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."

Comments

Quality was never the problem

[sciengin]

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.

Re:Quality was never the problem

[mrchaotica]

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.

I think you misspelled "... to strong-arm OEMs into installing it by default, to the exclusion of all other OSs."

Re:Quality was never the problem

[gstoddart]

Sometimes what it lacks is functionality.

Not so long ago, on an Ubuntu VM (I think), I was trying to change some system configuration or another.

There simply was no interface to edit whatever it was I was trying to do. You just sort of ran off the end of the earth, and then you were on your own.

Sometimes what Linux (or even FreeBSD) desktops lack is the actual ability to fully control the machine from the GUI, and then you rely on someone being able to drop to the command line and do the real magic -- which is fine if you can do it, and useless if you can't.

What is still needs is to have all of the functionality, instead of most of the functionality. It needs to stop being something you build in a kit or have to endless search the interwebs for trying to solve how to do it.

And, like it or not, it needs better support from software vendors ... I've used the same tax program for over a decade, I rely on that ... don't tell me to use Penguin Tax 0.1 because it's kind almost the same thing and doesn't work in my country and hasn't been updated in 4 years ... don't tell me I can use a web interface, I'm not submitting my fucking tax information on a web interface to a company I don't trust.

The photo editing software which came with my Canon camera ... I want to use that. Not some abandoned piece of crap which kinda sorta does some of what I need. The software to control my TomTom and do updates? Or update the GPS I use for golf? I need all of those things. There is no Linux version.

Computers are tools, not toys. I have some tasks I need to do, and either the platform does them, using the tools I want, or it doesn't. And I don't wish to spend hours trying to re-discover some arcanum I knew in the late 90s about UNIX.

For a good chunk of ordinary desktop stuff, sure, Linux has most of that covered. But as soon as you go off the path, or into something which requires commercial software (which exists and gets used no matter what your ideology tells you) ... then it becomes a largely useless thing.

I still keep VMs around to play with, or because I can shred through some data better with a UNIX command line than with anything else.

But I have yet to be able to rid myself of Windows entirely, which means my Windows machine is more likely to be where I run my Linux VMs

Re:Quality was never the problem

[serviscope_minor]

Sometimes what Linux (or even FreeBSD) desktops lack is the actual ability to fully control the machine from the GUI

Out of interest, why are you holding Linux to a higher standard than Windows or OSX. I dont't think that for example registry hacks of which there are still plenty are functionally any different from dropping to a commandline interface. There are plenty of websites out there documenting registry tweaks for Windows 10.

Re:Wow!

[LichtSpektren]

In the many years I have used Linux on the desktop, I have never once had to compile a driver.

Re:Wow!

[ArylAkamov]

There are a number of distributions that are pretty user friendly now. I toyed with linux ages ago but went back to windows because most of the software I use is windows specific.

My girlfriend got sick of the WINDOWS 10 UPGRADE NOW! shit on her laptop and asked me to install linux, after explaining there were a billion different distros and some other technical explanations, she picked out Mint.

I was really surprised at how much easier it was compared to last time I messed around with it. There were no missing drivers, everything worked perfectly right after installing, lots of helpful explanations and popup windows for "normal" users. It was apple-tier hand holding in some areas. She loves it.

Edge cases and the long tail are the problem.

[aussersterne]

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.