linux on the desktop exist on Mac and Windows. You can find 100 pieces of hardware that won't work out of the box and require tweaking, newer drives, etc. on all of them. You can find another 100 that work on all out of the box.

Wave a wand so that Linux has 80+ percent of the desktop share instead, and people will bitch about how Windows has the problems they pin on Linux today. "My built in motherboard card didn't work without tweaking/driver." Yeah, I just built a media center PC with new components. I put Windows 7 Ultimate on it, since it will be a Netflix box. I spent ~20 minutes waiting for the OS to install and another 30+ installing drivers and plugins and whatever.

Most users don't deal with that shit because they buy a laptop from Dell or HP who does it for them. They can do the same with Linux and the user would never know. Except they don't, because MS strong armed them into loading Windows for years and now no one gives a rats ass to use anything else. For them "it just works", when really "it just works" because Dell and HP did the work for them.

Google has banned Windows internally except in situations where a business critical app requires it; Mac or Linux only otherwise. I know of dozens of small companies that are purely Linux (many of them are not involved in dev or IT) It can be done and done well. It's just buying the licenses and installing it is seen as "easier."

You know what: until you get beyond a certain point, it is. At one small company, we had 30 Windows users, I made disk images with various software loads and updated them every 6 months. Later, I worked on a huge SCCM deployment project to manage a universities desktop computers (comp labs and offices, ~5/k machines) and it was a fucking nightmare, because Windows is a horrible network OS. Meanwhile, the UNIX team hardly touched their networked machines thanks to a robust and relatively easy to deal with Puppet setup (including various addons).

Windows is better because it's everywhere and people are use to it and really it works well most of time. Linux is not as ubiquitous, but also can be made to work well most of the time. This argument is rarely based on technical merits and typically devolves into opinion and preference. And Macs are only used by douche bag hipsters :P

More Microsoft marketing...

[Alex Belits]

Can we, please, stop posting fake "complaints" and "explanations" that come from Microsoft, and serve no purpose other than FUD-mongering and misdirecting the Linux development?

Should I remind everyone that Microsoft's settlement terms after (mostly toothless) antitrust lawsuit expired recently, and Microsoft is now free to continue their monopoly-maintenance practices such as "taxing" manufacturers' devices with non-Microsoft OS, without even trying to conceal them?

Yep, it's all about the apps

[walterbyrd]

If not MS-Office, then it's Photoshop, or AutoCAD, or some game, or whatever.

On my home desktop, I don't need any of those apps, so I use Linux, and I consider it a far superior desktop experience in every way.

Re:Yep, it's all about the apps

[HapSlappy_2222]

The funny thing is how many people will respond to this with "But OpenOffice! but Gimp! but FreeCAD!" without realizing that even on a Windows or Mac machine, MS Office, Adobe's suite, and AutoCAD absolutely DOMINATE their markets. They have become de facto industry standards, and competing software is only used on the fringe to get access to obscure features, while still interfacing as tightly as possible to the market leaders. Often, people will even use both (as in, Illustrator for most vector work, but Corel Draw for vector work that requires a specific technique to separate spot colors). This is why other software can stay in the game; they offer as much (or nearly so) as the standard software and tack in a few clever features; but they don't try to go heads up against the giant.

Sorry, but even if a software is actually better, if it's competing with an industry standard, it sure as hell has to conform 100% to that standard in addition to being better. David may have won one time, armed with a sling, but he'd have had an easier time of it overall if he was armed with sandal polish, instead. It's just the way it is in a lot of industries, at least until the sandal-shiner is consistently clever enough to rise as the new dominating force.

Re:Yep, it's all about the apps

[QuantumRiff]

Funny thing is, 90% of the people that claim they need those apps don't.. they need "word processing software" not "Word"..
heck, the newer versions of Exchange actually play fairly nice with other devices besides outlook now.

for all the people that claim to NEED Photoshop, i have only met one that had a licensed copy of it.. (I have met others that where Mac users)..

Only real stumbling block I can think of is Access and Excel. I worked at an accounting firm with an amazing amount of applications and add-ins for excel. Hundreds across the enterprise.. you should have seen the screaming when we were testing Office 2007.. (which had a big security model change from 2003!)

Re:Yep, it's all about the apps

[serviscope_minor]

AutoCAD absolutely DOMINATE their markets.

Um no.

Not with Pro/E and Solidworks. Not saying anything about Linux, but if you think AutoCAD dominates the CAD field, then you don't know mch about CAD.

Re:Yep, it's all about the apps

[macs4all]

Not with Pro/E and Solidworks. Not saying anything about Linux, but if you think AutoCAD dominates the CAD field, then you don't know mch[sic] about CAD.

I'm no Windows fan, but how does that bolster an argument that Linux has viable alternatives to Pro/E and Solidworks?

