Submitted by “They said it at LinuxWorld in Toronto a few months ago. They’ve buzzed it at analysts, and now the press is saying it to the public. Novell says this is the year of the Linux desktop, and I’m familiar with evidence showing gains in popularity for Linux. Yet, I disagree that this is the year. Nothing is happening this year to make it, specifically, the year of the Linux desktop and I’m going to hypothesize what could change that.”
Jinxed again..
The only real barrier is that manufacturers aren’t pre-installing Linux on systems with the drivers already configured and installed. Do that, and anybody can use a modern Linux distribution as their only desktop. My mother can and she’s pulling old age pension.
I’m doing it now.
The only real barrier I can think of is ease of integrating closed-source drivers from ATI and Nvidia, etc. etc.
Edited 2006-07-03 17:07
Every year really *is* the year of the linux desktop. Why? Because, every year, “linux on the desktop” is getting better.
I first tried Linux in … I think 1999. RedHat 5 or something. I bought a boxed copy at Best Buy.
It wasn’t up to the standards I was used to (applications-wise) of Windows 98 SE, so I didn’t switch over.
Fast forward to 2006. In my opinion, SUSE 10.1, RHEL WS, Ubuntu 6, etc. … any new computer user could easily get going with one of those distros, and have a very useful system.
But …
I think that seasoned Windows users (like myself) are unlikely to change over to Linux for desktop work at any point in the near future. Why? Because, unlike Windows 95, 98, ME, and even 2000 … Windows XP pretty much works, if you install some basic programs, and change some habits.
But … I *do* see Linux on the desktop growing every year, which is why I occasionally download a distro and check it out. Because … I don’t wanna be left out, if the revolution comes 🙂
I am tired of this year of linux crap.They are trying to take the open source paradigm to gain closed source profits from it.
Let the community decide where Linux grows and where it should go.Linux will get there.It may not be king of the desktop but can fill many niche areas like in non-profit organisations , industrial backend services and in developing countries.
I think that is what Mr Torvalds had in mind when he made it.Filling a purposeful need.
What’s needed is the major OEMs getting out of bed with virus ridden MSwindows.
What’s needed is the major OEMs making a commitment to sell preinstalled Linux desktops.
Until then you can buy from here:
http://www.emperorlinux.com/
http://www.ibexpc.com/
http://www.koobox.com/
http://www.linare.com/
http://www.linspire.com/
http://www.linuxcertified.com/
http://www.linuxsyscorp.com/
http://www.microcenter.com/
http://www.microtelpc.com/
http://www.outpost.com/
http://www.seascape.us/
http://shoprcubed.com/
http://www.sub300.com/
http://www.systemax.com/divisions.htm
http://www.walmart.com/
http://tuxmobil.org/reseller.html
http://www.us.debian.org/distrib/pre-installed
http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/index.html
http://tuxmobil.org/ (general information)
No OS
(Sabio made by Quanta, like Dell-latitudes)
http://www.avadirect.com/
http://www.asimobile.com/
http://www.powernotebooks.com/
Then what happens when someone purchases linux pre-installed? I don’t think thats the right solution at all. They will have a PC and an OS. The basics are covered. What about installing software? Most people will not have heard of the applications available then won’t download them or use them. Right now I think linux only offers minimal functionality for applications and this is a big hinderence for linux.
its true that linux really doesnt have the variety of apps windows has, but with most linux distros, all the basic apps you need are already installed anyway, and for the user who knows they want to install a new app, they are the type who probably already know where to look.
The model proposed in the article is bound to fail: Consumers in the software market choose by reputation, not by “solutions”. This is rational; usually they have better things to do then comparing “solutions”.
The Microsoft desktop platform is rather simple: As a consumer you know you can access every content by using Windows applications — whatever you want your desktop to do: Somebody probably provides an application to do it.
Now, what should be so interesting about the “solution” model proposed in the article: Probably, the solution doesn’t do what I want it to do. Will it play every movie that I download from a shop with lots of barely dressed women on the homepage? Will it provide a way to contact my friend with AOL chat? Will I be able to install a new game?
Let’s face it: Why should anybody care to get answers on these questions? This is too complicated!
What Linux needs is a wide-spread understanding that you don’t need to learn complicated commands to install the application you need, that you don’t need to download a complete LiveCD just to test one application; that you don’t need to rely on a certain distribution that it packages what you need.
However, the first step needs to be made by application developers: They should care to make their projects brands, to gain a reputation, and to get installed on every Linux desktop on earth.
For only when this happens we may see the distributions giving up their idea of being able to provide everything a consumer may need in their repositories. A usual distribution provides 12.000 packages (with lots of system junk in between) right now, and it’s already impossible to find something cool with their frontends.
