Linked by Sean Oliviero on Wed 28th Jul 2004 05:54 UTC
The promise of Desktop Linux (DL) has been long coming. It's made significant progress since the mid-90s when GNOME and KDE came out, giving Linux users a somewhat modern desktop to work upon. However, it's been 7 years and DL hasn't progressed much at all since then. Today, DL is still nothing more than a UNIX-clone with a task bar, a start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it. But why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It's a rant. So is this.
"The Current State of Desktop Linux"
Did the author expect the Linux desktop to be as good as a commercial desktop - with development being salaried work during working hours as opposed to voluntary work outside working hours? I think the current state is remarkable considering those odds.
"How To Fix The Hardware Problem"
Has the author tried YaST? Read about it? Never heard of it?
"Interoperability & Aesthetics Issues"
It'd be a mistake to fuse KDE/Qt and GNOME/Gtk. Let them evolve freely on different paths. Let them compete freely from different paths. It will make them stronger - also against Windows. It's not like one DL has 50% of the apps while the other has the other 50%. If an app is present in one DL and missing or no good in another then fill-in the void with a new app rather than bending the existing app to fit the void.
Why has DL not yet taken off in the work environment?
FUD. Inertia. No guts. Playing it safe. And the various Linux Office wares could be a little better. But that'll come. As time goes by more and more old systems reach retirement - like the NT systems in Munich and Paris. And by going Linux they are providing the leadership and push that others need to cross over. That in turn will increase the pressure for better apps. And suddenly the flood gates burst open.