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."
After just 25 short years, we've accomplished nothing!
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.
The name of the system you're thinking about is GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels. Torvalds has nothing to do with it. Therefore, it's irrelevant what he thinks about the future of this system as he did not contribute to its development, only to the development of its kernel, which is only one of many components that make an operating system.
Kudos, amigo!
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.
If anything is going to win mindshare among the general public, it's going to be cutting-edge, triple-A gaming on Linux.
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.
Torvalds is being silly. Whether Year of Linux on the Desktop ever happens is out of his hands because it has nothing to do with the kernel itself. The average end user doesn't know what a kernel is or have a reason to care. Android is Linux? Who cares? If Android switch to BSD as the underlying OS tomorrow, nobody would care in the slightest as long as all the apps still worked
And that's the key: "it's the apps, stupid". Until someone, whether the open source community or proprietary software businesses, builds a Linux app ecosystem that appeals to ordinary people, the Year of Linux on the Desktop will not happen. And, at this rate, it will never happen.
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.
I used Linux for my desktop for about five or six years. I got tired of the perpetual beta aspect, especially when it came to always being a step behind on new hardware integration. I learned a ton, though. It seems that Linux's best chance to take over the desktop is Android. As tablets gradually morph into laptop equivalents, Linux may very well become a top desktop OS, only nobody will focus on the Linux part.
When GNOME or KDE declare themselves to be a "Linux-based OS" and act accordingly. That means drop official BSD support, stop working with the distros and start competing directly with them. My prediction is that whichever desktop does that would take more ground in one year than they have in the last 5-10 years. It would not only give them focus and tighter integration, but would give them a powerful rallying point and cry for others to join them.
In some respects, this is why I am bullish on the long term prospects of Ubuntu. My only gripe is that they used GTK instead of Qt.
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.
As he said, it is definitely now possible. I have been using a Linux desktop at work for about 2 years now. It's integrated with our corporate Active Directory, Exchange, windows file shares, etc. The printers work, all my peripherals work, everything I need works. That being said, the process isn't for the faint of heart and is nowhere near stable enough that I'd deploy it to my users. So the next steps are clear: more automation, ease of configuration, and stability. Basically quality control and interface design work, which is not something the Linux community traditionally excels at. I am optimistic though.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The "year of the Linux Desktop" has already come and gone, it was 2008 with ASUS' EEE PC popularity. Even for a while after Windows XP EEE PCs were being sold people would still opt for the Linux one (as it gave you 20GB vs 12GB for the same price) and at least give it a try. I had a 900/20GB model and the Xandros desktop was not bad, especially for beginners, but for the rest of us you really had to enable the "advanced mode" which was a full KDE 3 desktop (yay!). I am not sure why it did not catch on more after so many people where exposed to it, I guess the lack of something that is a *real* replacement for MS Office might have been a factor and possibly the fact that it was not easy to switch to the full KDE 3 desktop (KDE at its finest - made a great replacement for windows) if you were not a beginner computer user, just a Linux newbie and the default tab interface was too restrictive but you wouldn't know how to switch from it.
Anyway, I don't think there will be another chance like that.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Gnome, KDE, or Enlightenment. Any other prospects? Maybe the Nazis should build the desktop into systemd, like a modern operating system.
This is so Linus.
Who is Linus "wearing down" here?
This speaks to the inherent mistake core Linux developers make that keeps them from accomplishing their (25 year) goal.
**Users want to use the Linux desktop**...but it's not designed well enough to meet their ongoing needs like an M$ or iOS OS does.
Even if they don't know Linux exists, they know they hate Windows 10 and would use an alternative, esp a free alternative.
The user base for the Linux desktop is there...the problem is the Linux desktop isn't good enough.
Thank you Dave Raggett
I've been told for years by Indian recruiters with thick accents that I need to know the "Red Hat GUI thing" to qualify for a Linux system admin position. I've always responded that I'm not a GUI but I know the command line quite well. Because they couldn't check off the "Red Hat GUI thing" item on their checklist, I never got an interview. So I finally built a spare system, installed the current version of Red Hat Linux, and discovered... Gnome. KDE was also available. But no "Red Hat GUI thing" that the recruiters kept telling me that I needed to know. Does the "Red Hat GUI thing" even exist?
Desktop vs Server ?
MOBILE.. CLOUD..
Now where does Linux need to conquer??
-- Mike Greaves
I have setup Mint for relatives.
It works great for what they need.
No problems with drivers, compliling, etc;
This isn't 2000... or 2004... or 2009...
The issue consistently turns out to be Office.
Basic computer users who take classes for such things inevitably have to use MS Office or get trained on it.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Well, if Linux on the desktop developers can get their act together before Windows 7 expires, they may well get all the computers that I personally administrate. I have decided Linux is going to be in competition even with Apple for my patronage, but I'm definitely not doing anything with Microsoft so long as the terms of their agreement dictate that they own everything done through their OS. I just won't have any part of it.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
When talking about the 'linux compatibility' they described it as 'it feels like linux because it is Linux!'
So either the person writing didn't know specifically what Linux was, or Windows 10 is secretly a Linux distro. I assume the latter.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Well, Ubuntu, specifically... in Windows 10.
I think the numbers do say that Windows 10 dominates the desktop already, so Bash is going to sneak right in on the next major update.
