Linus Torvalds 'Still Wants the Desktop'

dyzophoria said:
there is just too many distros out there for new users to dive in, the kernel is not the problem it is literally the desktop itself. for example the mere fact that a simple user has to understand that there are 3 different ways to install software on different classes of distros (suse, debian, centos) is enough to drive them away and call linux "complicated". stuff is just too fragmented.
Click to expand...

Then it is also "too complicated" for gamers to have four different ways of installing games on the same machine? (Steam/Origin/pop in disk and click install/install.exe)

The Linux Desktop is dominated by Fedora and Ubuntu, and while apt and rpm work rather differently, they both have easy to use graphical "app store" like installers these days. I simply just don't think this is a real issue, unless you want to make it one.

It reminds me of the "before" videos for those "amazing" "as seen on TV" products. "You slip and then you slide" (exaggerated video clip) "you drop and then you spill" (another exaggerated video clip) but LOOK how easy it is with the amazing doucheproduct.

I still think the real problems are:

1.) Using Linux implies installing an OS. 99% of users NEVER do this.

2.) The "My boxed TurboTax from the shelf at Staples won't install" problem. (expanded to cover other software as well)

Solve these two and Linux use will grow (slowly).
 
daglesj said:
Hmmm I dunno.

Let's take a look at a common occurance on Linux forums -

OP - "Hey guys I'm new around here and finally got round to installing linux (insert distro here) on my laptop. It's all going pretty well just wondered if you had any other tips for me?"

LinuxLord27 - "You installed the wrong distro...should have used (insert their fave distro here)!"

Sexy Penquin - "Dude, should have put (insert their fave distro here) on it!"

MegaUser - "Man you are using Unity/KDE/whatever UI, that's wrong plus you should only need (insert their fave distro here)!"

Just no consensus. Just going round in circles.
Click to expand...

I don't know any Linux community that acts like that.
Even on here, no one acts like that.

There is no such thing as a "wrong" distro.
It just depends on the user's needs and preferences, the end.

Not sure what you are talking about. :confused:
 
dyzophoria said:
there is just too many distros out there for new users to dive in, the kernel is not the problem it is literally the desktop itself. for example the mere fact that a simple user has to understand that there are 3 different ways to install software on different classes of distros (suse, debian, centos) is enough to drive them away and call linux "complicated". stuff is just too fragmented.
Click to expand...

That is entirely not true, at least for users new to Linux.
For new users, Ubuntu or Mint are, by far, the best places to start.

They have a large amount of supported software, drivers, and games, and the GUIs used in them by default are very easy to use and pick up.
The forums which support them are very helpful and have a lot of good information, not counting the how-to videos on YouTube for them.

Also, if the new user doesn't like one distro, then they can try another.
At least Linux gives users options for their wants and needs.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Linux has come a long way but it still needs lot of work if it wants mass adoption on the desktop.

Off the top of my head this is what it needs:

Oh, and the concept of role based groups like "administrators" and so on. In windows if you put someone in the administrators group they have admin access. In Linux there's none of that. If you have more than one admin they all need the root password. Having one set of credentials for multiple users is not that secure. If there is a way to work, it's probably complicated.
Click to expand...

Heck no.

The /etc/sudoers file exists, it's far more fine-grained and should be used, not a blanket administrator permission. Permission inheritance can be achieved through recursive ACLs. If any of this is too difficult (and it shouldn't be) there are a number of configuration management tools (e.g. Chef, Puppet, CFEngine) which will let you control user permissions among other things.
 
Linux sucks. Its so far behind in usability, support and just plain feature set. All the Linux guys do is copy Windows, as much as they claim to hate it, every single time they try to copy Windows UI features.

When Windows is effectively free for 99% of people (who buy pc's at retail), cost is no longer a factor. And without cost, I'd like to hear a single reason why Linux on desktop is better. And no, 'sudo apt get' and 'its free' aren't reasons.
 
MrCrispy said:
Linux sucks. Its so far behind in usability, support and just plain feature set. All the Linux guys do is copy Windows, as much as they claim to hate it, every single time they try to copy Windows UI features.
Click to expand...

Well, no, Linux does not copy Windows, if anything, it copied UNIX at the beginning.
Also, Windows just copied Apple and CP/M. ;)

Feel free to try again, though.
 
