Slashdot Mirror
Torvalds Hasn't Given Up On Linux Desktop Domination, Will 'Wear Them Down' (cio.com)
Reader itwbennett writes: Linus Torvalds told attendees at the Embedded Linux Conference that although Linux hasn't dominated the desktop like it 'has in many other areas,' he isn't particularly disappointed and also hasn't given up on that goal. "I actually am very happy with the Linux desktop, and I started the project for my own needs, and my needs are very much fulfilled," Torvalds said. "That's why, to me, it's not a failure. I would obviously love for Linux to take over that world too, but it turns out it's a really hard area to enter. I'm still working on it. It's been 25 years. I can do this for another 25. I'll wear them down."
How exactly are you going to "wear down" people who want an Apple-like simple, out of the box solution for consumer devices? Does he picture soccer moms compiling their own drivers?
Miscreations like the Unity and Gnome 3 desktop aside, the Linux desktop has been comparable if not better in user friendliness than Windows since the late 90s.
What it lacks is a team of rabid marketing people ready to cram it down the throats of unsuspecting users who do not yet know that they need it.
Now of course there is the temptation of pandering to the masses by trying to be more like OS X or Metro, but this leads to power users leaving and average users still not using it because they do not even know that it exists.
This is sort of the "neckbeard bubble" on display. It meets *my* needs, therefore it must meet everyone's needs. (Forgetting if that's actually true, or if it meets any of their "wants" besides)
Linux on the desktop continues to become more, more friendly towards inexperienced users and more well-supported by drivers and software.
MS continues to shoot both of its own feet repeatedly with a 12 gauge shotgun with things like malicious and obfuscated Windows updates, dishonest practices in trying to force people onto Windows 10 and embedding legitimate spyware into their OS.
I think Linux will be doing great if both these trends continue.
I remember Torvalds complaining about Gnome once, saying that "if you design for idiots, only idiots will use it".
I think that's fundamentally incorrect. If you don't make things idiot-friendly, then only power users will use it, and then you will never have the market share he covets. Plus, it's a false dichotomy to posit that nothing which is idiot-friendly can actually be useful.
Many lessons have yet to be learned in Linux's third decade
Sorry Torvalds
But in 25 years, you and every other programmer out there will be obsolete. The days of humans coding computers are coming to an end. The dark ages of computing will cease a few months to a year after the first strong AI's are built. I expect that should easily happen before the next 25 years are up.
Bullshit. I've been programming professionally for over 30 years. Time and time again we were told "secretaries will be taking your jobs" and other crap like that with new technologies. Good programmers / software engineers will always be needed, with an emphasis on Good. Cut and paste Script-Kiddies might need to be worried.
It's funny (but not haha funny) how the same old crap / propaganda keeps coming around and a bunch of people keep buying into it. Kind of like the "this is the year of the Linux Desktop." Or, this year is the year the World really, Really, REALLY Ends. We promise!
Same old crap, different year.
Clearly the problem is that there aren't enough oddly named distros and mash-ups. If only those pieces of spaghetti would stick. Eventually... Sure...
As a mostly non-linux guy (only at work) who has installed and tried to use a few variants, I just find the experience to be bad. The jargon of the names alone is off putting, I am not installing Hypoxic Ringworm 14.1RC5 3.14.4. Get Mint! No, use Cinnamon Mint!
Let's face it, Linux on the desktop has too much of a resemblance to HAM radio 20-30 years ago. Cool stuff, but too inward looking, and not looking like it will have wide appeal anytime soon. Not to say those who Linux have issues (except you Steve, you know who you are). But User interface and user experience for non-technical users is apparently low on the priority list.
Linux is very powerful, but you have actually be invested in it. If you use it casually you have one of two experience. 1) You figure out hieroglyphics to grep something at the command line, and are wowed, but also realize you will likely forget the details by time you need to do it again. 2) You try to use the GUI stuff that has been layered over top, and find it is all poorly implemented facade by people who clearly don't believe in GUI's.
In the many years I have used Linux on the desktop, I have never once had to compile a driver.
Linux on the desktop is almost perfect now, and certainly leagues ahead of Windows and macOS. Unfortunately, as long as Microsoft has the power to coerce OEMs, there will be very few good Linux pre-installed boxes for sale.
Any chance of adoption is killed the first time new user gets RTFMed. Until this changes, there won't be desktop linux.