It's been 25 years. I can do this for another 25.
Arlo Guthrie would be proud.
Bugrit! Millenium hand and shrimp!
I guess the biggest problem with linux desktop is that choices are too many and change quickly. I started using fedora from college days and still do but I realized that my enthusiasm to troubleshoot a problem and learn new things is slowly dying out. Recently, I wanted to convert a png to jpg image. there was no default app to do it. come on, how hard is it. I had to install gimp to do it. I spent a good 10 mins trying to convert it with a default app. I could use the command line but didnt want so installed gimp. These are small things but make helluva difference.
I'll be almost dead, but I can hardly wait.
Good point... for those users that just use their phone to interact with "apps" and those few places outside of walled gardens that they may travel to.
However, where "The Desktop" is still relevant, in much of the "Enterprise" and other places that need the use of a desktop computer, a chance/choice for Linux to shine would be a thing of wonder.
Especially in light of recent MS Windows (ahem... choke... cough) developments
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
If he wants the average user to have to learn a single command line, it won't ever be mainstream.
Just look at the recent XScreensaver controversy. As long as there are neckbeards wanting to ruin the Linux experience, it will stay obscure. Even chromebooks are more popular than Linux.
I think the more likely scenario is that Linux Desktop won't happen until Torvalds retires. He doesn't abide stupid people very well and you need to design software for very stupid people to operate in the desktop space.
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).
For several years, Android was not a desktop-oriented Linux distribution. The stock* operating system forced on users a window management policy of all maximized all the time. Say you're reading a web page, and you want to jot down some notes about it. To do this on current stock Android, you have to switch to the web browser, then switch back to the note-taking application (which completely hides the web page you were looking at), switch back to the web browser (which completely hides the notes you were taking), etc. Though a web browser can run on a phone, as can a note-taking application, and a tablet's display is more than twice as big as that of a phone, current stock Android on a tablet refuses to let the user show them side-by-side. In fact, it was a requirement in the Android CDD that the OS never change the application's window size after installation. (Only CDD-compliant devices are eligible to be shipped with Google Play Store and Google Play Services.) Only very recently was this requirement toned down in the CDD, allowing Remix OS and the forthcoming Android N to begin to work around this.
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.
But how many of those things can it show at once? And why can't the included web browser load more than about three pages in tabs and switch among them without the page reloading (and losing form data) when I return to a tab? I can manage a dozen tabs in Firefox with no reloading on a 1 GB laptop running Xubuntu (a Linux distribution using X11 and Xfce).
* Samsung is not stock. Though some apps included my Galaxy Tab A support Samsung's proprietary multi-window mode, not all apps do, and the ones that don't disappear from Recents when I try to activate multi-window mode. For example, the Stack Exchange app does not.
You GO, Linus!!!
What with the privacy nightmare that *is* Windows 10, I see more and more people abandoning that spyware-laden crap for Linux. Ever since I retired from using/supporting MS products back in 2010, I've quit using MS products on my families systems and NObody here misses Windows.. To keep myself busy, I started, with a few friends/ex-coworkers, a small (very small) business doing "computer janitorial services", AND migrating an ever-increasing number of people
over to Linux. Since Windows 10 came out we've done quite a few migrations for folks who bought a new system during the holidays, learned about what a
nightmare Windows 10 is, came to us for an alternative, which *is* Linux (X/L/KUbuntu/Mint).
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
I've been periodically installing Linux and playing with it as far back as 1999. I'd tinker for a bit then go back to Windows because I always needed something plus games.
It's gotten better and better over time. Gaming was the last holdout. In the last year the push from valve and other companies to bring serious gaming to Linux has paid out.
I realized recently that EVERY SINGLE GAME that I have played for the last couple of years is on Linux, and 90% of what I want to play is on or coming to Linux. That's without even talking about WINE or PlayOnLinux. Gaming gap closed for me and gamers of my type.
So I installed Ubuntu. It was actually easier and quicker to get running than Windows. I didn't need to use a terminal once to get everything I needed working. And I haven't come across anything that I need to do that I can't do after 6 weeks on it. This time, I have zero plans to go back to Windows.
Linux came too late to overthrow the Microsoft incumbency which had been around for something like ten years, dominating the business market that defined desktops which in those days were relatively expensive for casual home use. (The desktop business market was essentially handed to Microsoft by IBM.) The chance for *nix was lost early in the fighting between System V and BSD (which spawned Linux) and the shortsightedness of AT&T (which was far from alone in ignoring desktops).
There was no equivalent incumbency for smart phones which is why Apple and Android were able to compete more successfully. It's always been and always going to be too late for Linux since the desktop market has matured and even shrunk somewhat with the increasing functionality of smart phones.
The typical desktop user wants:
Seamless web browsing including media.
Seamless email, contacts and calendaring.
Gaming. The good stuff.
Movies.
USB gadgets that just work without discovering that required software is windows only.
Most of the pain around these things aren't Linus's fault. We can blame Adobe et al for media issues. We can blame Microsoft for exchange dominance and interoperability issues. We can blame AMD for the Radeon mess, and a whole host of companies for game incompatibilities. We can blame the MPAA for the DeCSS mess. We can blame gadget vendors for not going to extra mile for linux support too.
