Why Linux on the Desktop Is Dead

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Now I know what reaction this will evoke since there are some really vocal Linux supporters out there, but please don’t shoot the messenger. :D Tony Bradley over at PCWorld tried out Linux desktop OS for a month and offers his take on the shape of the desktop world.


But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done.
Click to expand...
 
Although not quite to extent that this guy goes to, I somewhat agree and it does feel like the desktop portion "fights" you along the way. I however can't stand using Windows Server and Debian will be my choice for the foreseeable future. Feels like the exact opposite with the server variants.
 
well he used Ubuntu... so he was probably using Unity... enough said
I have successfully converted my parents to Mint, that proves that the common person can use Linux
 
I won't shoot the messenger, but fuck Tony Bradley and s like him who will always be the only real deterrent to pushing Linux to the masses.
 
It's true though. I use linux for my file server, and it's good there, I can set it up once and forget about it for a few years until I need to upgrade.

But in a world where an average user wants to be able to buy Turbo Tax from Costco and do their taxes? Linux just doesn't have critical mass.

While most of these common prorgams that are not available for Linux do often have alternatives, you have to dedicate a portion of your life to finding alternatives to common solutions on Windows or Mac platforms. You rarely reach a point where you're "done" finding these alternatives, either. Just when you think you are... you need to find another.

Worth it for some, I suppose. Not me.
 
Wow, apparently he didn't understand that Linux isn't an OS for noobs. :rolleyes:
But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done.
Click to expand...
The whole point is that you can mold Linux to whatever hardware and software platforms you want.
But, they haven’t, and they won’t because Linux is not a big enough player in the desktop market to warrant the attention.
Click to expand...
That's not the point of Linux.

It doesn’t change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as it’s rivals, or that it lacks the third party hardware and software support of its rivals, or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker
Click to expand...
Linux isn't necessarily designed to be user-friendly, depending on the distro.
It's an OS in which the user can FULLY customize the kernel, back-end, and front-end.
You can't do that with Windows and OS X, they are far too rigid to mold to anything other than x86 and ARM platforms, and even then it's limited at best and even less so with Windows.

If this idiot wants a user-friendly OS, he needs to go with OS X as even Windows will be too difficult for him to fully understand.
Mindless computing at it's finest.

It's painfully obvious that Linux is far beyond his realm of understanding and comprehension.
He reminds me of these system admins who treat their systems and operations like it was the mid-90's.

Funny, I don't see any of the world's supercomputers running Windows.
Oh wait, they ALL use custom Linux variants.

Holy shit, that article was nothing but a metric-ton of fail.
 
JosiahBradley said:
I won't shoot the messenger, but fuck Tony Bradley and s like him who will always be the only real deterrent to pushing Linux to the masses.
Click to expand...

"Only deterrent"?

Speaking as an Arch user, there are many up and coming deterrents...for example when Wayland finally supplants Xorg, there will be no proprietary video driver support, and the rate at which new GPUs are supported by the FOSS drivers is best described as "glacial"...and if you hope for Eyefinity support, even with proprietary drivers keep on dreaming.

Heck it took 6+months after the Radeon 6000 release for there to be *any* video card drivers whatsoever for those cards...and even then they still do not have Eyefinity support now within my knowledge.
 
Skripka said:
Another one of these articles....
Click to expand...
Another one of these comments....

:p

The author was actually quite positive on desktop Linux for average users:
That said, what do most users really need? Write a letter? Send an email? Surf the Web? Connect with friends on Facebook? Play music? Ubuntu Linux has a capable office productivity suite, and email client installed by default. It can handle Web browsing just fine. It can play music, edit photos, create and edit movies. The bottom line is that Ubuntu Linux can easily handle the needs of average users--and most of those needs are addressed out-of-the-box so to speak just using tools installed by default with the OS.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that anyone seriously believes that Linux can replace other desktop OSs for the majority of other users. If you're happy running Linux on the desktop, it doesn't contradict what the author wrote. He concedes that it is usable for many tasks, easy to install and free.
 
But in a world where an average user wants to be able to buy Turbo Tax from Costco and do their taxes? Linux just doesn't have critical mass.
Click to expand...
Linux wasn't designed for average users because average users can barely use a web browser outside of IE or Safari, let alone a *gasp* different OS. :eek: :rolleyes:

Why use Linux when you can use Windows?
Click to expand...
I hope you're joking because... wow.
 
