Has the Desktop Linux Bubble burst?

realy? Berly

at the end of the day there is only so far a desktop can go
plus anyway unlike MAC and Windows, these linux ones are broken up


also look at E17
 
I also didn't realize that they had a bubble. Linux and BSD are good server os and can be used for the desktop but really KDE and Gnome have a long way to go.
 
how much further do they really have to go? i think both are excellent desktop environments....

although, i am a linux newb, what are the biggest drawbacks to KDE or gnome?


lastly, there ARE other desktop environs.... i really love xfce, and fluxbox seems really nice too...
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
how much further do they really have to go? i think both are excellent desktop environments....
Click to expand...
I don't think it's so much KDE or Gnome as much as xorg. It's made some great progress since the split, but they still have a ways to go. For example; What happens when you redo the resolution in windows? It changes and asks if it's ok.

Same procedure on FC4? Well, if you use the system-config tool, you can change it, but then you have to log out of X and log back in to get the resolution. And that's 50/50, because it will let you select a resolution/frequency ( for you CRT bound folks ) that is completely out of spec for your equipment. At that point, you are on to vim xorg.conf, and hopefully you know how to speak arcane and fix it.

I think KDE and GNOME are great and getting better; xorg still has a bit of a run to catch up after being held back. Even though they are making excellent progress.
 
ummm.....I believe if you use an nvidia card, you can change the screen resolution, without restarting your x session, those in or not in your xorg.conf, via nvidia-settings.

Also in ubuntu you can change the resolution without restarting x, same with xubuntu. However you cannot add a new resolution, to your xorg.conf and then change to that resolution in gnome or xfce4 without restarting x.
 
you can change the resolution to anything listed in your xorg.conf with ctrl alt +/-
 
I think that whole article failed to take into account several very important things....

In the last few years things on the linux desktop have exploded.....

1: transition from xfree86 to xorg.
2: making xorg modular
3: better ati drivers.
4: first xgl then aiglx and now nvidia composite
5: compiz, and beryl, and others coming soon

AND that is just off the top of my head. The linux desktop is devepoing at full speed even as we speak. Look at all the work freedesktop.org has been doing. It's amazing.
 
I think you're wrong on a few points.

The article was talking about desktop environments (even if the article was mis-named).

It's not talking about developments in compositing and xorg itself (which has been coming up in leaps and bounds), but about the desktop environments with which we use xorg.

The article is more about KDE and GNOME not having any new development in the future.
 
OK lets consider KDE, and Gnome. They are nothing more then a collection of applications. Nothing more then that. Period end of story. That is the end all be all of this situation.

Take a look at the things freedesktop.org is working on. I could make my own desktop environment if I wanted to by simply putting together a decent selection of applications that combined can do what a desktop needs to do.
 
I don't really perceive the DE to just be a collection of applications.
For it to be a DE there has to be some consistency in look-and-feel and usability. In KDE for example this means that I can expect every "Open File" dialog to work with a kioslaves address.

This means at home I am really stuck for the most part with using kde/qt applications to maintain that DE feel. I'm not knocking gnome/gtk here, I could just as easily use that DE.

My point is, application development doesn't exactly equate to DE development as duby is suggesting. There is a little more to it than that. However, the article is pretty substanceless as far as I'm concerned. There was never a desktop bubble. Development has always been pretty slow (or fast depending on who you ask), and I'm not expecting that to change.
 
man, just reading topics like this makes me realize just how much more about computers linux guys know than windows/osx guys :eek:

this same topic about those OSes would have responses about people talking about the most asinine, obvious things, your guys really know about the under the hood stuff!

*damn, I need to learn more about my computer....*
 
Of course your right, but even the backend stuff, like kioslaves is really just another library. Maybe a better way to put it is a desktop is just a collection of applications with the appropriate supporting libraries to make the applications work.

Although I still feel that is a bit too involved, becouse I could put together a fluxbox environment that would rival KDE.
 