We can also observe that in many ways things do get better. Outside the workplace email is web-based, and aside from commerce (tickets, purchase receipts) and password resets, increasingly less important. Many games work under wine, and I hold out hope for Steam to further that cause. Movies work. The USB subsystem is mature and most important gadgets get some form of support.
I remember the days of multi-hour kernel compilations to try and get hardware working. I remember having fun getting 2D acceleration working with the S3 Virge DX. I remember *weeks* of fun trying to get the Soundblaster AWE64 working well. But at this point, I can't even remember the last time I had to compile the kernel for desktop use. I don't even need to compile modules to host VMs any more. That's progress.
However, the lag can still be frustrating. We still get treated as 2nd class citizens too often, and I don't feel that there is a great advocate to help fix that issue. It seems to me that companies have better economic incentive to get linux working well in the server space and to contribute to software running on top of it. Linus cares emphatically about the kernel but doesn't seem too interested in being a voice in the desktop world. That's unfortunate.
Linux will NEVER achieve desktop domination. Let me explain why!
Too much fanboi developers that think that a machine only needs to be usable at THEIR level. A machine that is a mystery to its user is considered low brow technology no matter how much time and "expertise" it took to create it.
I develop code and my very first concern is how usable my interface is for my customer. A well designed interface in one that requires NO guides or manuals to operate the underlying engine that people are using to do work. Yes intuitiveness can be difficult to achieve, but it is also rarely given any significant thought either.
The people in the Linux world are wastes of development existence that does not care about people despite their constant whining to beat the "inferior" Microsoft OS where the other people go.
Everything right down to the last bit must be administratively controllable by both GUI and CLI which should always work through an API and NEVER natively.
yes, this is a lot of work, but will be the bare minimum requirement for you to topple Microsoft and until you sign up for it, just be complacent in your pathetic little place you carved out in the computing world.
I do hope that Steam OS takes off and that another PC platform can de-thrown the terrible Microsoft, but you guys are just not doing yourselves or anyone other than hobbyists any favors. Please understand that your shit stinks just like Microsoft's!
At which point your OS will not matter as much as the services you choose to use.
The problem there is that Linux does not have good modern services to link it to the insanely popular mobile markets. Only Apple really has that and they are weak, MS should soon take that from Apple when it integrates Android and notifications (along with Linux bash). MS is definitely going to pull ahead when they do that and I don't see where Google/Facebook or anybody else has any suitable way to sync android to Windows in anything that resembles a full featured effort.
MS will be the first company to try to seriously sync Android to the desktop at the OS level because Google hates you all and just wants to mine your data and sell you ads, not make awesome apps. Google needs to get their shit together and stop trying to be Mircosoft in the 90s with the whole free love hardware thing and allowed alterations of their OS by OEMs whom seem to have no real concept of internal branding, no less a concept of the Android brand in general. Even MS has more control of their platform. Google's approach is just insane because the phone market is the only mobile market that really matters. The others are all interesting, but there is no real money in the mobile markets without the phone market leading the charge.
I think Google will be in for a rude wake up call when people start to take another look at Windows 10 mobile in another year or so when it's more or less out of beta. Google doesn't realize how much people hate Android because of the whole OEM customization and bloatware. When people think of their smartphone limitations, they often think Google because it runs Android, not Motorola or Verizon. Google gets most of the hate for OEM's failures, but to some degree that's what they get for being pussies and letting phone makers push them around still.
Anyway the point is that it's all going to be universal apps and browser extensions. MS has .NET so well flushed out now they can integrated themselves into any architecture or kernel they want. There is no more portable full platform than Windows 10. It might be a tad harder to port than a linux command line, but the fact is linux has no portable framework. It's just an OS and applications and the portability is defined by how portable the varies languages are between architectures.
MS uses CLR and .NET so they won't have that problem anymore and while Linux can too the reality is they are far less prepared for the demands of modern desktop users. Not having a voice assistance and mobile syncing all nicely integrated is soon going to make your desktop look very dated.
I'd also like to add that while Windows 10 is not perfect, it's pretty good. It's prob as good as Windows 2000 and XP were in terms of setting a new level of what MS can do. I run Windows 10 with Cortana and chrome with lots of extensions on computers with 2 gigs ram and it runs fine and boots fast and power saving stuff generally works better. I was using Linux Mint and Linux just isn't going anywhere right now while Windows has a lot of exciting new features and Apple has a pretty solid user experience.
Linux has... uh... security most ppl don't need? Windows and Apple are more secure than ever so that Linux advantage is getting a bit old. The low price.. eh.. who cares. Your OS is worth 150 bucks or so.. you will be using it for 10+ years probably oh AND right now just about any Windows 7 key you can find will net you a free Windows 10 license.
So what does any Linux distro do that I need vs Windows 10. Not spy on me? Ok, but I'm comfortable that I can turn that off and I'm not spied on enough OR just leave it on because I have nothing to hide that I would do on my Windows OR Linux personal desktop. So.. in a lot of ways Windows 10 is perfect because I'm that much more aware that i'm being tracked.
So I could use Linux and Duckduckgo, but you lose a lot of features like that, especially with mobile platform integration being an ideal end
After all, we gonna see linux on every desktop once M$ rolls out linux bash on win10.
Heck.. I never thought this could ever happen.
