Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What killed the Linux desktop

tirania.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 385 posts

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#171

Post by luriel »

jsnell wrote: post #61
jrockway wrote: post #9

I've used Linux for years and have never had these problems. I think the issue is that getting everything working requires a deep understanding of each component and the system as a whole. If you just follow advice on forums, you will make things worse because you're doing things you don't understand to a system that you don't understand. That's not going to lead to success. You need to be able to think critically ab…

I have used Linux as my main desktop and laptop OS for 17 years, and see these problems frequently. It used to be a system I could keep completely in my head, and understand what was happening and why. But from maybe 2005 onwards there has been a persistent and accelerating trend of replacing the old working and transparent (though possibly a bit baroque) infrastructure with fancy new components that are completely i…

All the problems with Linux over the last five years can be summed up in one word: Pottering.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#172

Post by migueldeicaza »

migueldeicaza wrote: post #51
ajross wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really didn't intend it as a swipe against Miguel, but I think it does inform his perspective. And I meant "platform fan" in the advocacy sense: he has a tendency to "fall in love" with favorite products. That's not uncommon in the general population (it's pretty much the norm at HN!), but it certainly is among core Linux people who tend to prefer doing new things in different ways. > His early world was Midnight C…

Pedantically speaking, I wrote Gnumeric not because I loved Excel, or enjoyed using it or because I was trying to be innovative. In fact, I did not even know how to use a spreadsheet at the time. Gnumeric was the product of the mood in the early days of Gnome: we need to provide this to have a complete desktop offering and we were talented hackers that could get it done. So I did.

I forgot to mention.

Once I started, I enjoyed writing a spreadsheet every second of it. It was both a very educational process, but also the one that made me grow fonder of strict compiler warnings and errors. And from this experience, most Gnome software after this was compiled with warn-as-error.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#173

Post by MatthewPhillips »

flatline3 wrote: post #93
MatthewPhillips wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, they weren't, but it's not like Linux in general has given us much innovative things in the desktop space. O.o Two off the top of my head: workspaces, app stores.

Workspaces? You mean virtual desktops? Those date back 1986, implemented at Xerox PARC (and patented!). As for appstores, I assume you're talking about the packaging systems, which are similar only if viewed from 50,000 feet. The packaging systems were not stores. You couldn't buy packages. They didn't serve as an agent to sell other people's personally submitted packages. They had "apps" but no "store". The applicat…

You got me on workspaces, I wasn't aware of the Xerox implementation.

I didn't mean packaging, I meant app stores, see Lindows and CNR.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#174

Post by migueldeicaza »

keithpeter wrote: post #57
migueldeicaza wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantically speaking, I wrote Gnumeric not because I loved Excel, or enjoyed using it or because I was trying to be innovative. In fact, I did not even know how to use a spreadsheet at the time. Gnumeric was the product of the mood in the early days of Gnome: we need to provide this to have a complete desktop offering and we were talented hackers that could get it done. So I did.

Well, I'm glad you did write Gnumeric. The graphs module with that tree like properties box is really nice to use.

Jody Goldberg and the Gnumeric community deserve the credit for the graphics module, not me.

But I am glad you enjoy Gnumeric.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#175

Post by wsc981 »

diminish wrote: post #112
wheels wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have two monitors on my Linux desktop. A month ago full screen on video stopped working. [...] In this regard, both Windows and OSX just work. Just because it's never happened to you on OS X or Windows doesn't mean it doesn't happen. OS X 10.6.7 broke the output on my 13" Macbook for either of the two external displays I own. Both worked fine previously, when booted from the install CDs, or from Linux on the same…

To stress out again; OS/X has the poorest hardware support for 3rd parties; even compared to Linux. Just "think different" and buy some hardware and you ll see what I mean..

Printer drivers seem fine. Scanner drivers seem fine. USB mouses and keyboards work fine. Most Apple products can't really be expanded in many other ways.

I'd say the hardware support is fine for what little customisability Apple allows on the hardware that they sell. Perhaps the Mac Pro might have some issues with internal cards (I honestly wouldn't know ...), but those devices are not affordable for 99% of the people.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#176

Post by vetinari »

pswenson wrote: post #148
rufugee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry..I strongly disagree. You have me on the video support...OS X does a much better job there. You even have a point on audio drivers...they can be a pain at times. But design? Gnome 3 and Unity to me are FAR superior to OS X in terms of UI experience. YMMV of course. I bought a Macbook, gave it a fair shot, and it ended up being a dust collector simply because the desktop experience was painful compared to Ub…

what's wrong with the terminal? hit cmd-q to close an app. no idea what you mean by insane window switching behavior. you gave no examples of how Ubuntu/Fedora is better to rebut on UX. care to share some?

