The concept of Linux on the desktop is as aberrant as the concept of Windows on the server
What killed the Linux desktop
251–260 of 385 posts
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows is horrible to use, everything is poorly designed. Linux (Ubuntu in my case) and OSX just work sanely mostly, but OSX is a horrible dev environment, so I moved back to Linux.
>Windows is horrible to use, everything is poorly designed Without qualifiers, that statement is meaningless. Perhaps you mean it's horrible for some devs? (Millions of others are doing just fine with Visual Studio). For regular users, dropping them to Linux will be like replacing your mom's car's controls with the controls found in an airplane cockpit(command line) or playing "who moved my cheese ?" with the Linux d…
Ubuntu works just fine for two kind of users:
1.) Grandmothers and the like who just want to read their mail and check the news.
2.) People like me who can and will use 4 + 2 + 1 + 0,5 hours to customize it over the course of 6-12 months to have an almost perfect working environment instead of living with a slower OS without virtual desktops.
The only thing I can think of that needs tinkering is some online banks that require applets to work, but then again even Windows doesn't come with Java preinstalled.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#253This is the money quote: > The second dimension to the problem is that no two Linux distributions agreed on which core components the system should use. Linux on the desktop suffered from a lack of coherent, strategic vision, consistency and philosophy . Every engineer I know likes to do things a particular way. They also have a distorted view on the level of customization that people want and need. I like OSX. Out o…
> I just want it to work...
We must be doing different things, because I've been on Linux desktops with zero-to-minimal effort since 1999.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#254Earlier 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..
I have no idea where this sentiment coming from. I'm typing this from an MBP with a das keyboard, navigating with a razer mouse and viewing with a samsung monitor, everything works fine.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#255Earlier 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..
I have no idea where this sentiment is coming from. I'm typing this from an MBP with a das keyboard, navigating with a razer mouse and viewing with a samsung monitor, everything works fine.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#256"As for myself, I had fallen in love with the iPhone, so using a Mac on a day-to-day basis was a must."
What? How? I've got an iPhone and have never felt like having a Mac was a must. Am I missing some major parts of the system that don't work if you don't have a Mac?
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or the complete lack of uninstallers. I am continuously baffled by that. How can you have a "modern" operating system without uninstallers? Well, the dream is that you don't need one. Drag the app from Applications to the Trash and... ta-da! Of course, that never happens with anything more complex than the most superficial of apps.
> Of course, that never happens with anything more complex than the most superficial of apps. Well all of my applications are superficial apparently, because apart from Little Snitch I can't think of one I'll need an uninstaller for. And LS is a special case.
I'd say at least 25% of the OS X apps I try have an installer and therefore require an uninstaller that often doesn't exist. Usually someone on a forum somewhere lists a sequence of terminal commands required to remove an app and it's background services. If I'm lucky.
Happened to me several times in the last two weeks alone. I vaguely remember it took me ages to get VMWare or similar off my machine.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#258This is the money quote: > The second dimension to the problem is that no two Linux distributions agreed on which core components the system should use. Linux on the desktop suffered from a lack of coherent, strategic vision, consistency and philosophy . Every engineer I know likes to do things a particular way. They also have a distorted view on the level of customization that people want and need. I like OSX. Out o…
Among non-ultra-geeky Linux users I know (mostly part-time users), "Linux" does seem to be reasonably standardized as far as desktop components go, because by "Linux" they mean "Ubuntu". It's possible the Ubuntu desktop dominance came a bit too late, though, and still isn't entirely complete. My own experiences aren't great with Windows, though they're smoother on OSX than Linux. The problem I have with Windows is th…
>badly interacting upgrades of the OS and separately installed packages and system versions of python/ruby/etc., that I do most of my dev work in Debian in VirtualBox now
Well, sure, but (unless I am mistaken) that is no longer on the topic of the Linux desktop.
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#259What killed it is that it didn't have a huge and multi-billion dollar company betting on it (on the desktop) like Microsoft and Apple had, even Apple with its billions is still around 5% market share worldwide so having 1% is still a great accomplishment when you think that it had no support from huge corporations. Now take the mobile world for example, Linux on mobile had been around for a decade but it never really…
Redhat and Canonical are big companies that did bet the house on Linux. A few years back I was confident Canonical was what desktop Linux needed to get its shit together.
And today I'm typing this on a Zareason laptop that's supposed to provide 1st class support for Ubuntu (even has an Ubuntu key), and the mic doesn't work, Fn keys don't work, youtube videos appear in monochrome blue, and it likes to boot itself up randomly from time until the battery drains...
Re: What killed the Linux desktop
#260For what it's worth, GNU/Linux never really was about some desktop conquest, so this whole discussion "What killed the Linux desktop" is quite absurd.
That aside, what we have here is a thread apparently devoted to shitting on the work of people who built something for fun and gave it away for free.
Good job folks!