Systemd is going to kill Linux on the desktop like it's killing Linux in the datacentre.
nd why can't the included web browser load more than about three pages in tabs and switch among them without the page reloading (and losing form data) when I return to a tab?
How about Netscape Navigator on today's Websites? I compared my phone to a computer from 10-15 years ago. My phone does more than "Desktop" computers from that era. This is about "Linux on the desktop", not comparing Chrome on Android vs Chrome on Windows (or Chromebooks or Mac).
My point, has little to do with App management, it has to do with tasks done during the age of "the year of Linux on the desktop" discussions were taking place. We're there, and people like yourself like to compare today with today, and not yesterday's desktops (when we were asking about Linux on the desktop) and today's Android platform.
Would you rather have a Pentium IV running Windows XP or an Nexus 6P. I know which one I'd rather use.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
backing life extension and age reversing technologies, I don't think a 75 year old will keep up with technology.
Not with the Gnome, Unity and KDE clowns, who insist in repeating Microsoft's mistakes well after Microsoft. To the Linux GUI designers - get your heads out of your arses. Stop insisting in a single GUI for all devices. Stop dumbing it down. Stop getting in the way of work done. Stop using so many resources for Mickey Mouse stuff. Stop being the star of the show - a good desktop should be unobtrusive, nimble and out of the way of the user. Finally, stop copying Microsoft - come up with something new, original and better - if you can.
The Linux desktop is perfectly fine. Linus's attitude is perfect. Linus (and most devs) make tools for themselves. Then they end up with users, and the users are excited about adding some features, and those sometimes get added.
The issue- though it isn't really one- is that when it comes to GUIs, this method seems to take a long time to converge. Probably because users are fundamentally confused about GUIs, and there's a whole bunch of layers involved too, but I don't really know for sure why.
I think GNOME was on its way to being a standard Linux desktop, and by choosing this really bizarre ideological something, they shattered the community. I happily use XFCE now, but it is clear that there's a lot of hunger for certain types of desktops- to the point that packaging a good desktop is pretty much worth a distro to most people, instead of every GUI being expected on every desktop. At some point, something will be able to unite that group enough- one of the desktops will be "good enough" for most people, most especially including technical power users- and then you'll see that become more standard.
The splintering of these users has let everyone have what they want, but the cost is that any problem you have is experienced by a much smaller pool of people than if everyone was on the same thing. This makes the problem live a lot longer than otherwise, etc.
So Linux doesn't just have a good desktop solution, it has several- and obviously it takes longer to polish a bunch of solutions than it takes to polish a single one.
Linus has apparently admitted he sucks at UI design.
So why wouldn't he empower a group of acknowledged UX/UI experts to design a "next standard" desktop UI on top of Linux.
It should be based on simplicity of use, lack of need for manual etc.
It's not that most people are stupid. It's that they don't have time to become an expert in every little detail of their tools. They are focussed on higher-level tasks and want basic operations to just work smoothly, consistently, and with a minimum of unnecessary choices requiring arcane knowledge.
There could easily be built in to such a UI an "Escape to raw Linux land" mode that replaces the easy, choice-free, just works UI with an ultimately configurable land of terminals and bare X-windows and such. It could have a warning pop-up, that said "Beware: Here be woolly mammoths! Enter at own risk."
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
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
I'll tell you why it's not ready, from my own personal experience these 4 points sum up the issues:
That's a silly question.
It's pretty hard to SMASH things with a screwdriver. You can only screw them.
Obviously a hammer is the best tool.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
ITT: m$ shills. m$ shills everywhere.
Every new version of Windows is worst or just as bad as the last. Just letting Microsoft continue on as it has will produce a Windows so unusable that Linux will be the only answer.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
I'm completely down with growing it, making it a more robust community, and making it be used more in standard industries/homes around the globe. But having the goal of "dominating" the desktop is retarded. Especially since it isn't going to happen in his lifetime.
Also, consistently IS a virtue. Changing somebody's default DE in the upgraded/newer version, or massively changing the current default DE is not such a good thing.
One of the great things about 'nix is you generally have a choice in such matters, but it seems that lately a lot of that is being eroded or encroached upon
The Linux kernel is ready. It runs on everything from cell phones to supercomputers and everything in between, so unless he's starting a new project all he can do is sit back and watch. Not that Linux really needs a new DE, there's only so many ways you can start/switch/organize applications and if you look through Win95 to Win10 you're not exactly seeing a revolution. Nor did I see anyone really asking for all these widgets and portlets or system integration of contact management, notifications and all that into the desktop itself.
The OS is a means to run applications. And say what you want, but there's a lot more strange needs than there are OSS developers with an itch to scratch. Not to mention the "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" attitude that creates towards users. Without the Play store, Android would be nothing. AOSP + F-Droid would be roughly as popular as Firefox OS or Linux on the desktop. I'm not going to pretend that Angry Birds for $1 changes the world, but thousands of apps like that do. Open source wins by the long game, slowly improving stealing users and lowering the premium they can charge.
People don't want to make the big jump. Linux is too much new, all at once. And unless you're arrogant or delusional, they won't find good replacement for 100% of their softare, maybe 70%-90% if they're lucky often those are a deal killer. Paid/proprietary software is so obviously not welcome that only a few have dared try. Steam did but it's 0.85% of all Steam users now. In February it was 0.91%, January 0.95%, December 0.96%, November 0.98%... More games, less users that's not a trend which is likely to continue unless Valve can make Steam Machines popular.
