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

51–60 of 385 posts

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#51

Post by migueldeicaza »

ajross wrote: post #30
batista wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So in that light, I think the idea that the Linux desktop got "killed" is sort of missing the point. It's no more moribund now than it was before. Oh, but it is. Because it has lost a lot of momentum that it had, momentum that was coming from the "we're gonna overtake MS and win over the Desktop" feeling prevalent at the time. Heck, the guy behind GTK complained recently that he is just one man taking care of the p…

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.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#52

Post by scrumper »

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…

This is pretty much spot on.

I believe that the lack of "strong-D" Design you refer to is because Linux's desktop is pretty much the ultimate committee-driven project. It's very democratic: great for preventing abuse, but rather bad when it comes to vision.

Most of us here know how difficult it is for one person in a company to drive an idea through without it being diluted; countless product companies have gone bust over the years because of committee-induced paralysis. It's much worse when you have a distributed group of volunteers who rarely, if ever, get to meet.

Maybe collaborative development is incapable of producing something as complex and difficult as a clean, well-designed desktop environment and API? Forking, competing spinoffs, factionalism are all useful things in some ways, but they're death to this kind of project.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#53

Post by batista »

untog wrote: post #36
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…

Even windows, crappy as it may be, has it. [...] Apple's work looks pretty-- because it is designed to function well. Actually, I'd say the same of Windows, if not more so. I far prefer the Windows 7 interface to OSX, it's just stuff like the terminal/command prompt that really lets Windows down.

>I far prefer the Windows 7 interface to OSX, it's just stuff like the terminal/command prompt that really lets Windows down.

I'm not sure. Windows has some overall design, but also has tons of design neglect.

One example: due to static compiling and linking, you often get programs (and lots of them) that still use Windows 98 like Open/Save File dialogs, instead of every program automatically getting the latest OS standard widget with late binding.

Or things like the Metro/Windows dichotomy in the latest version.

Windows always feels design by committee to me, and one where some manager can have idiotic ideas and no developer/designer can shoot it down.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#54

Post by keithpeter »

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've used Linux for years and have never had these problems."

Agreed. That is two desktops and four laptops worth in a decade.

"I think the issue is that getting everything working requires a deep understanding of each component and the system as a whole. "

Not so sure. I'm an end user and tend to just shove the CD-ROM in and cross my fingers. Most 'stuff' works. My stuff is simpler than yours however (audio interface, cameras, keyboard (musical) controller)

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#55

Post by SCdF »

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…

So I enjoyed using Ubuntu w. Gnome2 more than any other OS/window manager that I've used, which includes Win 98-7, and Snow Leopard->ML.

I thought it was designed well. So what does that make me then?

"if you want to run a linux desktop and don't value or care about design"

But I do care about design, it just sounds like you and I like different kinds of design.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#56

Post by jcfrei »

in a q&a round at aalto university in finland linus adressed the question why linux never took off on the desktop: the lack of being a pre-installed os. he mentions that without preinstalled operating systems there's now way to gain a significant market share in the desktop segment.

the whole talk by itself is very recommendable: http://youtu.be/MShbP3OpASA?t=23m45s

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#57

Post by keithpeter »

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.

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

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#58

Post by ConstantineXVI »

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…

IMHO; Android and to a lesser degree ChromeOS (as well as other similar platforms) don't quite count as "Linux" for purposes of "the Linux desktop" as they've replaced nearly everything above the kernel with their own stack[0].

[0] Last time I used ChromeOS it was still mostly in line with ordinary Linux (thought it might have been partially Gentoo based?); but a rather impractical one as it's less than simple to run [things that aren't Chrome]. Heard about Xorg getting replaced at some point, I'm unclear on if that actually happened.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#59

Post by eropple »

nnnnnnnn wrote: post #40

An interesting observation is that tablets are becoming the new desktop and in that space linux, through android, is becoming a dominant player. In a way, the linux desktop is finally here and it's winning against both Microsoft and Apple put together. All of the article's criticism of mainstream workstation distributions is accurate, of course. But it's important to note that those represent nowhere near the sum tot…

In no way is that "the Linux desktop" "winning" at anything, because (at long last) the navel-gazing of the Linux community has been pushed aside in favor of one group saying "this is how it will be" (and then some OEMs scribbling a little on the walls, but not much).

Android is only "Linux" when it's convenient for Linux advocates, but it's never "the Linux desktop".

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#60

Post by mbreese »

spiralpolitik wrote: post #49
wonderzombie wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the risk of re-igniting that flame war, I posit that this is also a cathedral vs. bazaar issue. OS X is more or less centrally planned, by one company, Apple.

There is nothing stopping people sourcing the parts from the bazaar and using them to build a cathedral. After all it's exactly what NeXT (and Apple) did.

Yeah, but you need an architect that people will listen to in order to build a cathedral. It has to be many people, united under a common vision. That's really hard to pull off in the Linux community.
Post reply on HN