Posted on 08/17/2011 5:00:18 AM PDT by ShadowAce
Where is the Linux desktop going, and where should it go? This is a hot topic, and an important one. Unfortunately the discussion usually starts from the wrong premise, that the Linux desktop has only recently achieved parity with its Mac OS X and Windows cousins. Not so! The Linux desktop has been superior since its early days, and would have to go backwards to achieve parity.
Now which Linux desktop are we talking about? That's a good question, and that is superior item #1: multiple desktop environments and window managers to choose from.
The PC has been a mighty multi-purpose power tool from its humble beginnings. Unlike a lot of multi-purpose tools, it can do many things extremely well. You other old geezers probably remember when hardware was the limiting factor, and impatient do-it-ourselfers were continually upgrading just to keep pace with the software. Then in the early 2000s hardware caught up, and now even cheap commodity hardware has more power than we need. (Except for ghastly script-heavy poorly-coded Web pages that bring quad-cores to their knees; I laugh when people say all they need is a cheap low-power gadget for email and Web surfing. Good luck with that!)
The benchmark for the user interface has always been Windows. This is understandable due to Microsoft's lock on the market. Back in the olden days of Linux most Linux users came from Unix backgrounds. Anymore I'll wager that the majority of Linux users learned Windows first, and a goodly number of Mac users as well. Which has little to do with preference and merit, and much to do with lock-in. I started with Mac, then Windows, then Linux.
I don't like to see Linux chasing Mac and Windows, except for copying the good stuff. For the most part Linux chasing Windows is going backwards. Especially the part where each release grows by gigabytes without providing any additional functionality. Windows 7 Pro eats up a good 22GB, while Windows XP Pro consumes less than a gigabyte for itself. What do you get for all those extra gigabytes? Minesweeper, Solitaire, Notepad... um... oh yeah, drastically higher CPU and RAM requirements. Maybe to power all the nagware.
Chasing the Mac interface might make sense. But listen to Ingo Molnar's extremely insightful comment on user interface design:
"I think what the KDE4 and Gnome3 folks are doing is that they have picked Apple (and to a lesser degree, Google) UI products as their role model...the problem as I see it is that they tried to achieve this by mimicking Apple products, instead of implementing a high quality UI development process...You cannot really gap that difference by taking a giant leap in the "product space", regardless of the existing user base and regardless of the quality of the landing...
"I think OSS UI projects are also making a big mistake by mimicking the development model of closed-source projects...We should realize that our future OSS developers are sitting in front of the device they are using, most of them are at most 100-200 msecs away from a server that the developers are using - they only have to be engaged intelligently ...
"Yet we are doing everything in our power to create silly artificial walls between developers and users."
Linux already has everything it needs to provide a superior user experience. Which users, you insightfully ask? Not Jim and Jane Sixpack, who find iPads too complicated because they can't decide which finger to poke it with. Jim and Jane aside, tablets and smartphones are wonderful devices filling a long-unserved need.
But, they are not PCs. Ever since the early days of Linux the Linux desktop it has run circles around Mac and Windows. Even back when it was raggedy and unpolished it was bursting with functionality. What good is pretty if it can't do anything, or doesn't let you do what you want? First make it do cool stuff and be reliable, then you can always pretty it up later.
Here is a partial list of things Linux can do, some new, most old, many of which Mac and Windows still can't and won't even try, or only with expensive third-party add-ons:
The better approach is not to throw all this great stuff away in the name of simplicity, of dumbing it down drastically to appeal to "the masses." An awful lot of Linux fans have this idea that when the Linux desktop reaches the perfect level of eye-candy one-button one-finger fabulousness then the masses will flock to it. And in a way they're right, as evidenced by the success of smartphones and tablets. But — and I repeat myself — PCs are not tablets and smartphones. And, for those good people who believe that a great GUI is "intuitive", meaning anyone can pick it up and instantly start using it, guess what the consistently-best selling O'Reilly books are: iPad and iPhone books. Go see for yourself. (The supposedly-superior Windows is there too.)
Freedom. This is the biggie. It seems a lot of Linux fans are squirmy with talking about freedom, like it's weird old hippie stuff that nobody wants to hear about. But the reality is that many people are interested. Many computer users, especially frustrated customers of the usual closed, proprietary vendors, are very interested in freedom: they like the idea of Richard Stallman's classic Four Freedoms, and recognize that these add considerable value to software.
They like the idea of freedom from crazy licensing schemes designed to confuse and overcharge, freedom from crazy unilateral end-user license "agreements" that dictate what you can do with your own property, freedom from lock-in, freedom from artificial barriers to interoperability and open standards. They want honesty and accountability, and freedom from the heavy overhead of managing proprietary licenses.