Except a tattered community full of distros that aim high but accomplish nothing.
You're actually wrong too.
1) Secretaries are doing many of the things I was "programing" for 25 years ago. The things we did as programmers are now being done by off the shelf programs, that also do other things.
2) What you are actually writing programs to do, has changed over the years, slowly so you don't notice those changes.
3) The "Year of the Linux Desktop" has already occurred, and it is Android. 90% of what people use Computers for, can be done on Android (running Linux kernel). No, it doesn't look or act like Windows, and it doesn't have to. That is a false barrier. My current Android phone has more power and Ram than the computers I used 15 years ago, does most if not all of the things those computers and does other things not even thought of.
However, you are correct in that Programmers are still needed. However, the emphasis has change.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Android won consumers, so there's hope for Linux for consumers. I seems that people care about apps, and what's on Windows that you can't get on Linux these days? Definitely not everything. But the list is growing. Video editors (e.g DaVinci) games(steam), it's all slowly coming together, so Linus definitely has a point I'd say.
And maybe he should take a lesson from Apple. You don't have to have 90 percent of the market to be successful.
I suspect that by the time we have an actual year of Linux on the desktop, the desktop will stop being relevant anyways.
And no, I'm not bad mouthing linux, I use it all the time.
I wonder what kernel the chromebook runs....
Sorry, it's when all the OEMs jump out of bed with microsoft. Nothing short of that will pave the way. 99.5% of people don't care about the desktop. Any of them are good enough. They take what comes in the box, no muss, no fuss. There isn't a desktop platform design possible that would make today's computer consumer base a purchasing decision or go to the trouble of reloading the OS.
In the meantime, chasing the hopeless, non-technical goal of 'displacing windows' leads to all sorts of mischief and degradation of the desktop experience.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Yeah, but 1.78% is not good either, barely better than Windows Vista at 1.41%, and that is more than 6 years after it was replaced by Windows 7.
Linux has been very successful for "real work", but no the desktop.
What I don't see is an acknowledgement that maybe years and years of half-heartedly trying to become a well used desktop OS and failing should result in a change of behavior. "We'll just wear them down" is an acknowledgement of deafness and stubbornness. Anyone arguing Linux has been ready for the masses for years is just delusional. Hell, I say that fully aware of the Windows 8 disaster, and the current Windows 10 mess.
Linux suffers from a bad lack of polish and inconsistencies.
But installing Windows is beyond simple and the answer to that would be yes.
You have either never:
1) Installed Windows.
2) Installed Kubuntu.
Windows is a huge pain in the ass to install. Install the base system, reboot, find the motherboard driver disk, reboot, find the motherboard network driver disk, reboot, find the mouse driver disk, reboot, find the video driver disk, reboot, repeat for almost every piece of hardware in your system. Did you later change your motherboard? Repeat the whole damned process over again.
Kubuntu is dead simple. Click next on every prompt, enter your username and password, wait until the install is done. Reboot into a fully functional system.
You and I have very different definitions of "beyond simple." Did you later change your motherboard? Just boot normally, and everything is fine.
Linux is now fabulous at "install, set a wallpaper, start a browser, type a letter."
That 90% of general use is totally and completely conquered.
The problem is that basically anyone who is still using a desktop or a laptop needs one or two unique thing more than this, or they'd just go to a tablet like so many others have done.
Everyone has their one or two "unique use cases." Very often this unique use case involves one peripheral and one piece of supporting software or application.
This is where Linux falls down. Everyone can get 90% of their needs met with Linux. But for that extra 10%, Linux either does not support the hardware/application or does so in a way that results in an inferior experience compared to other platforms (Mac, Windows).
This can't be done centrally; that's been the Linux model for 25 years (add another driver to the kernel or another userspace daemon that has to be downloaded/compiled/customized/whatever). It has to be done by third party hardware and application makers, and to date the chicken-and-egg problem remains: it's tough to get out-of-the-box Linux support when the market share is so tiny. Third parties just can't recoup their costs.
Add to this the fact that many smaller / more niche software and hardware developers only support one platform (Mac or Windows) because quite simply that's the only platform where their labor, scalability, or expertise are practically deployable, and you have the problem that the only things keeping people tethered to their desktops/laptops are also the things that they can't as easily do with Linux.