If anyone can bring Linux mainstream on the desktop I don't think it's any of the existing open source distros, simply by nature of being just that. I'm guessing it'd be something like Chromebooks, if only Google would go on a full frontal assault on Microsoft. But then they're happy as long as people use Google's services, which they seem to do anyway so I can see why they're not in any hurry. After all Microsoft has a pretty big war chest that you don't want to pick a fight with for no good reason. If you're a business that is, OSS don't play by those rules.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
ugh, I used a Linux Desktop for a few years, and I kept on having all sorts of weird problems, problems with printing, lack of webcam functionality. With Windows 7, most applications, and peripherals, just run, even if the Desktop is bloated. I guess Linux could have multiple Desktop Environments, ie. one good for peripherals, and stuff, another for Word processing, printing, scanning, email, web browsing, and security, another Desktop Environment for computer programming, etc.
I bet Linux could dominate the laptop and mobile devices by being more efficient on power usage than Windows. It is already dominant on the smart phones and tablets via Android. I run a Toshiba laptop and just wish it supported a Linux version - what seems to be missing is device drivers.
Lets have a pole - how many people use Linux exclusively for their main Desktop at home. As it's virtually impossible to avoid that other OS in academia and at work, as it's the standard and to prevent viruses, so I've been told :)
http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html
When Windows 7 extended support ends and there is no Linux to switch to, then there never will be. That's when people will consider Linux for the last time, and if it's not ready then, abandon the PC as we know it. Once the cloud has them, they're never coming back. Vendor lock-in is child's play compared to that beast.
"It's the financial models, stupid."
I hate to be rude about it it. If I were a diplomat rather than a techie, I would reword that to say the financial models are stupid. Microsoft has proven that it is NOT the quality of the software that determines software dominance, but the characteristics of the business model. LOTS of details available upon (polite) request, but I want to keep this short, so let me switch my focus to a possible solution. If you have a better idea, let's see it, but the bottom line is that NONE of the existing financial models for Linux has worked well in comparison to the competing models.
We should have charity brokerages that allow us to pool our small donations to create and SUPPORT better (Linus-based) software (including the OS itself). New features and ongoing costs would be broken down on a project basis, and each project would only commit when enough donors agree the project is good enough to support. The brokerage will hold the money until each project is funded, but will earn a commission for the funded project by making sure the project proposals are complete. That includes making sure critical things like testing and success criteria are not forgotten, and in additional the brokerage would be responsible for reporting on the project's relative success to the donors. The "end result" would be to let your name appear on the donor tab of the documentation for that feature (or for its ongoing cost project), not personal profit--but we would ALL benefit from better software (and without such monsters as Microsoft).
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I think you misspelled "... to strong-arm OEMs into installing it by default, to the exclusion of all other OSs."
It has been very long time since that has been legal --- and from the beginning anyone could see that the OEMs were crying all the way the bank and that sympathy for them was misplaced.
I would have given up after 6 months.
How about Netscape Navigator on today's Websites? I compared my phone to a computer from 10-15 years ago.
A 10-year-old PC would be running Firefox. A 15-year-old PC would be running Firefox after a RAM upgrade; I did exactly that on a Dell PC purchased in the fourth quarter of 2000.
My phone does more than "Desktop" computers from that era.
PCs and Macs from 1987 were doing multi-window multitasking in Windows 2 and MultiFinder. This is a feature that stock Android won't get until N.
people like yourself like to compare today with today [...] Would you rather have a Pentium IV
By "1 GB laptop" I meant a Dell Inspiron mini 1012 purchased in 2010, which runs a traditional Linux desktop environment. It has a 1.6 GHz Atom N450 CPU, which is roughly comparable in performance to a 1.6 GHz Pentium 4 CPU.
I use nothing but Linux and simply could not stand using any Microsoft products. Linux is fast and stable and can be as secure as you want it to be.
I recently switched full time to Kubuntu because Windows 10 shows Microsoft going down a very worrying path. I.E. Basic Telemetry is not optional in consumer versions. And even more worrying any attempts to disable Windows 10 spying will be reversed by a automatic update see here http://bgr.com/2015/12/01/windows-10-privacy-preferences/
So it seems you are the product in WIndows 10. People like to point out that this is similar to how Google and Facebook operate their web services. Ignoring the fact that those are web services that you can easily choose not to use. Whilst Windows 10 is the dominate desktop operating system that runs your software that you may have spent thousand of dollars on. Not so easy to switch away from that.
They are also doing advertising in Windows 10 as that's what live tiles in the start menu really are. Currently most of them are just cross promoting things like Microsoft's other web services and offerings I.E. Get Office app Get Skype App and Xbox and of course Windows store. But there are also straight up ads right now. Right now if I open the Windows 10 start menu I see an ad for Flip Board, Minecraft, and I heart radio. I assume Flip Board and Clear Channel media paid for those ads.
