Ask Slashdot: Whatever Happened To the 'Year of Linux on Desktop'?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Whatever Happened To the 'Year of Linux on Desktop'?

Posted by msmash on Friday September 29, 2017 @04:45AM from the curious-case dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Investors, enthusiasts, and Linux distro makers have for more than a decade projected that the upcoming year will be the year of Linux on the desktop platform. But we just can't seem to get to that year for some reason. Windows continues to dominate the consumer market. Apple's macOS X is quickly gaining ground among business customers and designers, and is already ahead of Linux. Do you see Linux getting a significant boost in the desktop market in the coming years?

13 of 417 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

D'oh! by Aighearach · 2017-09-29 04:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

What happened was, we'd already been using it for years so it sounded really stupid and it was only ever a joke where people laughed at anybody who had repeated the phrase.
It was already a great desktop, and it still is.
New users are not really useful to us, either. Please don't switch.
1. Re: D'oh! by SuseLover · 2017-09-29 05:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Steep learning curve? What steep learning curve, everyone I have set up one for has been using it as easily as windows and they only call me for help a couple times a year
2. Re: D'oh! by p4nther2004 · 2017-09-29 05:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Linux is fundamentally a good idea, but between the dozens of distros, the rather steep learning curve for new users, and the bi-polar nature of the community, it's pretty off-putting to most people.
  
  You say this like it's a bad thing.
  No seriously. I mean that. I've done the fanboy bit before. OS/2. There. BeOS. Yep. Lots of others.
  I do NOT recommend Linux to people. In fact, I say to NOT use it. Why? Cause most people want to play games, browse the web, do their email and watch NetFlix.
  For them - use Windows.
  If I tell them no....and then they ask what I use....and why. Only THEN do I begin the conversation with them. What do they want to do on their computer? Oh, you need programming languages? A database? Source code control? Then yes, you should start looking at Linux. It's got a hell of a learning curve but damn it's worth it.
  Don't get me wrong. Linux has won. Windows has Ubuntu shell. Docker is linux.
  But I'll be damned before I spend time trying to convince someone who doesn't want to use Linux and doesn't need it that they should be using it.
  Either Linux sells itself or it doesn't. (And it has...)
3. Re: D'oh! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-29 05:17 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Fun Fact, the term Steep Learning Curve actually means that something can be learned easily, like it was graphed with Time on the x-axis and has a steep slope on the line since x (time) is a small value, while a Shallow Learning Curve was to indicate that it would take more time to learn.
  IMHO, using Steep Learning Curve in the wrong manner, just means that the person had a hard time learning something that other people accomplished in a short time.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_curve
  Idiocracy is upon us
4. Re: D'oh! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-29 05:39 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Your comment does an excellent job of showing how detached from reality Linux advocates are not only when discussing why Linux isn't being used by desktop users, but also when discussing common English idioms used while discussing while Linux isn't being used by desktop users.
  Not only do you advocate for a desktop OS that's impractical to use, but you go out of your way to intentionally misunderstand the meaning of a common English saying used to explain why the OS you support is impractical to use.
  To put it in quasi-mathematical terms that you might understand better, you're exhibiting first-order autism while discussing why Linux isn't being used by desktop users, and then you're exhibiting second-order autism while discussing the English idioms used to describe why Linux isn't being used by desktop users!
  Additionally, when you likely deny this to be the case, you'll be exhibiting third-order autism by being oblivious to being told about your lower orders of autistic behavior!
  And if you deny that, you'll be exhibiting fourth-order autism. As you can see, this could continue to infinitely many orders of autism, depending on how much you choose to ignore reality.
  It's literally autism all the way down with people like you!
5. Re: D'oh! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-29 06:13 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Can they get a windows machine up and running? Do they know how to do a fresh install? Thought so.
6. Re: D'oh! by chipschap · 2017-09-29 06:37 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Exactly this -- although I don't necessarily recommend Windows. I recommend whichever operating system they are already most familiar with.
  That's eminently sensible. However, if the needs are basic and the prospective user is not a "computer type" --- I might just install Linux for them.
  I did that for my wife, who uses Linux and doesn't know it's Linux, and doesn't care, because she can do her browser-based stuff and maybe view some photos or documents off-line, and maybe play a simple game or two.
  For basic needs, Linux is certainly no harder to use than Windows.
  And when problems pop up (quite infrequent), then this "basic user" wouldn't be able to fix them whether it was Linux or Windows or Mac.
7. Re: D'oh! by jedidiah · 2017-09-29 08:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  What moronic nonsense. There is not ONE thing in that post that warranted your reply. The fact that shit just works for a lot of people is just something trolls can't handle.
  It's not 1995 any more. The "steep learning curve" is overblown. It's really no worse than it would be for anything. That includes strange new versions of Windows.
  When things go wrong, they are equally ugly on all three platforms.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I hope not by JohnFen · 2017-09-29 04:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't see Linux gaining a significant part of the desktop market in the foreseeable future. And, as an avid Linux user, I think that's a great thing.
I don't want Linux to get so popular. Getting that popular brings two really terrible things with it: more attention from hackers, and a more rapid degradation of the operating system as it tries harder to cater to everybody.
Yeh baby by Dorianny · 2017-09-29 04:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

The desktop was replaced with the smartphone and considering that every android phone runs on a linux kernel its fair to say that Linux rules the world
1. Re:Yeh baby by Anonymous Coward · 2017-09-29 04:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  > every android phone runs on a Google-modified linux kernel with Google userland and spyware its fair to say that Google rules the world
  There, I fixed that for you.
Re:Which Linux? by DeBaas · 2017-09-29 05:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's actually easier. I've put my in-laws on Linux (Mate as a desktop environment) and it's much easier for them. Windows 10 is terribly confusing (even for me). Mate has a 'start' menu not too different from Windows XP, using Linux Mint means that it practically updates itself. And they love the fact that they are much less vulnerable for malware.
Not to mention the retarded 'Windows is updating' message lasting forever even on a I7 with SSD and lots of memory when shutting down AND starting up. At most Linux wants a normal restart after it updated itself after it quietly updated in the background.
Elderly people that don't do much more than use it for online stuff are better off with Linux.
The only thing keeping a lot of people and especially companies on Windows is software that only runs on Windows. With more and more software being web based that is becoming less of a problem. Only the large volume of MS office documents will be a big hurdle for a long time IMO

--
---
Re: No std GUI - a commercial minefield by chipschap · 2017-09-29 06:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

Go read Qt's commercial terms,
Maybe YOU should read them. You need a commercial license if you want to produce closed-source proprietary products. You can still sell your product / offer support, etc., without a commercial license, you just have to provide source.
And Qt is not the only game in town.