I share duby229's view that a desktop is merely a collection of applications that share a common foundation. The article looks at only half of the Linux desktop - the software provided directly by the Gnome and KDE projects. I think that they have been somewhat constrained by the development of other supporting software, namely hotplug, udev, dbus, and hal. Think about it; it's only recently that udev-dbus-hal have been able to deliver on the promise of desktop plug-and-play.
 
Even to this day I am having difficulty with udev dbus "plug and playing". I it seems every other time I do an update it changes how they work, and I run into permission problems (just inserting a CD!), or a feature that worked before no longer does. It's frustrating.
 
I think the author weighs to heavily into version numbers ;). Also, KDE/Gnome have reached a point where much of their (not to be confused with the kernel, or things like udev, coldplug, etc) work is done for a stable, feature rich, pretty desktop to multi-task in. They each have their flaws of course, but I could sit here and throw fists full of shortcomings in WinXP, Vista, OSX, AmigaOS, XFCE, or what ever.

To me it all boils down to my personal usability experiences though. A properly configured Gnome or KDE desktop is barely distinguishable from a properly configured XP or OSX desktop- to me.
 
Tweakin said:
To me it all boils down to my personal usability experiences though. A properly configured Gnome or KDE desktop is barely distinguishable from a properly configured XP or OSX desktop- to me.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Since I have OpenOffice, FireFox,... installed on my wifes laptop & my dual-booted XP, my wife didn't have a problem in getting into using GNOME-desktop (she first thought it was a skin for GNOME)

There is only so far a DE can go before only small incremental advancements are to be expected. Yes Windows and Apple have very mature DE, but you don't see much real advancemence comming from them now do you?

its the classic S-curve of developement, at the bottom it takes a long time/lots-o-work to get something really basic, then you hit the period of maximum developement and improvements then finally you hit the final part of the slope where only minor things are added


That is quite apparent with the last 2 major releases of GNOME, alot of the work has been done behind the scenes in reducing memory footprints and startup times (2.16 is vvery good!!!). Look at the wheel, when was the last time something significant happened with that?
 
duby229 said:
Of course your right, but even the backend stuff, like kioslaves is really just another library. Maybe a better way to put it is a desktop is just a collection of applications with the appropriate supporting libraries to make the applications work.

Although I still feel that is a bit too involved, becouse I could put together a fluxbox environment that would rival KDE.
Click to expand...

Interesting experiment, how would you go about putting together a fluxbox alternative?
 
eeyrjmr said:
realy? Berly

at the end of the day there is only so far a desktop can go
plus anyway unlike MAC and Windows, these linux ones are broken up


also look at E17
Click to expand...

I just switched to E17 the other day and I am very impressed. I know development has been slow with it and I cannot wait till the finished product is out.

And it is true that Desktops can only go so far. I mean what is the purpose of a desktop? To me it is to allow quick and easy access to the functions I require on my computer. Be it I need a simple DOS (Terminal) Window or whatever. There is only so much functionality you can put in a desktop, the rest is just "bling".
 
Install fluxbox, then decide what applications you need... That is really about it.

If you want to duplicate the functionality of KDE, then you'll need to find applications that offer comparable functionality, and that all preferably use the same widget set... If not then there is a theme engine that will allow GTK, and QT themes to be syncronized.
 
I personally think that this stall is due to Microsoft taking such a long time to push out the next version of Windows. Unfortunately, a lot of "innovation" in Linux DEs comes externally from the FOSS community.

I don't think it's a problem for Linux personally. Applications and certain APIs are at a state that most developers and their users are happy--and that's all what most people who use Linux DEs (not outside observers or tech journalists or whoever writes articles like the OP linked) actually want.

I think that it's a much bigger problem from Microsoft. Applications and APIs stagnating is not a good thing when you need users to buy new versions of your product to maintain a revenue stream. And six years between releases of one of your flagship products in the computing industry is not bad, someone please mention what is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top