General use: Tablets > Linux
Specific productive uses: Mac+Windows > Linux
I was a Linux user for 17 years (1993 through 2010) and as I moved up the food chain in my professional life, it simply became too big a headache to continue to use it. Yes, things were always *possible* and there were always *ways to do it* but at the end of the day, for the niche needs I could plug in and/or install on Mac OS smoothy and reach full functionality in single-digit minutes, where on Linux it was the better part of hours to multiple hours in each case. Just as importantly, the Mac OS installs and device support remained stable once in place, while every time I ran an update in Linux it threatened to destabilize all of the devices/applications I relied on, after which more troubleshooting time would be required.
I was very hesitant to switch away from Linux at first, but now I can't imagine spending that amount of time on maintaining my work computing systems. It's just not on. I couldn't go back.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Apple designs for idiots and only the idiots will buy the devices and pay extra for that privilege.
To put that a different way: they're a fashion company. Which, by the way, is a great way to make money. Last I saw, 2 of the 10 richest people in the world were fashion moguls.
And, no, it's not just the idiots: some people get more value from social signalling than they would from what the device actually does.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Ubuntu tries its best to be Windows-like, and the level of polish really isn't that bad these days (I'd say it was better than Windows 8, for example, if you were trying it out and knew Windows 7).
However, people who really like Windows already have Windows, and don't see a compelling reason to switch. Canonical would do better to aim for 10% market share, with something that stands apart from Apple and MS UIs. You can be newb-friendly while pushing back against the current mobile-inspired trends and define your own style that way, for example.
The situation with drivers has gotten a lot better, but there's still room to improve there as well.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I think most of you miss the essential points of personal computing entirely when debating this issue. Apple and MS represent the defacto standards that define that market, but those companies aren't going to spell out for FOSS hobbyists a laundry list of what draws non-technical users to a platform.
People who have paid attention to PCs over the decades realize that:
1. Users will ignore complexity they don't need, as long as the UI is _consistent_ and recognizable. Even OS X UI can be fairly complex, and Apple configures it in a way that complexity is tucked away under 'Advanced' buttons or ingeniously in the filesystem (think: plist editor).
As for consistency -- look at how Windows users are willing to rebel against MS upgrade paths if the changes are too severe. It can be argued that MS waits a very long time before springing unfamiliar paradigms on its users who may still reject the changes.
2. Real platforms are a comfort zone for both users and app developers, because the platform must bring those two groups together. Lack of defined reference hardware and OEM partnerships hurt. Lack of feature stability is very painful. In the PC desktop space, Linux is an _unstable_ platform, which is not the kind of place a developer uses to court potential customers.
2a. Real PC platforms aim to _convert_ their users into developers. They offer standard IDEs that are both rich and easy to get started in. They treat the issue of tool choice as one for more advanced developers, instead of burdening beginners with a whirlwind of confusion. There is always a preferred high level language on offer, as well.
Beginners will also go elsewhere when they realize that their first efforts at useful programming don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of running on another person's "Linux" machine without a lot of extra pain. Not being able to easily share/show their work to teachers, classmates, friends, family, bosses, etc. is a dealbreaker (more accurately, it breaks the _spirit_ and ambition of pursuing ideas on that quasi-platform).
2c. Real platforms draw sharp distinctions between app developers and system developers. Saddling app devs with the expectations of system devs leads to a pecking order where the concerns of focused app devs aren't taken seriously.
3. People will not get excited for your OS if most of your announced plans revolve around making things more (and more) _modular_ so that more and more projects can plug their own implementations of whatever component you can imagine into the system. This is sacrificing vertical integration of concrete hardware (or even software) features in favor of horizontal integration which demands unachievably perfect abstraction and usually results in slipshod appearance and performance. Desktop Environments should not be the disembodied, interchangeable "heads" of PC; the OS vendor needs to "own it".
TL;DR, when you're missing any outward appearance of recognizability and feature stability, and most of the features and developer efforts are for the benefit of fourth-party system devs wanting to plug in or replace commonly used features, and no one knows quite the right way to install independently-produced software nor how to get started writing it, and there isn't even a logo-licensing program for compatible hardware, and no one even knows what the minimum hardware feature set should be nor where they can look at a reference implementation.... I'll just leave it there.
Is there any hope? I think Canonical has some of the right ideas. (So does Google, except their offerings are really mainframe terminals not PCs.)