So here's the deal, Microsoft's monopoly on the Desktop has been historically very bad for users. It's allowed them to produce shoddy software with little real impact on their bottom line. It's now allowing them to go in a direction that will result in a constant barrage of ads driven by data they have collected about you being built right in to the OS. If this keeps going the way it is soon your desktop will look like the TV screen from Idiocracy just a bunch of ads with a little view port in the middle. Microsoft is not trustworthy nor a good steward of this defacto monopoly. It is really up to us tech types to start the revolution by moving to an open platform like Linux where there can be real competition on the desktop between competing distributions. After all we are the ones that have the technical chops to easily move. Once adoption is up better driver and software support will follow. All though personally in my recent switch on a MSI gaming laptop I had 0 issues.
My move has gone without a hitch I am writing this from Kubuntu 15.10 all my daily work is fine. I have VMWare player setup for the Windows apps I need. And when I logged on to Steam thanks to Steam OS there were 107 games already in my steam Library I could install and play. So I have not missed Microsoft's Advertising System Windows 10 at all. It's time to switch.
Depending on where you work, I'm in an office of techies right now and about half of them have brought their OS X device in with them. Thats a lot of people running desktop BSD. I was under the impression that desktop *nix is here, it just wasn't delivered under a GNU license. If the big difference between OS X and GNU offerings is the Windowing manager, then it seems pretty clear who is letting down 'Linux on the desktop' effort.
I gave up on Torvalds a long time ago. He's more like an abrasive blowhard these days than a serious community leader.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
It depends how one looks at it. Technically Linux is a perfectly fine desktop OS, I'd contend that as far as user friendliness on the desktop goes, Windows or OSX have nothing on desktop distros such as Ubuntu or Fedora. Many organisations have deployed Linux desktops and are happy with them. The general public uses Windows (and the rest OSX) not because they conclude that these are better desktop OSes, but because they come preinstalled. People just regard them as being an integral part of the computer they buy. I know an otherwise perfectly sensible person who had a Windows laptop, used it every day, was happy with it until the day the came to ask me to help her because she would like to buy "a computer that has Paintshop Pro". After some discussion I understood that she never realised she could actually install new windows apps on her laptop. Thus the point is, the general population doesn't use Windows or Linux. They use "a computer" and don't generally care (or even know) what OS and software it runs. Linux's problem in that area is not the OS itself, but compatibility. LibreOffice is nice and well and its MS Office compatibility is usually good, but people send each other photos as MS Word documents with pictures embedded in them through OLE... Until LibreOffice can open such stuff flawlessly every time with 100% reliability, until the most popular game of the day runs on Linux (without having to deal with GL driver conundrums) and until mouse pads sold in your local supermarket are advertised as being "linux compatible", there will be no Linux on the desktop for the wide public. Linus made the OS technically capable of making a great desktop, but this is not something he can change.
That's a rather vague sig. Which aspects of America do you want to stop? (I'm curious if they overlap the aspects of America that I want to stop.)
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
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).
Android builds on the Linux kernel. But it is unmistakably a Google creation (with all the good and bad that comes with that) and not a traditional community-oriented Linux distribution. Android remains focused on the app-oriented mobile world of touch-based UI and the 4 1/2 to 6 inch screen.
That means "Torvalds needs != majority needs" in Pascal-style lingo. I know many know this, but it is written that way to illustrate the different expectations people can have.
Many want a dumbed-down desktop. I don't want it, Torvalds would not even lose his time laughing at it, but the simple fact is that people want it -- and will pay for it.
And that's what "professional" corporations will provide them with. Case in point: Windows come with a stupid option known as "Hide known extensions" or something like that. That means things like:
cvitae.txt.gz looks like cvitae.txt
That looks simpler, no doubt. A lot of folks don't even know what a .gz is. So almost everyone will look at a systems which "simplifies" file listings and find it wonderful. The problem is wanting to open cvitae.txt with notepad and just getting a garbage blob instead of ASCII chars, because it is in reality cvitae.txt.gz with the last extension hidden.
Why Android was launched as one visible task window? Because it's simpler and people like it. Two- or multi-panel apps? It's necessary now as a selling point, but I bet it's hard to sell it... most people probably will do one thing at a time.
We'll never have the desktop we want... because nobody wants it. We may have something like Windows or Mac in the future, but it will make us cringe upon seeing it. It will be a Pyrrhic victory for Linux, one that we won't be able to celebrate.
But if we can make the underlying machinery common and just change to outer interface, that may allow us to enter an advanced interface mode, with all the benefits we're used to.
Which might be the Windows strategy now by adopting things like Bash... :-/
it has to do with tasks done during the age of "the year of Linux on the desktop" discussions were taking place.
Which is pointless. It's not like they were saying "hey in 10-15 years we want common Linux devices to be able to do what we are doing on our desktops now". Saying "hey we're 10-15 years behind" is not a success.
I have setup Mint for relatives.
For as far back as I can remember, every Linux conversion story posted to Slashdot begins like this --- and it always ends well.
But failure is often more revealing.
I don't have any relations who use Linux and I doubt I could summon a geek out of the woods even if I baited the trap with free beer and one of the gals from Twin Peaks. I began with Windows 95, settled in to stay, and currently run Win 10; if I come across something interesting in F/OSS, I simply download the Windows port.
For instance KDE 4 is about to be replaced and will die, likely - or has been replaced already depending on your distro.
KDE 5 might have good potential, it looks good on screenshots. Yet it would be nice to have some announcement that if I choose to convert to it, then it will be still around in ~12 years. Even if a Qt6 comes out then perhaps it's time to not care about it, the desktop and file manager / core apps can stay on Qt5?
