When asked why he wasn't helping to repair his immobile Sherman, he said, "Oh, man, I just ride in 'em ... I don't know what makes 'em work ..."
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.
IBM failed with OS/S in that market because DOS (Windows) was cheaper.
And that is precisely why Linux will never be more than a niche product on the desktop/laptop market. Linux makes an excellent server for some applications, but the desktop is an entirely different matter. When something goes wrong, where is Grandma going to get help?
Outside of web servers, Linux is having quite a bit of success on mobile devises in its Android incarnation. That's because Google make it extremely easy to use. As for the Linux incarnation of Chrome OS, it's still too early to tell if Google will be successful. But I think Google has a better chance than the typical Linux distribution.
No. Instead you had to deal with anti-virus tools that take over your system almost as bad as a virus itself (norton and mcafee, I'm talking to you). You had to sweep regularly as well with malware tools, firewalls, and other annoyances.
It's a trade off.Linux (and Mac users), largely don't have to deal with any of that.
I find it funny that people are complaining so much about printers, when the vast majority of them are supported, even older ones that MS-Window 7 will never support.
The biggest problem I know of with Linux these days is wireless cards, and even they have come a heck of a long way especially considering so much of the work is the result of some rather painstaking reverse engineering of the hardware. The simplest solution to wireless card issues, is to simply get a supported one. There are many (if not most these days) that are supported right out of the box.
One solution for your quicken issues might be to run it in a virtual machine. There are several out there, though I’m partial to VmWare. (VmWare player is free).
The average home PC user doesn’t need, want or even know what any of that partial list of 31 Linux capabilities are.
Linux is a fine industrial operating system, but is not even close to suitable for the average PC user. When an average person goes to the grocery store, they hop in their Civic or Chevy sedan; they don’t hop in an 18-wheeler tractor trailer truck, particularly one built by a hoard of volunteer mechanics in their spare time.
Well I may have to deal with them, but they are far easier to deal with and are a fair price to pay for dealing with something that doesn’t give me headaches trying to get the simplest stuff to work.
And Windows 7 supports almost all printers made at least within the past 8 years. That’s about 99% of all relevant models.
Maybe a few dot-matrix machines get left out, but that’s ok.
You missed my point - Comparing the modern nixes to older ones, it is getting much easier to operate (and by similar comparison, Win is getting more difficult and obfuscated). While it may still need work, Linux is going in the right direction, which is why I deny your position (nix will NEVER be...) It is now at a point where it is no more difficult that Windows, albeit in a different perspective.
When something goes wrong, where is Grandma going to get help?
The same place she goes now... Me, and others like me. I don't think you realize how deep the Linux revolution goes - I literally don't know a single service tech who is not at least passingly familiar with Linux, and most that I know use it regularly. And those service techs are the direct interface between computing and John Q. Public.
That began all the way back with Win2k, where M$ in it's hubris, failed to provide a means to access a dead box (no boot disk for YEARS) - For me, and many others, Linux (Knoppix mainly) picked up the slack - being the only means to access a broken box to fix it or get files off it without hanging the drive in a test bench - Most service techs I know are quite comfortable in Linux, and many are spearheading it's distribution to their clients, if for no other reason than that it is impervious to viruses - By far and away the lion's share of the trouble my clients encounter.
And about 1/3 of my Linux desktop users ARE Grandmas, btw.
When asked why he wasn't helping to repair his immobile Sherman, he said, "Oh, man, I just ride in 'em ... I don't know what makes 'em work ..."
Try Rhythmbox or Amarok and add gtkPod.
“IBM failed with OS/S in that market because DOS (Windows) was cheaper. “
We’re saying the same thing. IBM was pricing the market for corporate users and figured individuals would not buy PCs for home use. Hence the higher price.
Microsoft priced things lower and sold it to the world.
Linux went free but still can’t get a foothold in the desktop market. Partially because the space is filled already but mostly because the linux desktop product isn’t as easy to use. There also aren’t as many software products for use on Linux.
Mac OS X is the modern Unix that is easy for the average computer user. Linux isn't there, except for mobile devices running Android. And some special purpose devices like home routers and Tivo.
The same place she goes now... Me, and others like me.
That isn't going to happen. Grandpa needs a trustworthy vendor to get help from.
I don't think you realize how deep the Linux revolution goes
I have been running Linux for 14 years. And for 14 years I have been hearing the same thing about Linux going mainstream on the desktop. It isn't going to happen.
I literally don't know a single service tech who is not at least passingly familiar with Linux, and most that I know use it regularly.
That has been true as long as I have run Linux. Most of these techs went to colleges that ran Unix. Linux is an easy step and cheap step for them. So what? I have been around techs long enough to know that the vast majority can only explain things to other techs. They have no patience or communication skills for explaining to Grandma how to fix her Linux box. In fact they will think she is an idiot because she can't figure it out on her own.
And about 1/3 of my Linux desktop users ARE Grandmas, btw.
And how many millions of Grandmas are you supporting? And how much does the job pay?
“Many people believe computers are tools. They don’t care how it works, they don’t want to modify the kernal, drivers, system files or anything else. They just want to use it. Ya know what, thats ok.”
Sure,but weighing up the end-benefit in terms of education of users,I pick Linux users.
As for the desktop debate,it depends totally on your hardware,choice of Linux distribution,and also some preparatory homework,but with those caveats aside,you can find many better desktops available off the virtual shelf than windows.
There`s nothing inherent in the windows desktop that can`t be surpassed by a Linux one.
“Geeks are geeks. they tend not to be very sociable.
I think that is true. Linux on the desktop is for geeks. So you have to become a geek to use it. Don’t expect much help getting there.”
From a Linux veteran,although still a beginner in terms of technical stuff on some issues I must admit there is some truth to the Geek charge regarding Linux vs Windows.
However,I disagree that you have to be a geek just to get a Linux desktop to do what you do on windows.
“There`s nothing inherent in the windows desktop that can`t be surpassed by a Linux one.”
Sure, all it takes is money, development, testing, marketing, and people willing to spend their hard earned money on an un-proven product.
Until then its all vaporware.
I've been using Linux at home almost exclusively for the past two months. I am not, nor have I ever been, a geek.
All I can say is "May the force be with you".
Ha!
You just described about half the FReepers around here!
Apparently it has been.
What I am saying is that when a user has problems with the system, technical support becomes necessary. On a PC, that help comes from the hardware vendor or Microsoft. On a Mac it comes from Apple. Where does the help come from on a Linux box? At that point the user needs to be the system administrator. Good luck if you don't have a solid background in Unix system administration.
The force has been with you for two whole months? I do hope it's still with you 3 years from now.
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.