There are more things deterring the masses from Linux than naysayers. Limited support from software and hardware developers hold it back in serious ways.
 
Red Falcon said:
Wow, apparently he didn't understand that Linux isn't an OS for noobs. :rolleyes:

The whole point is that you can mold Linux to whatever hardware and software platforms you want.

That's not the point of Linux.


Linux isn't necessarily designed to be user-friendly, depending on the distro.
It's an OS in which the user can FULLY customize the kernel, back-end, and front-end.
You can't do that with Windows and OS X, they are far too rigid to mold to anything other than x86 and ARM platforms, and even then it's limited at best and even less so with Windows.

If this idiot wants a user-friendly OS, he needs to go with OS X as even Windows will be too difficult for him to fully understand.
Mindless computing at it's finest.

It's painfully obvious that Linux is far beyond his realm of understanding and comprehension.
He reminds me of these system admins who treat their systems and operations like it was the mid-90's.

Funny, I don't see any of the world's supercomputers running Windows.
Oh wait, they ALL use custom Linux variants.

Holy shit, that article was nothing but a metric-ton of fail.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, the other reason why Linux on the desktop will never catch on - their unbearable users.
 
Red Falcon said:
Wow, apparently he didn't understand that Linux isn't an OS for noobs. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thus the name of the article, "dead on the desktop." Believe it or not, 99.9% of desktop users are mass consumers. Us enthusiasts are the very large minority, the 0.1% if you will.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Except for when it is being marketed as an OS for noobs
Click to expand...
In the case of Ubuntu, I agree with you.
Everything beyond 10.xx has been complete fail due to the incorporation of Unity.

However, there are literally hundreds of other Linux distros in existence that can be used.
The author was just one of the mindless masses that went "oh look, this one is popular so I'll use it too." without any other research as to which distro would most suite his needs.

Considering all he does is e-mail, web browsing, and facebook though, he should just stick with Windows or OS X.
Linux is a bit out of his comprehension.
 
Arcygenical said:
Thus the name of the article, "dead on the desktop." Believe it or not, 99.9% of desktop users are mass consumers. Us enthusiasts are the very large minority, the 0.1% if you will.
Click to expand...

Wow, so 99.9% of desktop users are noobs?!
tumblr_m0h59l1ORm1r0q2j0o2_500.png

:D
 
As a Linux fan myself, I can certainly agree with the article. Though he makes some points I can't stand behind. Syncing your iPod and iPhone? Using Office instead of Libre? The open source community does have alternatives, but the real problem is WINE.

No matter what I do, WINE just doesn't work as well as it should. Though I hear 1.4 will bring massive changes, but I doubt it's as plug and play as it should be.
 
For all those "i converted my parents" posts I would say the only think you need to work for parents these days is a word process or and a web-browser...

Hell my Dad thinks the BB Playbook is the greatest think in the world since he can use hotmail and listen to music!

Anyone with real productivity needs ether needs to have a strong app already supported on linux, or yes it is an up hill battle.

Linux is going to be a "specialty" desktop at most.. There are only two established desktops Windows and Mac. Everything else is specialty... Android and iOS may have a much better chance of taking over desktop then linux ever will. If you refer to desktop as what the majority of home users expect from a computer.

Even with linux server it is a nightmare to get dependencies together for some server tools, often the repo packages are too out of date to use, and other apps will be packaged for another distro but not yours so you need to get the compile dependencies then spend hours debugging why the build failed.
 
For me Linux on desktop is dead. But then I use a virtual machine on my desktop for linux and have linux on my old laptops:D
 
EuphoricRage470 said:
I mean, I can't play most games on Linux, for one thing...so...there's that.
Click to expand...

Stick with Windows if that's what suites you.
No one is forcing you to use an OS that isn't suitable to your needs.

With that in mind, it doesn't make those OSes that you can't use, bad. ;)
 
Linux and Windows are both useful in their own way for different things. I don't really want either to converge towards the other (or OSX for that matter). Jack of all trades, master of none.
 
Red Falcon said:
Wow, apparently he didn't understand that Linux isn't an OS for noobs. :rolleyes:

Linux isn't necessarily designed to be user-friendly, depending on the distro.
It's an OS in which the user can FULLY customize the kernel, back-end, and front-end.
You can't do that with Windows and OS X, they are far too rigid to mold to anything other than x86 and ARM platforms, and even then it's limited at best and even less so with Windows.