Linux is awesome, Open Office still is akin to BBN Slate from the 1990s. Open Office is a very primitive tool and that is what is holding Linux down.
https://distrowatch.com/
Mint, Debian, openSUSE, Arch are great on the desktop. They install quick and you can easily install them into virtual machines with zero risk. Play with them all you want until you get familiar with them. If you mess up a config in the virtual machine you can just start over.
Google search for Virtualbox.
You can also use live distro's and install nothing at all. Fanboys like to pretend you have to pick one or the other. You can use both. Windows is global spyware but maybe you don't care for games. Use all of it until Windows goes do-do bird.
Try these live distros:
KNOPPIX
Kali
Blackarch
Tails
You can burn them onto CD's, DVD's, flash drives, SD cards, etc. You can also boot into the .iso's in a Virtualbox virtual machine without installing anything at all.
Until the big game studios can develop games with the same or less effort for Linux than for Windows, and get an equal or superior product, gamers will be forced to stay with Windows (even if it means to dual boot).
Currently, games ported to Linux are 1/2 the framerate with the same hardware, lower in graphic quality, or have some kind of unacceptable tradeoff. It's not the developer's fault, it is due to a lack of a competitive open-source directx alternative. Even games that were developed in opengl (Kerbal) or java (Minecraft) from the get-go are inferior when run on Linux.
The open source community has a very unhealthy lack of appreciation for the level of quality its commercial competitors achieve.
Your last bit about monoculture is interesting but I fear it is not improving.
Sure Windows has less of a stranglehold, but while on the desktop we're relatively free, it's mobile (phones) that has turned into a monoculture that gets stronger by the year.
I'm pissed that Firefox OS has died, which makes me question the future of any other free mobile OS, such as Ubuntu Phone. It's awesome how Firefox OS was always that red headed bastard child the Slashdot user base would always shit and piss loudly on, but Android always gets a free pass.
It's as if they care about CPU hungry programs and video games to run on a cell phone (what you need Java and Native run-times for), whereas others are more worried about basic functionality and basic security or not being eavesdropped on, which Android does NOT guarantee.
In fact running Windows is better than running Android : Windows is proprietary and has security updates, Android is proprietary and has no security updates.
I guess Android users can rationalize their using Android because they hardly have other choices (like desktop computing mid 90s), or they feel smug because they chose the right device, or they feel smart because they used a security exploit against their device to "root" it, or they crawled through shady forums to flashrootjailzapbreakburn the custom JZXHZYY "ROM" (I thought btw that ROM meant "read-only memory").
Yes, but when paradigm changes, some features are lost. With horse riding and carriages replaced by cars, the feature of horses knowing their way home and taking you home if you are drunk, injured or dead - was lost. Self driving cars have still not materialized after over a century.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I think the #1 reason why Linux is still hard to adopt is due to the sheer number of options in the form of Distros. I can think of more Distros of Linux off the top of my head than there are companies that manufacture computers. Alot of these companies are doing great things, but i feel the effort is far to spread out between distributions to make a mark in the market space.
This coupled with the complexity in comparison to Windows and OSX would be enough to drive away almost any casual user.
Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
And neither is my family I guess? It's getting harder and harder to find that "Everyone has their one or two "unique use cases." " I can't remember the last time I came across one. I can't think of anything I can't get done on Linux. Editing home movie clips together, publishing them online and distributing it on blu ray to family, doing vector illustration and animation, home theater PC and media streaming for other TVs and portable devices on WiFi, printing, browsing, composing documents, composing music (rosegarden is brilliant), home closed circuit camera, I use it for everything every day and so does family, I think that the Linux desktop is really hitting every target here.
Twinstiq, game news
Man same here except this is my wife's friends that were asking to get switched over, every time people tell her about the latest Windows headache she isn't in that loop and doesn't chime in or can't relate, finally they see her laptop and ask what she's using and then say "where can I get that?" I make some money on the side doing installs sometimes and it's been working out great so far.
Twinstiq, game news
Yes, but when paradigm changes, some features are lost.
But why does the paradigm change in the first place? If the new paradigm of Android on a laptop is better in some way than X11/Linux on a laptop was (until netbooks were discontinued in 2012), which other improvements make up for the loss of multi-window mode and how? Or is the argument just "it's still manufactured therefore it's under warranty therefore it's better; take what you're given"?
and then Ubuntu put that shitty UI in, and we're back to being 10 years behind
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
the terminal is no longer needed.
People can do everything point-and-click in OS X and Windows without needing arcane commands. Firewall configuration, rebooting, resetting a password, updating drivers, installing the latest version of Chrome, plugging in a USB drive to copy over some files, updating the OS, configuring an obscure gigabit Ethernet card that was bought on NewEgg for $4, searching your entire hard drive for a file called "2017 Budget.xlsx", closing the laptop lid and re-opening it out of sleep mode, installing PHP to run your own Wordpress site, uninstalling MySQL, Skyping with friends, watching Netflix, resizing a disk partition. Try any of those on Linux, many can't be done without the terminal.
Focus on better apps (office, multimedia, mobile etc) for Linux desktop
Casteism
Should be denied? Of course not, you are most welcome to launch an operating system UI that enables what you want.