What's wrong with the Terminal.app? Except for the fact, that it does not really work?

Yeah, for simple stdout/stderr output it is fine, but for medium-sized ncurses apps it is a major PITA. Even Icaza's own Midnight Commander does not work there.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#177

Post by rotskoff »

freyrs3 wrote: post #62
nirvana wrote: post #25

I think he's right, but I think he's missing a key point. Design. Design is what killed the linux desktop. It never had it. OS X has it. Even windows, crappy as it may be, has it. Before I go on, let me say that Design is NOT "making it look pretty". In fact, thinking that this is what design is, is what leads many linux advocates to reject the needs of design. Apple's work looks pretty-- because it is designed to fu…

> Design is about usability and understanding the user Here's the point you're missing. The overwhelming majority Linux users don't give a flying hoot about the average user or mass adoption. They just want a system that gets out of their way and let's them do their technical tasks. Linux succeeds and excels at this because it is precisely designed for that niche and curated by its end-users. There are however people…

Agreed. I do a lot of scientific computing, and many of my tools simply don't exist in OSX compatible builds. While the majority of the work that I do is remote, on servers running Linux, tools like Xmonad and aptitude are basically indispensable for me.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#178

Post by nirvana »

lttlrck wrote: post #160
sjs wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you expected a clone of Windows and were predictably disappointed. > I got maybe three hours of the supposed 7 hour battery You should have taken it back. Seriously. > Perhaps I'm set in my ways You hit the nail on the head here. There's nothing wrong with that but most of your complaints amount to "this is not what I am used to". > the absolute insanse window switching behavior On Windows and Linux I…

Much like the Mac OS menu bar; drove me nuts stuck at the top of the screen like that, but a lot of people like it and I can understand that...

That's my point. It's not that a lot of people like it. In fact, whether people like it or not isn't really relevant.

It's that this is the correct way to do it.

When the menu bar is at the top of the screen, the user is much faster at getting the mouse over a menu item and clicking to open the menu.

It works better. This isn't opinion, it's measurable scientifically.

When the menu is on a window, you overshoot with your mouse and come down and have to hunt to get on the menu to open it. This slows you down.

But the thing is-- people get used to being slower and less efficient and then when on a better solution, they think the better solution is worse because it goes against all the compensations they've had to build up over the years to get around the other, poorer, design.

Now, I'm not saying that you can't prefer a windows style UI and menubar, but I am saying it is most likely because this is what you've been taught to use, and thus it feels more natural to you, even though it is less efficient for you.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#179

Post by fosap »

j-kidd wrote: post #102
aartur wrote: post #72

> In my opinion, the problem with Linux on the Desktop is rooted in the developer culture that was created around it. This developer culture DEFINES Linux. A fruit is either an apple or an orange. I couldn't have an OS with wonderful package management, developer tools, endless configurability AND a desktop Miguel de Icaza dreams of.

But I can have an OS with wonderful package management, developer tools, endless configurability AND a desktop Aaron Seigo and friends created.

The desktop wouldn't be configurable. Or not much more than Channing the background image.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#180

Post by pixelmonkey »

First of all, the Linux desktop is not dead.

As I wrote on my blog recently:

"In the [past three years], Linux has grown — albeit slowly — in desktop usage. After nearly 2 years of no growth (2008-2010, lingering around 1% of market), in 2011 Linux saw a significant uptick in desktop adoption (+64% from May 2011 to January 2012). However, Linux’s desktop share still about 1/5 of the share of Apple OS X and 1/50 the share of Microsoft Windows. This despite the fact that Linux continues to dominate Microsoft in the server market."

It may be in third place in a desktop market with primarily three OSes, but usage has never been higher.

As I discussed in this article, most of the original reasons that stopped Windows / Mac users from using Linux years ago are no longer valid. However, the irony is that it's easier than ever to get by with a Free Software desktop, but harder than ever to avoid proprietary software and lock-in, thanks to the rise of SaaS and the personal data cloud.

I agree with de Icaza that the "Open Web" is more important these days than a Free Desktop. But the linked Wired article's conception of Open Web refers to things like HTML5, JavaScript and CSS. These aren't the problem. They are an open delivery mechanism, yes, but usually for proprietary software.

Modern SaaS applications accessible through the web browsers using open web standards are the modern equivalent of an open source Perl script wrapping calls to a closed-source, statically-compiled binary.

You can read more about my thoughts on this in "Cloud GNU: where are you?" http://www.pixelmonkey.org/2012/08/18/cloud-gnu

Post reply on HN