![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Linus Torvalds 'Still Wants the Desktop'
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Dr. Righteous
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 3,163
LOL.
Love *nix on the back end. The desktop still feels dated and is perpetually in catch up mode. How may graphical designers work on the various Linux desktops? To me it feels like software engineers playing at being UX designs. "Hey docks were cool on NeXT, right?! And glossy icons! Yeah! More of that! A mouse pointer you can barely see on a high DPI display...that's cool!"
AAPL and MSFT both employ artys fartsy folks to drive their UX. That's why they push forward. That's why Office, Windows and iOS evolve in their look and feel and the offerings on Linux looks like something from 1995.
I can see CLI being faster for a couple specific tasks, but a properly configured GUI can be a lot faster for many functions, because it's click, click, done. With CLI I might have to type out the directory I need to go to, remember the exact command and parameters I need (assuming I know them). In the rare times that I need to do something via CLI in Windows, I set up a batch file so I have to do it ONCE and not retype the same crap over and over.Zarathustra[H];1041039897 said:
Besides, saying "it shouldn't be a problem" is exactly the wrong attitude to take if you want to win over desktop users from Windows. Desktop users are a wide range of people, they're going to use their system in a lot of different ways. For me, the CLI is a long slowdown v. a GUI I can configure is something that only gets faster and faster for getting things done. Regardless of whether you agree or not, that's my preference. If Linux can't cater to that, but Windows can, why switch to Linux as an enthusiast?
I personally define desktop and laptop as the same right now. I don't see iPad type devices being around much longer with how power consumption on x86 processors is dropping. Benefit of a "tablet" will be gone shortly, if it's not already.
Dr. Righteous
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 3,163
I don't even consider gaming. I game on a win7 system but infrequently now a days.
I spend 8hrs+ a day behind a linux system and it is mission critical work. I moved to linux 5 years ago because windows failed me for the last time.
And the past 5 years have been relatively trouble free. The only issues were caused by me, screwing with things that caused problem I didn't know how to fix. But in both case, it was time to upgrade anyway, so new version went on.
I'm still using my old AMD Phenom x4 with 4GB of ram; still rock solid, no reason to change it.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
It's shrinking relative to the much larger size of the smartphone market and even the tablet market, though that market is slowing. But when it comes to anything beyond consumption, the desktop is still king, and there's still a great deal of opportunity in the desktop market. Which is why it is still of interest to folks.
I disagree. You do NOT need all of that. What you DO need is something. You need the niche that it performs in very well or just as good for cheaper. Right now, linux does that in the server market, and pretty much no place else. Maybe as render farm nodes.
So we basically have a bunch of decent server side stuff, sort of détente in the kernal space, holy wars for the dektop UI, and (for the most part) a bunch of also ran and never was in the desktop application space.
Have you ever seen the attitude of Windows users?
Who even still does that? Just head over to the Software manager, type in what I want and install. If you're still doing this, you're doing it wrong.
Translation: You are just regurgitating something you read somewhere and have no real first hand experience with anything Linux.
It's pretty important to point out that 100% of the Fortune 500 companies run Windows Server as well. Linux doesn't have an exclusive spot in the server market.
Linux for Desktop has been the pipedream of some ever since Linux was created. It didn't happen. It does not happen. It will not happen.
Consumers in the developed world know how to use Windows, re-educating them to Linux is hugely expensive as Mark Shuttleworth has found out after pouring millions are millions into Ubuntu which was supposed to displace Windows. Years later it didn't make a dent.
Developers develop for Windows because Windows users have the buying power to actually pay for software. It doesn't matter if a billion rice farmers in India use Linux because they are too poor to buy software.
Since it's been a while for you, I'll fill you in on your list a bit.
IF you need to install drivers like say video drivers, there is a front end for it on most popular distros
It's stupid easy to enable a 3rd party repository if you need to and install stuff. Especially in say a distro like LInux Mint
Check.
check
check .. you can do this until you puke
Check, sorta. I can only speak for my NVIDIA card, but I can specify most if not all the things you are looking for.
Check
Start considering
wow. Thank you for perpetuating the entertaining stereotype, while actually having the balls to say Windows users are just as bad.
I mean, I don't know if I can lump Windows users under any one adjective, but if I could it would likely be neither arrogant or elitist.