MrCrispy said:
Linux sucks. Its so far behind in usability, support and just plain feature set. All the Linux guys do is copy Windows, as much as they claim to hate it, every single time they try to copy Windows UI features.
Click to expand...

I don't know man. I disagree with the direction they are taking, but Ubuntus approach to touch-like integration (Unity Desktop) WAY predates Windows 8.

I prefer to use neither of those, but that's just me.
 
MrCrispy said:
Linux sucks. Its so far behind in usability, support and just plain feature set. All the Linux guys do is copy Windows, as much as they claim to hate it, every single time they try to copy Windows UI features.

When Windows is effectively free for 99% of people (who buy pc's at retail), cost is no longer a factor. And without cost, I'd like to hear a single reason why Linux on desktop is better. And no, 'sudo apt get' and 'its free' aren't reasons.
Click to expand...

I'd love to hear the ways that Unity, or GNOME 3, or Enlightenment, or FVWM are copying the Windows GUI. Care to name some? Heck, not even KDE 4 or XFCE are all that similar to Windows unless you're just talking about the position of the 'X' you use to close open windows.
 
Runningflame570 said:
Heck no.

The /etc/sudoers file exists, it's far more fine-grained and should be used, not a blanket administrator permission. Permission inheritance can be achieved through recursive ACLs. If any of this is too difficult (and it shouldn't be) there are a number of configuration management tools (e.g. Chef, Puppet, CFEngine) which will let you control user permissions among other things.
Click to expand...

I should not need to use 3rd party apps to make something like permissions be usable though. In Windows I can manage file permissions from any system such as shares or local and everything works seamlessly across the board using built in tools (essentially just right clicking the folder and going to permissions tab). There's probably ways to do this in Linux with LDAP and Kerberos and all that but it's a huge pain to have to set that up on every single machine and I think you still need to make sure all the guid/uids match across all systems. I don't think GUIs in Linux even understand ACLs either as you only get the basic permissions out of it. ACLs are kinda 3rd party and most tools don't consider them.
 
How about things like the tray icons, explorer, Control panel. I know they're not in all distros, and I don't mind that they are there, the goal is to make it users moving to Linux from Windows. I'm just talking about UI paradigms here.
 
"The challenge on the desktop is not a kernel problem, Torvalds said. "It's a whole infrastructure problem. I think we'll get there one day."

IMO getting somewhere isn't necessary, simply wait for the inevitable to happen. I mean for the paid software industry to finish greeding itself out of existance. Windows 8 is a huge step toward that end imo, it can't even play a DVD. Microsoft's market share is and can only be inversely proportional to their effort to gut open computing standards.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041041681 said:
Details?

I have yet to come across a system in the last 6 years or so that wasn't fully supported by drivers in the kernel, granted my most recent systems are my Desktop (X79), my server (990FX) and my laptop (Ivy Bridge) so they aren't the very latest chipsets.

Not having compatibility out of the box just seems rather foreign compared to my experiences.

Yes, several years ago, I had lots of compatibility problems where I had to choose between no support for certain hardware in stable releases, or support in unstable releases leading to instability, but at least for me that is a historical issue.

Linux compatibility for common hardware has been fantastic IMHO. It can get a little trickier with some of the obscure hardware we use in this community, but even my Creative audio (probably the most obscure client side hardware I have) works flawlessly...

What motherboard hardware have you encountered that wasn't supported?
Click to expand...

Asrock H97 Fatal1ty Performance http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty H97 Performance/?cat=Download

Gigabyte GA-H97-D3H http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4962#sp

These two only show Win 7 or 8 drivers.
 
JeffDC said:
"The challenge on the desktop is not a kernel problem, Torvalds said. "It's a whole infrastructure problem. I think we'll get there one day."

IMO getting somewhere isn't necessary, simply wait for the inevitable to happen. I mean for the paid software industry to finish greeding itself out of existance. Windows 8 is a huge step toward that end imo, it can't even play a DVD. Microsoft's market share is and can only be inversely proportional to their effort to gut open computing standards.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I play DVDs and BDs on my Windows 8 machines regularly. If you bought a PC with a DVD or BD drive it will have the necessary playback for those media. Yes, Microsoft took out the DVD decoder because they have to pay a licensing fee for every copy of Windows, even though many people these days don't play DVDs on their PCs.