Locked bootloaders and restricted device drivers make it <understatement>kind of hard</understatement> to install an operating system with a different UI on still-manufactured hardware.
On the other hand, are you implying that current operating system UI vendors should be forced to use a paradigm that they don't think their user base has the brains to use?
I don't demand this from operating system publishers as much as from device makers. Too many devices make it impractical to replace the operating system with a free one, and many of them don't have a free-software-friendly competitor in the same size class. I complain about Android because it's the closest thing to a 10" Linux laptop since conventional 10" laptops were discontinued at the end of 2012, for instance.
one in a million use use this feature.
I find your claim that only 7,000 people on this planet use overlapping or tiled windows hard to believe. I'd be more inclined to believe it with a citation.
Most people develop software with neither overlapping windows nor tiled windows.
[...]
Even those who do [use a debugger] - visual studio, eclipse, idea intellisense, emacs debugger (some of the most popular code editing tools used today) all split the window itself such that people can see the program and its variables together
By "tiled windows" I include splitting the window in this manner. This leaves including the output in the split.
Can you cite sources that only "one in a million" use tiled windows between, say, an HTML editor and the browser rendering it? Or can you cite sources that only "one in a million" use tiled windows between a web browser for viewing an HTML document and a text editor or word processor for taking notes on the document?
The world is inefficient. Get over it.
I find it more difficult to just "Get over" artificial inefficiencies, especially those enforced primarily through cryptographic lockdown, than inefficiencies with a substantial cost justification.
I "don't even anecdotally counter [your] observation of no non-geek ever using overlapping windows" because I am willing to acquiesce to the absence of overlapping windows if tiled windows are also available. The problem is that tiled windows aren't available either.
Restarting from here to avoid the personal attacks into which the other discussion degraded:
Why did the paradigm change from overlapping windows, which you claim that only a small minority can use, to forced maximization instead of from overlapping windows to tiled windows?
And why did the paradigm change from preserving the state of open HTML documents to destroying it?
There was really no personal attack. Anyone unwilling to make the smallest effort to use a niche feature has no leg to stand on, even to complain that the feature is "missing". Because it is not missing at all - just takes effort to use like most other niche features.
Why did the paradigm change from overlapping windows, which you claim that only a small minority can use, to forced maximization instead of from overlapping windows to tiled windows?
The thing that you are calling 'tiled windows" is very much available, and Android framework even provides convenient layouts for that. It is similar to HTML frames, or emacs "windows". App developer has to typically choose that and code for that - one popular strategy is to use navigation in phones vs. these "tiled windows" in tablets. Might even be a Google recommendation, for all I know or care.
Why developers don't choose this - reason could be similar. They must deem (and I agree) most people will find that too complicated and choosing a good frame size is an exercise in endless indecision given the zillion possible screen configurations.
And why did the paradigm change from preserving the state of open HTML documents to destroying it?
I don't understand who is destroying open HTML documents. OEMs, like in most devices, under-provision RAM. Web-developers, like most developers these days, hog too much RAM. Anyway they want to push you to use their "app" so that they can steal your contacts, location and attention. So too many open web-pages leads to reload if same tab is revisited. Saving to disk at a RAM starved point of time might be thought of as too much work for little benefit, though it can be useful.
Around 2 years ago, I chose a 3 GB RAM Android phone when they were rare. Around a dozen of pages of those days could be opened together in the browser (along with hosts based ad blocking, of course). The number has since reduced, but it is still comfortable enough that I don't call it a paradigm of destroying HTML documents.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
The thing that you are calling 'tiled windows" is very much available, and Android framework even provides convenient layouts for that.
I assume you're referring to the framework for displaying multiple views within a single app, called "fragments" and introduced in Honeycomb. But the limit of "fragments" is that it can't display views from two different apps, such as a web browser on one side and a text editor on the other. This makes it difficult to, say, write and test code on a small device while commuting on public transit to and from work. Right now my 10 inch laptop works for this purpose, but I don't know what will be available to replace it once it finally breaks. If I were to instead carry a larger laptop, I would run a greater risk of theft because I would need to carry it in something that's more obviously a laptop case.
I don't understand who is destroying open HTML documents.
Chrome for Android has a limit of how many documents it keeps loaded at once. I seem to remember reading that this limit was close to three. When more documents are opened in tabs, or when Chrome receives a memory pressure signal from the operating system, it will destroy a document instead of serializing its DOM to Chrome's cache folder.
So too many open web-pages leads to reload if same tab is revisited.
And this behavior causes data loss. For example, it causes the comment entered into a Slashdot comment form to be lost. Why did the paradigm change to excuse loss of the user's data?
Saving to disk at a RAM starved point of time might be thought of as too much work for little benefit, though it can be useful.
Saving to disk to avoid loss of user data is exactly the behavior I expected, as it's similar to what the virtual memory manager on a desktop OS does.
Microsoft is doing a nice job pushing desktop customers away and I've gone to Mac OSX but I worry that Apple might pull the Google/Microsoft stuff at some point in the future and then there will be fewer options. I use Linux as my primary development system but our systems are professionally maintained so things are pretty easy. I have Ubuntu VMs on my Mac that I use for certain things. Ubuntu is more management work than my Mac would be but I would manage if it came to that point. I just don't see the average person dealing very well with Linux though - they'd just likely go with Windows as they don't care about the stuff that people here care about.