Live data from Hacker News

What killed the Linux desktop

tirania.org

211–220 of 385 posts

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#211
Please ignore Icaza. As for the famous death of Linux on the desktop let me tell you something: IT NEVER HAPPENED. What are those people smoking?

I've been using Linux for the last decade and every year it gets better, more polished, more integrated, featuring a better design; I hear more & more people talking about it and using it. Linux is more alive than ever on the desktop!

Depending on your needs, Linux can make an exceptional desktop. Yes, true, it is not for _everyone_, but then again neither are Windows or MacosX.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#212

I never understood this. Why would market share of Linux on the desktop matter? I've always viewed Linux on the desktop as something for power users and developers, and thousands of said power users and developers are continually developing and maintaining multiple distros and thousands of applications. It's not like it's a stale and abandoned paradigm that's left to die.

Linux by no means should be limited to power users. It should be (and is) a universal OS.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It is absolutely opinion.

For a start, it precludes a sane implementation of focus-follows-mouse.

Secondly, for frequently used commands, keyboard shortcuts will be faster anyway (I'm aware of the study you're probably going to mention, but plenty of other studies have had different conclusions).

Lastly, and this is pure conjecture on my part, wouldn't having the menu bar at the top of the screen result in a much narrower arc from the current mouse position to the desired entry? The theory also seems to ignore the fact that in most cases you'd want to move the mouse back to the original window, or hit some specific (and often quite small) target in that window. Which is now made more difficult by the mouse being farther away. Just some idle wonderings, they were quite possibly addressed in that study.

I know that you started your post with "Whether people like it or not isn't really relevant. It's that this is the correct way to do it.", and thus are unlikely to be swayed from your opinions; it's worth considering though that every choice has pros and cons, and sometimes the total value of each side very much depends on the person.

(although I share your "Screw the people, this is /correct/!" view when it comes to tau: no-one's perfect)

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#214
Nothing "killed the Linux desktop"; it still thrives for those that want it, and it's steadily improving. It never came to dominate the market, and one can argue about the reasons it never displaced Macintosh (still less Windows). It probably has a lot to do with lack of a single, unified vision, and the market fragmentation caused by the different distros, and the lack of market pressure to ship, as it relies on volunteer labor, but I'm not going to presume.

Personally, I've been primarily a Mac user since the Mississippian superperiod, but I used an X-11 Windows(™) environment (on top of FreeBSD) for years at work. I don't miss it, even one iota, but I know plenty of smart people who prefer that sort of thing. De gustibus non disputandum est and all that.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#215
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does falling in love with an iPhone show that you don't fully appreciate the value of open source? Tell me about any good open source handset that came out before the iPhone. OpenMoko? I mean, you really had to love open source to put up with it. Yes, there is still Android but, given how modified the usual handset is, you can't buy a free and open Android on the market as well. So, where is the problem in using…

There is a big difference between using and loving.

Which leaves your point unexplained. So, let me reply in an equally enigmatic fashion:

There are many reasons for which a thing can be loved.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#217
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That example isn't due to static linking, it's because they chose a particular style of dialog which is deprecated and cannot be updated without breaking backwards compatibility. Software compiled in 1998 has no problem using the newest common dialogs if they used the standard API without installing their own hooks and customisation.

> That example isn't due to static linking, it's because they chose a particular style of dialog which is deprecated and cannot be updated without breaking backwards compatibility. I'm not sure what this means though: "it's because they chose a particular style of dialog which is deprecated and cannot be updated without breaking backwards compatibility." So you mean something like the Windows API featured 2-3 differe…

"it seems in Windows API all drawing is hardcoded, so the dialog also comes with the old style buttons etc. "

IIRC, the particular style allows applications to paint on top of the system dialogs, add controls, etc. The API call cannot know when or where drawing will take place (or whether it will happen at all), so it cannot use any other screen real estate than what it always used. That means controls must stay the same size and exact location. That rules out shadows, font changes, etc, so the control must forever stay as it was in the dark ages.

On the positive side: I understand that the Windows 3.1 "Add Font" dialog is gone in Windows 7. Unfortunately, not everybody seems to be happy about it: http://www.sevenforums.com/backup-restore/42035-restore-inst...

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#218
post #159

Linux desktop will rise again as Android PC.

No Android please! Linux desktop is shifting from X.org to Wayland, and Wayland is making inroads into mobile as well. Android is really a completely side thing for conventional Linux.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#219
post #61
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…

PulseAudio doesn't depend on GDM, you just need to create a config for it; What I do (on fedora) is move the default.pa from /var/lib/gdm/.pulse/default.pa to ~/.pulse...

You can't expect everything to work when you tear out components then fail to configure things properly...

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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..

I've been using OS X going back to the betas. I've never seen OS X have problems with third party hardware that conformed to standards. I have seen problems with third party hardware that required its own driver (poorly written generally) or that was half assed crap that was designed to work with windows but marketed as supporting standards like "USB". Meanwhile, Linux has trouble dealing with the computer itself, le…

In my experience, Linux works great with standards-compliant hardware. Linux is typically the first platform with support for a new standard. The problem is there is so much hardware that is not standards-compliant.

Your comment looks about as asinine to me as the as the parent comment does to you.

Post reply on HN