The argument you're making has been made for 20 years now and it's really never played out this way.
 
coolpurplefan said:
Asrock H97 Fatal1ty Performance http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty H97 Performance/?cat=Download

Gigabyte GA-H97-D3H http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4962#sp

These two only show Win 7 or 8 drivers.
Click to expand...

That's because many hardware vendors don't certify to Linux, and don't provide drivers, but they don't need to because they are included in the linux kernel.

I'd be willing to bet that if you fired up Ubuntu on either of those it would automatically detect and use drivers for the chipsets on it's own.

The only time I have ever had problems is with integrated third party components like extra SATA controllers or unusual USB3 controllers, but those usually work too.

Like we have been saying earlier in this thread, with Linux most drivers are in the kernel. You rarely ever have to download or install anything, and you probably shouldn't as the ones in the kernel are the ones to use.

It's not like with windows, where after install you have to go to a webpage and download drivers. The kernel is updated frequently, and in 99% of the time includes everything you need, except proprietary GPU drivers, which you don't manually download either. You just tell it to install them from the gui, and it pulls them from the repository and installs them.

That's why it is usually EASIER to install Linux than windows. There is usually no need (or reason to) go driver hunting.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041042916 said:
That's because many hardware vendors don't certify to Linux, and don't provide drivers, but they don't need to because they are included in the linux kernel.

I'd be willing to bet that if you fired up Ubuntu on either of those it would automatically detect and use drivers for the chipsets on it's own.

The only time I have ever had problems is with integrated third party components like extra SATA controllers or unusual USB3 controllers, but those usually work too.

Like we have been saying earlier in this thread, with Linux most drivers are in the kernel. You rarely ever have to download or install anything, and you probably shouldn't as the ones in the kernel are the ones to use.

It's not like with windows, where after install you have to go to a webpage and download drivers. The kernel is updated frequently, and in 99% of the time includes everything you need, except proprietary GPU drivers, which you don't manually download either. You just tell it to install them from the gui, and it pulls them from the repository and installs them.

That's why it is usually EASIER to install Linux than windows. There is usually no need (or reason to) go driver hunting.
Click to expand...

I have been using Linux as my primary desktop OS since ~2001, and I can't remember the last time I manually downloaded a driver zip and installed it. It's simply not the way it works. That's the Windows way :p

Everything is in either the kernel or in the distribution repository. For really exotic hardware you could potentially have to manually compile and modprobe a driver module or something, but I haven't had to do that in like 10 years.
 
The Intel I217-V ethernet on my Z87 mainboard did not work in any distributions of Linux upon its release.
 
dook43 said:
The Intel I217-V ethernet on my Z87 mainboard did not work in any distributions of Linux upon its release.
Click to expand...

Yeah, upon first release things can take a little bit to catch up, but it usually doesn't take too long.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041041835 said:
How is that different from any other forum on the internet?

Hardforums:

OP: hey all, just built my first PC, what do you guys think? <specs>

Nvidiafanboy69: Sux, should have used a GTX<whatever>

Radeontool49: Fuck you Nvidiafanboy, everyone knows the Radoen<whatever> is the only way to go in this price segment

CPUgod21: Dude, why did you only go with an i5? Six cores and i7 is the only way to go

Ilikeweakcores: Pshaw CPUgod, everyone knows pre-bulldozer AMD CPU's are the best bang for the buck.

ASUS4lyfe: useless without an Asus Mobo

Lantec: Useless without a $10k desk to put it on

OP: What have I done?


--------

The same scenario plays out on ever car forum, every computer forum, every audiophile forum, every forum ever dedicated to anything anyone has as a hobby in the history of the internet.


Calling out Linux specifically on this issue seems kind of silly.
Click to expand...

Haha, too true. Hell I've seen people argue about what the best motor oil is on bobs...

Still Linux might be better if they condensed down a bit, made it more unified and universal.
 