I mean, I don't know if I can lump Windows users under any one adjective, but if I could it would likely be neither arrogant or elitist.
These days I've been throwing Ubuntu on old workstations that we donate to employees. I feel it has reached a point of simplicity/maturity that it can be seen as a contender to Windows now, thanks in large part to people's comfort level adjusting to new UI's after using iOS/Android devices. Now that driver installs and system configuration is fully automated on any system there is a reasonable expectation that things will "just work" when you plug them in or download a new program. Nobody really needs to understand the underlying process anymore. With an app store available and a good chance of finding any random program you are looking for linux stands a good chance of getting great acceptance these days.
In fact I imagine the only reason a lot of people arent migrating just yet is fear that somehow it will still be deficient in some areas, which it is. But hey, at least I'm doing my part forcing people to use it
In fact I imagine the only reason a lot of people arent migrating just yet is fear that somehow it will still be deficient in some areas, which it is. But hey, at least I'm doing my part forcing people to use it
I don't think it has anything to do with the attitude of the Linux community, because the average person probably doesn't even know anyone who uses Linux. If you can't appeal to the Wal-Mart crowd with a free OS, then you just can't compete. This forum, and others like it, are not for the average user. Windows may have been a colossal pain years ago, but Windows 7 has proven itself to be rock solid (In my experience). I have talked to plenty of average users who said they have no intentions of leaving 7 because "it's so easy to use". These people surely wouldn't understand how to use Linux, and likely have never heard of it. If they have, it carries the same stigma as Mac systems, "I hear they're difficult to use", "it only has one mouse button" etc. Neither one is true, but it seems to be forever etched in the mind of average users.
It's kinda like this;
If you're too dumb to configure a system, linux is perfect for you since it can configure itself just as easily as windows.
If you're so savvy that you need bare metal control of your system, then you are smart enough to figure out how to do it in linux.
The only reason I havent migrated yet is due to performance issues in video games and 1 very important program that uses SQL which does not play nice in linux no matter what i do.
If you're too dumb to configure a system, linux is perfect for you since it can configure itself just as easily as windows.
If you're so savvy that you need bare metal control of your system, then you are smart enough to figure out how to do it in linux.
The only reason I havent migrated yet is due to performance issues in video games and 1 very important program that uses SQL which does not play nice in linux no matter what i do.
I'd also say this whole "free" business has nothing to do with it. The average consumer buys a PC with Windows already on it. They have no idea how much it costs and they dont care. From their perspective it kinda is free since it was always there to begin with. They'll never actually buy a copy of Windows, they'll just retire the PC and take whatever they get next. This doesnt make them poor, so they are still just as capable and willing to spend money on software for Windows as they would with Linux. The avg consumer does have an understanding that software costs money, they just dont consider the OS part of that equation. Linux users are just as apt to purchase something as a Windows user, so there's no fear of marketing towards a crowd who "expects everything for free".
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,878
The truth is it keeps coming up in these threads, because the problems listed as motivations not to use Linux are ones that were very common in the Linux forums 6-8 years ago, but these days are completely gone.
Dell Mini Wireless card? I haven't had a wireless problem on any laptop since ~2008 or so.
In fact, I haven't had a single piece of hardware that didn't work out of the box without having to install separate drivers in years and years and years.
Everything typically works perfectly without even having to configure anything, except proprietary 3D video drivers, which the system pops up on first boot and asks in a GUI window if you want to install. Click yes, type in your password, hit enter, and done.
The only reason to not use Linux currently is software availability, especially if you are the kind of user for whom "it has to be this exact piece of software or nothing". There are plenty of decent workalikes to the many large software packages on the Windows/Apple side. Anyone at home in Word 2003 will be at home in LibreOffice Writer in no time. Is it IDENTICAL? No. And if that is enough of a killer for you that it outweighs:
- Free
- efficient use of resources
- more stable
- more secure
Gaming is also a concern, but on the rare occasion I actually play a game, I can dual boot.
It used to be in years past that you could never just run software without having to do something first to make sure it works. Install directx, install dotnet, download runtimes, whatever it was, you had to prep a system for a lot of generic tasks. There were so many dependencies placed upon the user that people felt intimidated to even try. Linux completely failed in this regard making the user have to install damn near every thing by hand one at a time to get started. Sure you built a great understanding of the system in the process, but your uncle is never gonna go for this.