Re:"Just Change It"

[sam_paris]

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm talking about BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY, do you even know what that means? It's like saying that a Playstation game will play on a Playstation 2. This means that PS2 is BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. Windows 8 is backwards compatible with Windows 7.

How do I know this? I've been developing Windows 8 apps (for Microsoft) since October of last year.

Who's the moron?

To establish intent

[tepples]

Surely it's not an attempt to prevent printing multiple coupons

That's exactly what it is, as far as I can tell.

since even if I couldn't find a way to capture the coupon in a PDF on Windows, I could just scan and copy the one I printed.

For one thing, not if it has anti-photocopying marks all over it. For another, a lot of softer security measures aren't intended to be foolproof. They're intended to make it so that counterfeiting requires an overt, intentional act. It's easier to prove wrongdoing when you can establish intent.

$200 operating system to run inside the VM

[tepples]

As for the rest of your points, you could have just used a VM.

For one thing, one would still have to buy a $200 operating system to run inside the VM. For another, I was under the impression that the Windows Media DRM associated with Silverlight streaming video would intentionally break if it detected a VM.

You need to be willing to relearn how to do things you've gotten used to and it doesn't hurt to have a friend help show you how it's done.

Provided that one knows how to find such a friend who lives within a reasonable distance of oneself.

Psycology

[phorm]

I know somewhere that had similar issues.

So one guy got smart. He started mentioning how old our version of office was etc. The techies followed with the same mutterings.
After that circulated around, it was announced that we were going to bring in a newer version of Office (nobody said MS Office). By making it sound like an update/upgrade, rather than a newer version, acceptance was greater and everyone actually seemed to like it.

Did anybody read the article?

[Anonymous Coward]

This article is based on estimates from Gartner. They are both biased and ill informed. From the article:
__________
In addition, the free versions of Linux are only supported with free fixes for about a year, says Michael Silver, an analyst with Stamford, Conn.-based Gartner group. "You have to switch to the new version of Linux every year," he says. "Microsoft supports each version of Windows for ten years -- I don't have to pay any more money, and I still get security fixes. Even vendors that do offer extended security fixes for Linux, like Novell or Red Hat, they're going to charge every year for the privilege."
__________

The claims made by the analyst are simply false.

The bottom line is that the desktop form factor is in rapid decline. Tablets and phones are eating away at them. In addition, most stores do not offer Linux preinstalled. The consumer, a mindless sheep, uses whatever is placed in front of them.

The article is both a non-starter, and old news. What is the premise, other than FUD? Do they really think that Linux users will abandon their cherished operating system because they are at "2%" market share? No, the article is to put pressure on IT shops and software companies to abandon their Linux efforts.

Re:GPL is poison to business

[westyvw]

Sucks you are anonymous, you could learn something here.

This is the mindset that needs to die. You dont get it. Most businesses arent in the business of making software. The GPL makes complete sense, you want to enhance a software package, and contribute back to the community, of which you know will also contribute back making everyone have better software so you can get on with YOUR BUSINESS. Think of it as a global software pool that just gets better.

Dont think that can work? Here is a case study for you from real life: Business needs to get its information out to a website, the content is important, Apache, Postgres are simply tools. They pay 50,000 a year for support to a vendor. The vendor provides patches and fixes. At the end of the year, if they have support hours left over, they add "nice to haves", which enhances Apache and Postgres for everyone. There are businesses doing this today, right now, and they are more productive and have better support. Why? Because there is no lock in, they could choose a different support team next year if they weren't satisfied, and the enhancements and bugfixes are coming from everywhere on the planet.

In my work, the number of features of an application I use regularly has increased exponentially, because different business interests are paying to enhance the suite, something we couldn't afford individually.

Re:Distrust Free?

[bryan1945]

I have absolutely zero idea what you are trying to say here.

Re:GPL is poison to business

[mr_gorkajuice]

Imagine a private person being able to put a fence around the city park and arrest people for tresspassing.

I kinda thought Linux guys in particular understood the difference between physical and digital goods.
A better analogy is having the gardener of the city park help you create your own garden, which is exactly identical, and you then decide to put a fence around it.
GPL is the gardener telling you in advance that he'll only help you if you never do such a thing. Not neccesarily unreasonable, but also not a no-brainer, and completely unacceptable if you planned to wall it off all along.

Re:GPL is poison to business

[jbolden]

Also good examples.

And no I do think that's what we are talking about. What would an OS look like that had multiple GUIs? Well it would either have to have most of the complexity at layers other than the GUI. In the case of Linux when the multiple GUIs developed (and still mostly today) the CLI where the GUI is just a thin shell around the CLI like ti was for DOS. Or the complexity would be things that the end user doesn't control like in industrial use or phones.

Obviously you aren't going to have the complexity be in the GUI and have multiples. Which may have been your point but it is subtly different... that Linux is unlikely to develop a complex GUI culture (like Windows) as long as it has multiple GUIs. Which is likely true, Linux is likely to never develop a GUI culture where API's are built at the GUI level.