It's because Linux doesn't come preloaded on machines at major computer retail shops. Computer manufacturers aren't going to do that, because they're in bed with MS. It would be stupid for computer shops to sell Linux machines when they can make more money doing malware removal on Windows machines. It's about money; you guys are all stupid.
 
r-486 said:
It's because Linux doesn't come preloaded on machines at major computer retail shops. Computer manufacturers aren't going to do that, because they're in bed with MS. It would be stupid for computer shops to sell Linux machines when they can make more money doing malware removal on Windows machines. It's about money; you guys are all stupid.
Click to expand...

It's the retailers that put Windows on machines but the OEMs. Sure they are in bed with Microsoft, but those relationships came under the most government security and monitoring that any tech company has seen with Microsoft's anti-trust problems and those relationships do work much differently now.

In bed or not, there's got to be something in it for OEMs to Linux on their machines. Resistance to malware is great, but that's just not enough considering the vastness of the Windows ecosystem and the support that Microsoft provides its OEMs. And it's not just technical support but marketing. No doubt when Windows 8 launches, Microsoft will spend hundreds of millions marketing it and everyone will know that a new Windows version is out. No one is going to spend a dime promoting a new version of a desktop Linux distro.
 
Linux as a kernel is pretty great but the desktop environment software is in major need of leadership to get it polished up. A significant problem is the lack of constancy... just as a DE begins to mature these numbnuts decide to scrap everything and start all over.

I thought Canonical was on to something for a bit there, and then Shuttleworth completely lost his mind. Granted the GNOME kiddies kind of forced his hand a bit too.

There is also too much politics and too many egos in the overall Linux ecosystem. That has a potential to put a crimp on any "meritocracy".
 
Ultimately computers are seen by most as appliances, like a refrigerator or coffee maker. Your average person would prefer for them to just work, with as little thought and issue as possible. That's one reason Windows 8 has failed, because people see it as akin to having to relearn how to use their refrigerator, which is pointless aggravation. Linux is that much worse.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041042916 said:
That's because many hardware vendors don't certify to Linux, and don't provide drivers, but they don't need to because they are included in the linux kernel...
Click to expand...

I just found it a little odd that the Asus P5Q socket 775 had Linux drivers and the Abit AT8 32X socket 939 also had Linux drivers and the newly listed mobos don't.
 
coolpurplefan said:
I just found it a little odd that the Asus P5Q socket 775 had Linux drivers and the Abit AT8 32X socket 939 also had Linux drivers and the newly listed mobos don't.
Click to expand...

Maybe they finally figured out they don't need to post them, cause no one downloads them? :p
 
Everything on Linux is just too complex for the average user. Anyone who thinks otherwise is grossly overestimating the users here. The company I work for charges about $75/hour for technical support (with a 15/min a call minimum) and we get tonnes of calls from users who "can't log in" and we just find that they either can't remember their password or can't type the password from the reset email accurately.

That's right, they can't read the email and then type that password in to the login form. That's what you're dealing with. Some people won't even use an OS that requires they log in, that's why Windows still supports accounts without passwords.

And the way open-source software is developed I can't see this changing, ever. The reason is it's developed by technical people, for technical people. Until Linux is easier to use than Windows for people who are familiar with Windows it's not going to go anywhere, this is the reason Android is popular, it's EASIER to use than Windows, so much so that average people are willing to try it out.
 
Didn't you know, Linux is now easier to use than Windows!
 
Quix said:
Everything on Linux is just too complex for the average user. Anyone who thinks otherwise is grossly overestimating the users here. The company I work for charges about $75/hour for technical support (with a 15/min a call minimum) and we get tonnes of calls from users who "can't log in" and we just find that they either can't remember their password or can't type the password from the reset email accurately.

That's right, they can't read the email and then type that password in to the login form. That's what you're dealing with. Some people won't even use an OS that requires they log in, that's why Windows still supports accounts without passwords.

And the way open-source software is developed I can't see this changing, ever. The reason is it's developed by technical people, for technical people. Until Linux is easier to use than Windows for people who are familiar with Windows it's not going to go anywhere, this is the reason Android is popular, it's EASIER to use than Windows, so much so that average people are willing to try it out.
Click to expand...

The other side of that coin is that ChromeOS is supposedly too dumbed-down and non-technical to be a "real" OS.
 