People see an OS these days as they see their cellphone home screen. A pretty background with icons that do stuff. You dont have to do anything else to get those icons to work, you just click something and off it goes. Linux can do this now. You can browse an app store, see what you like, and just click "install". You get a nice shiny icon and when you click that, it works. Thats all an OS should ever be, it's the underlying framework to allow software to drive.
By the way I'd have to say that linux support users (such as on forums) are some of the nicest people. They genuinely try to encourage people to understand what they're doing so they can help themselves. I think a lot of people infer some sort of superiority complex here because they are used to being baby fed in their Windows universe. How many times have you seen god awful tech advice on a Windows forum that may invariably have lead to a solution but only from blind luck? Usually the advice you get from the linux crowd is spot on.
People see an OS these days as they see their cellphone home screen. A pretty background with icons that do stuff. You dont have to do anything else to get those icons to work, you just click something and off it goes. Linux can do this now. You can browse an app store, see what you like, and just click "install". You get a nice shiny icon and when you click that, it works. Thats all an OS should ever be, it's the underlying framework to allow software to drive.
By the way I'd have to say that linux support users (such as on forums) are some of the nicest people. They genuinely try to encourage people to understand what they're doing so they can help themselves. I think a lot of people infer some sort of superiority complex here because they are used to being baby fed in their Windows universe. How many times have you seen god awful tech advice on a Windows forum that may invariably have lead to a solution but only from blind luck? Usually the advice you get from the linux crowd is spot on.
The PC market was doomed to shrink one day or another. It doesn't mean the PC is less capable, only that the number of people who require the full power of a PC is smaller then the number of people who can get by with a Smartphone or Tablet.
Take me for instance, I would hate to be completely reliant on only my Phone but my Dad still uses a feature phone and my wife is happy as a pig in shit with her Smartphone, but she has my old laptops scattered all through the house so she can watch Korean Dramas streamed thu the browsers.
I learned things the hard way once before.
I spent a lot of cash on Amiga Computers back when they were damn expensive to buy. The Amiga was beyond doubt superior to the IBMs and clones in every way possible. But there was no good software and therefor the Amiga died a terrible and slow death. No software, no future, period. The only thing that is floating Linux is RedHat in the Enterprise world, if not for RedHat understanding that you have to charge money, you have to be a business to do business, Linux would be dead and gone with only diehards hanging onto the shreds of it's potential.
I spent a lot of cash on Amiga Computers back when they were damn expensive to buy. The Amiga was beyond doubt superior to the IBMs and clones in every way possible. But there was no good software and therefor the Amiga died a terrible and slow death. No software, no future, period. The only thing that is floating Linux is RedHat in the Enterprise world, if not for RedHat understanding that you have to charge money, you have to be a business to do business, Linux would be dead and gone with only diehards hanging onto the shreds of it's potential.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
Wow there was about everything on the Amiga from DTP to video editing, renderfarms , raytracers.
If you watched the video (where the quote is from) then what he said is that Linux is one of the biggest in routers and other networking equipment he also lists a sick number of devices where Linux is used.
The reason why Linux can't win desktop is because of the users. Most people don't care if they get screwed by MS for more then 99% of current computer users there daily browsing skyping spreadsheet acitivites can be done on Linux as well.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
I meant to say lightwave and Imagine , not raytracers so much for that edit button .....
so much for that edit button .....There is a huge learning curve with Linux as a desktop. Also, you don't have large scale OEMS pushing Linux as the desktop of choice. But here is the crazy part.. This part is as stretch but hear me out. MacOS is basically a BSD derivative, very Linux like under the covers. How come MacOS and IOS are doing so well? They have the killer easy to use interface that is also very beautiful. 2nd, they have locked down the hardware they allow you to run on it.
Why can't Linux do the same thing? Linux is trying to do the same thing that windows does.. Run on everything, and support everything. That's pretty tough to do. If an OEM decided to sell a certain hardware stack that ran a really slick derivative of Linux with an amazing desktop, and enterprise connectivity, and supported it, I honestly think it would start to work. There would be some hoops to jump through, but any major software provider that has mac support could easy recompile the app for this Linux derivative.