If this idiot wants a user-friendly OS, he needs to go with OS X as even Windows will be too difficult for him to fully understand.
Mindless computing at it's finest.

It's painfully obvious that Linux is far beyond his realm of understanding and comprehension.
He reminds me of these system admins who treat their systems and operations like it was the mid-90's.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Why do I use Linux? Because it is awesome! :cool:
 
wright_left said:
I agree 100%. Why would you want to go through the hassle of Linux, when Windows is sitting right here, ready to do what you want.
Click to expand...

Because Windows is a horribly rigid OS that can't do what I want it to do.
I'll say it again, zero of the world's supercomputers use Windows, they all use Linux.

Windows and OS X are ready to use, but their flexibility sucks.
I guess that's why their popularity with that 99.9% of desktop users is so high. Noobs! :p
 
There is little, if any reason to use Linux on a desktop PC, as it offers nothing over Windows. In addition to not offering any features over Windows, it is sorely lacking in two key areas (video games and software development).

Everything on modern Linux distros can be summed up as "us too!"
Windows introduces a major new feature; most Linux distros have a clone of it in a few months.
Mac OS introduces new graphical niceities; most Linux distros have a clone of it in a few months.

They offer nothing new or better. It's just a clone that has boatloads of compatibility problems, and a lot of tweaking/workarounds if you have any remotely recent hardware. I am far from being a conformist, but the only OS that really does "just work" for the 99% is Windows and, to a lesser extent, Mac OS.
 
Red Falcon said:
Linux isn't necessarily designed to be user-friendly, depending on the distro.
It's an OS in which the user can FULLY customize the kernel, back-end, and front-end.
You can't do that with Windows and OS X, they are far too rigid to mold to anything other than x86 and ARM platforms, and even then it's limited at best and even less so with Windows.
Click to expand...

Why?

What critical life-changing feature am I missing out on by using a stock NT kernel backed by the Windows API?

(The answer is "nothing", but I'm sure you'll think of several bullshit reasons.)
 
There is little, if any reason to use Linux on a desktop PC, as it offers nothing over Windows.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't use Linux for anything beyond the gui. :rolleyes:

They offer nothing new or better.
Click to expand...
That's a good one. I mean really, really good.
By good I mean bad.
 
Shit, that fools crazy. I started with Ubuntu..... now im a distro freak. Yes I am still a Linux Uber Nuub..... but I do love the huge amount of distros and ease of use. Oh and what........ 3 minute install if that. Not to mention 100 billion free items in software suite downloads.

I admit, for my power machine i use Win7..... but love using the distros on my work and laptop.
 
InorganicMatter said:
Why?

What critical life-changing feature am I missing out on by using a stock NT kernel backed by the Windows API?
Click to expand...

Hey, if you don't like it, don't use it.
No one here is forcing you.

(The answer is "nothing", but I'm sure you'll think of several bullshit reasons.)
Click to expand...
Nope, just keep drinking your cool-aid!
 
Red Falcon said:
Considering all he does is e-mail, web browsing, and facebook though, he should just stick with Windows or OS X.
Linux is a bit out of his comprehension.
Click to expand...
In this case there should be no difference under linux as well, so I don't know what is his problem.
 
Red Falcon said:
You obviously don't use Linux for anything beyond the gui. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I actually use it for a web server at the house, and an SVN server at work. It's absolutely perfect for both tasks, and the SVN plugin for Apache is far better supported on Linux than Windows.

Red Falcon said:
That's a good one. I mean really, really good.
By good I mean bad.
Click to expand...

So you don't have a response. Got it.

Give a bullet-pointed list of concise reasons. Not generic "you don't understand" ones. I've programmed in operating system kernels you've never even heard of. Yes, I understand. I understand that you're full of shit, that is.
 
I want to look at switching to Linux, but I do feel the same way every time I want to do something on the desktop side, it's much harder in Linux than windows. Linux is a server OS. Though I still want to try it out anyway some time just to see if I could make the switch off Windows/proprietary software.
 
Better question: was it ever alive on the desktop?

Regardless, Linux's strength is in servers, and as the underpinnings of Android, which is probably success enough for an OS that's free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top