Cathy Malmrose, CEO of independent Linux vendor ZaReason, told me once that they investigated selling Windows, perhaps in dual-boot configurations. But they would have needed an extra staffer just to handle the compliance paperwork. It's just as bad for a business running even a bare complement of proprietary software, what with server licenses, client licenses, client access licenses to the servers, remote access licenses, terminal server licences and so on, all calculated for maximum redundancy. It's nuts.
So please, friends, don't sell desktop Linux short. It already towers head and shoulders above its proprietary cousins. We don't need to apologize for it because it has long provided a superior computing experience, and will only get better — as long we don't get derailed chasing inferiorware.
I would add 'shouldnt have to' to your list.
I agree they shouldn’t have to.
Interesting. My experience is different. With my network-enabled printer, my linux box just sees it, installed the correct drivers, and can use it with no issues.
(And I hate the new Ubuntu desktop)
You and me both.
See, now there’s the problem.
It takes 3 seconds for you to say “update your video driver... yada yada yada”
Then the person listening decides he’d spend a half an hour or so and it should be EASY to upgrade the driver.
And then after he’s four days into the project and still doesn’t have it done, he’s pretty frosted. And I do not blame him at all. Linux is INCREDIBLY difficult to tweak.
I installed Knoppix on one of my laptops to boot from the hard drive. It would not recognize my wireless. I found all I had to do was make a simple change to one of the init parms,
But it WOULD NOT let me edit it! I had to create a copy, edit the copy, then try to copy it back.
But you can’t say COPY X Y, you have to use MOVE...
Now, I’m not a rookie either. I was my first computer about 1973 and have been working with them ever since. I’ve written a LOT of assembler code, and worked with Univacs, IBM’s, others.
I am a z/OS systems engineer now.
In all my years, the only thing I’ve seen as cryptic as Linux is some of the C derivatives.
With the latest Ubuntu, I was able to update my video driver from the desktop (once I figured out how to find the relocated system functions).
I hate the new desktop, but it did its job in this case.
What is the fake interop of Brand X? And what are the trade offs?
Well if it works for you great if not leave it alone is what I tell people. The backbone of the net what does it run on ReadHat centos an Oracle mainly and when they shoot them rockets in the air to travel to Mars Pluto Saturn do you think they trust Windows or Mac LMAO>> Mac now I know about Mac OS it is nothing but BSD with a modified kernel all reference to BSD and the BSD license is stripped out, dont belive it open the code in a hex editor and take and good gander at it!!
I have seen that as well. Linux is a great OS, and I admire Linus Torvalds for starting the Linux project. But a lot of Linux geeks are extremely selfish and self-centered. They live in a very small world.
When I have work to do, I use Windows, because that's what work uses.
When I am surfing the web or doing personal things, I use Ubuntu.
Keeps everything separate and if I pick up some security risk while surfing the web, it doesn't affect my Windows installation.
It’s comical in a way.
Like people who are hard-core into Dungeons and Dragons.
Teenage boys who have dreams of Elvira, Mistress of the Dark!
Remember, Linux is positively “BURSTING WITH FUNCTIONALITY”!!
It’s a very cloistered world.
They have yet to realize the capital that is peoples past experiences with various computers. Many times, I’ve seen on Linux boards someone would pose a question “Ho do I do Z??”
The Linux brain trust comes back and says “Why do you want to do that? You’d be much better off doing R”
The person asking the original question is bound to think “Well, I was just getting used to the idea that I might be able to get Z to work, and now they tell me I gotta use R? WTF?”
Linux probably does have the highest level of what someone might call the snobbery quotient to it. And that works very much against mass acceptance.
Nobody wants to be made to feel stupid just for asking a question.
Lol!!!
Hey, hang in there. Another four months of study and the Council might teach you the secret handshake!
I haven't heard anything but complaints about it.
No that isn’t a true statement. The best doesn’t always win. Microsoft Windows was not better than OS/2 from IBM. Far from it. M$ had better marketing (amongst other things).
I hate dealing with printers. The last few versions I haven't had to do much of anything to get them running. Webmin is your friend when dealing with a lot of the stuff that would otherwise have you hand-editing config files. It even makes sendmail easy.
Linux vs Windows is apples and oranges.
Windows has all the hardware support from the manufacturers and massive monopoly position that it can use to keep out opposition,whereas Linux is for more freedom-orientated individuals who want to customize their stuff.
The average windows and the average Linux user will both be pretty hopeless,but the experienced Linux user is a different species of computer animal than the experienced Windows user.
They're called 'Lusers'.
“Microsoft Windows was not better than OS/2 from IBM”
Microsoft is far far better than IBM. IBM never imagined there would be a PC on everyones desk.
Microsoft made a product which was easy to use and they made it easy to buy. Linux has developed over the years, but is difficult to use for the average person. We keep hearing about new desktop versions but they aren’t ready and probably never will be. There is not adequate financial incentive for companies to develop that product.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.