My final thought about Linux as a desktop.. server admins have the same issue. Lets say you apply the latest RPMs and a certain software package breaks. You are at the mercy of the package maintainer to either fix it, when ever they get the time to do so, or just recompile the code yourself and install it in alternate directory. If you are comfortable doing this, then no problem.. But I would rip my freaking hair out trying to walk my mom through ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/appname/ ; make ; make install because my mom doesn't under stand the difference between slash and forward slash.
Why can't Linux do the same thing? Linux is trying to do the same thing that windows does.. Run on everything, and support everything. That's pretty tough to do. If an OEM decided to sell a certain hardware stack that ran a really slick derivative of Linux with an amazing desktop, and enterprise connectivity, and supported it, I honestly think it would start to work. There would be some hoops to jump through, but any major software provider that has mac support could easy recompile the app for this Linux derivative.
My final thought about Linux as a desktop.. server admins have the same issue. Lets say you apply the latest RPMs and a certain software package breaks. You are at the mercy of the package maintainer to either fix it, when ever they get the time to do so, or just recompile the code yourself and install it in alternate directory. If you are comfortable doing this, then no problem.. But I would rip my freaking hair out trying to walk my mom through ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/appname/ ; make ; make install because my mom doesn't under stand the difference between slash and forward slash.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,878
Does Red Hat have THAT poor testing on their stable branch?
I cant remember the last time an update killed something for me.
(actually yes I do, it was ~2003, I was running Gentoo linux unstable branch)
I've very rarely noticed some bad behavior after an update in Ubuntu/Mint, and when that happens, next update it is either fixed, or downgraded and removed from the stable tree, and an update downgrades me.
I simply have not had to do any real problem solving in Linux in a while.
I'm going to be nice about this and just let you know I have an atom netbook running Ubuntu 14.04.1
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
For most people time is more precious than saving few bucks on OS and every time I tried to do switch even simple tasks like getting codecs to play mkv files were waste of time.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,878
Funny. In the early to mid 90's a lot of my friends had Amiga 500's and Amiga 2000's, (I lived in Sweden, they were common there) and I was always impressed with how many games, and graphics programs they had to play with that I didn't on my 286 and later 486.
I always thought the reason they failed was not software availability, but the fact that PC's started to copy what they did (dedicated processors for sound, graphics, etc.) followed by x86 processors giving a ridiculous amount of performance for the money, leaving Motorola 68k CPU's in the dust.
All that video shit was sweet, but it matters to like 2 people in 2 million, not something that keeps a platform alive which is why it's dead. They needed word-processors and shit and that's all you could get for it, shit. All you could get for the first 6 years or so was games, it got a name for being a great gaming machine but it couldn't do anything else well, which was wrong, but it was right cause without the software it was useless for any productivity.
Of course linux and linux based OSes are used all over, so what, we are talking about the PC market and the users and these people don't built it themselves, the OS is part of the package and the package that sells to joe sixpack is the one with Windows on it. These people get burned enough they don't care if it costs a little more, they just want it to work and they sure don't want to have learn something new or buy more shit for their school aged kids. Linux will never take the crown from MS in the PC market any time soon.
invinciblegod
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2006
- Messages
- 81
ERROR: Dependency is not satisfiable: "A kernel does not a desktop"
BunnyKillBot
n00b
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Messages
- 33
This, times infinity.
The greatest downfall of Linux is the inability of average joes and enthusiasts alike to distinguish the kernel from the distribution. Linux is to Ubuntu as Unix is to OSX, yet even in this thread we have lots of people saying 'rarr rarr linux desktop'.
D
Deleted member 83233
Guest
The only thing I find lacking on Linux in my own world is proper audio support. Add an easy to use, widely supported layer like ASIO, and that would go a long way. All of the stupid "standards" they've tried to make so far may do one or two items OKish, but none are truly low latency, or even widely supported. Also, the mixing and routing apps like Jack are a joke. Otherwise, I can see needing some real Office/Adobe type applications (if not the actual applications) before people would make a full switch. I think gaming will be going in the right direction soon enough because of Steam support, but I will still run Windows until every last one of my games runs on something else. (not very likely) All of this said, I still do love Linux for some applications. I try to have at least one system in my house with it on it at any given time.
No. Linux is the kernel used by Ubuntu. The kernel of OSX is XNU.
Unix is a classification given to certain operating systems based on their compliance with the Single UNIX Specification, or source code ancestry with AT&T operating system.