Neither Windows or Linux is easier.
Both have aspects that are easier than the other.
Like printers? Linux is easiest, hands down.
Software installs off of disks? Windows.
Driver updates? Linux.
Retail access to software? Windows.
Games? Windows.
Buying a PC with an OS pre-installed? Windows.
Then again, most of the easier/ harder with Linux depends on which distro you opt to run.
Linux keeps getting better, getting more support, more software. The problem is Windows has one hell of a head start and the only way Linux is ever going to catch up is Microsoft becoming complacent and stagnate.
 
linux is doing just fine in the server market, not sure why OS's all want the consumer market so much, as the server market is also where the money is to be made with support contracts.
 
SGA76 said:
I think that, right there, is what hurts Linux on the Desktop most in the long run. Nevermind the fact that we're ALL incorrectly referring to our distros as Linux.

As I said before... Ubuntu's installer is so dead simple that even installing Windows 7 is needlessly convoluted. But that is just Ubuntu.

Then the xkcd comic comes to mind if I were to suggest one mega distro that serves to be the ultimate community distro that solves all the problems of Linux for Windows OEMs.

Instead of having that one mega distro, we'd just have another distro vying for attention among the 20-30 others.
Click to expand...
 
Smashing Young Man said:
Ultimately computers are seen by most as appliances, like a refrigerator or coffee maker. Your average person would prefer for them to just work, with as little thought and issue as possible. That's one reason Windows 8 has failed, because people see it as akin to having to relearn how to use their refrigerator, which is pointless aggravation. Linux is that much worse.
Click to expand...
I think that's only half of it. Windows 8 didn't just change things around, from a desktop perspective, they changed them around and added more steps for no reason. Like in Windows 7, if you want to shut down, you click on 2 buttons, done. In Windows 8, you hover over an area, then click on 3 buttons. That's quantitatively worse. If a GUI is different, but has key advantages in almost every area compared to the old method, it's worth learning. If it's just "different" AND has additional obstacles that get in the way of performing actions efficiently, there's no incentive to change.
 
tetris42 said:
I think that's only half of it. Windows 8 didn't just change things around, from a desktop perspective, they changed them around and added more steps for no reason. Like in Windows 7, if you want to shut down, you click on 2 buttons, done. In Windows 8, you hover over an area, then click on 3 buttons. That's quantitatively worse. If a GUI is different, but has key advantages in almost every area compared to the old method, it's worth learning. If it's just "different" AND has additional obstacles that get in the way of performing actions efficiently, there's no incentive to change.
Click to expand...
Most people have been doing the exact same set of basic tasks (email, web browsing etc) on every version of Windows since Win95/98. I think history will eventually record the era of paid computer software as one of legalized extortion.
 
JeffDC said:
Most people have been doing the exact same set of basic tasks (email, web browsing etc) on every version of Windows since Win95/98. I think history will eventually record the era of paid computer software as one of legalized extortion.
Click to expand...

Meh,

I have a different take on it. I am happy that there are hobbyists and professionals that want to contribute their free time to developing open and free software and I'll happily use it, but I have no gripe what so ever with people charging for software. Living is expensive, and we can't expect the work of highly qualified software engineers to be free all the time.

They need to eat too :p
 
Well Fedora is free, based on Redhat but without the customer service.

One issue is with windows to install a program you simply click the exe and it runs.

With linux you usually have to put in code and not everybody is a programmer and can understand.

Installing java for example:

$ sudo apt-get install openjdk-7-jre

I don't think grandma is going to remember that or even want to attempt it.
 
ep0x73 said:
Well Fedora is free, based on Redhat but without the customer service.

One issue is with windows to install a program you simply click the exe and it runs.

With linux you usually have to put in code and not everybody is a programmer and can understand.

Installing java for example:

$ sudo apt-get install openjdk-7-jre

I don't think grandma is going to remember that or even want to attempt it.
Click to expand...

Except you don't have to.

The command line certainly is an option, but all distributions have graphical installers that look like an app store and automatically pull in all needed dependencies...
 
What disturbs me about Linux is actually keeping track of what is installed in the first place. There are some (overly complicated) methods of tracking what you installed via apt, but what about the stuff you compiled yourself and used 'make install' on? That stuff just copies shit to a directory and the only way to uninstall it is to hope the 'make uninstall' script is functioning.

There needs to be something akin to the "Add/Remove Programs" list Windows has for Linux, IMO atleast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top