A good Windows download site offers up to 23.000 end-user applications! This is real choice.
So, until there’s not a change in attitude from Linux application developers, there won’t be major progress in the Linux-on-the-desktop question. They need to stop thinking, a Linux distribution will do the distribution and promotion for them.
//Will it play every movie that I download from a shop with lots of barely dressed women on the homepage?//
Wow. That’s the most veiled definition of pr0n I’ve seen in quite some time …
I wouldn’t necessarily argue your reputation point. But how do you propose changing a reputation? Linux, Windows, and Macintosh already have reputations. To change that as a Linux provider, you’ve got to do something by going way out of the pre-established model (which was defined by rules you had no part in establishing), identifying where it doesn’t work, and then introducing a far better and more attractive model, which the others cannot touch. That’s how you re-establish a reputation.
Your comment “Why should anybody care to get answers on these questions? This is too complicated!” is spot on. Most customers/users don’t want to spend huge amounts of time trying to figure out software installation/configuration stuff. That’s why there needs to be a solution. It takes care of that for you, in advance. And then people start talking about that helpful benefit, giving it a new reputation.
I’m afraid that the suggestion to brand every project is an untenable one. Marketers know how difficult it is to build a brand, and relatively few succeed. This won’t make anything easier or clearer for the customer/user. If you’re talking about things like “distribution packages”, “liveCDs”, or “command lines” you’re already in alien territory for the majority of users. I doubt any of those things would provoke the massive reputation change required for widespread adoption. Neither will more OEMs, since they’re just latecomers to a game with rules that put them at a disadvantage.
And note that by definition, to be a solution, it has to do what you want it to do.
Yes, you’re right: Application developers are a part of a system that they didn’t create. However, just like others in real life, they can start a revolution, too.
Every application project can do something. Firefox made an effort, and they changed the way people look at Open Source. Linux needs more of these projects. Otherwise consumers will have to wait for official ports from Adobe, and we all know how likely this is!
The good news is: Gaining a reputation is rather easy with software! If it’s well-designed and useful and easy-to-install, it spreads like wild fire.
One thing, many projects could do is offereing a Autopackage of their application. Hide the instructions for other Linux package formats. Make a stand for easy installation under Linux.
This is the most important thing: For example, a new major release is a good opportunity to make some fuzz about your application but without easy installation, the news won’t spread very wide. In fact, your application won’t spread because nearly everybody will be waiting for distribution packages, and forget about it until then.
The next two things you need is basic utility, and a little bit of promotion. If you asked yourself: “Who’s going to use your software and why?” and if you designed accordingly, promotion is really easy. Just get in touch with users where they meet: BB boards, app sites, etc.
And that’s it! Nothing particular breath-taking, yet many projects ignore it, or have a problem doing it. If only ten percent of Linux application developers would accept these three tips, Linux on the desktop would look differentely I’m sure.
The question to ask is “What can linux do better than Windows?” What is linux’s reason for having people switch?
One person suggested having OEMs pre-install linux. I don’t see that as a good option. They will have linux on their computer then what? With Windows they know they will be compatible with the rest of the world. Any applications that need to be installed to do any type of work can be found. The Windows applications are fully featured. Lets take AIM and Yahoo vs. GAIM for an example. AIM and Yahoo lets you link to music and play games online. They have extra smilies. GAIM is pretty basic. I think thats where the linux applications need to improve. Get rid of just the bare bones basic functionality and add full feature functionality.
Lets take AIM and Yahoo vs. GAIM for an example. AIM and Yahoo lets you link to music and play games online. They have extra smilies. GAIM is pretty basic. I think thats where the linux applications need to improve. Get rid of just the bare bones basic functionality and add full feature functionality.
That’s a pretty simplistic view of the situation. GAIM has many featurs and plugins that AIM and Yahoo do not. Just the fact that GAIM can interface with so many IM clients is an important feature itself. For my uses GAIM is much more advanced than AIM or Yahoo because I value the features that GAIM has more than the features that the other clients have.
AIM on Windows (especially “Triton”) is a revolting piece of shit. Yahoo Messenger is the most annoying, blinky-blink piece of software ever made. They can’t even look upon the majesty that is iChat, Adium, or GAIM.
“That’s a pretty simplistic view of the situation. GAIM has many featurs and plugins that AIM and Yahoo do not. Just the fact that GAIM can interface with so many IM clients is an important feature itself. For my uses GAIM is much more advanced than AIM or Yahoo because I value the features that GAIM has more than the features that the other clients have.”
GAIM and Kopete both lack basic functionality, which is what people use Yahoo and MSN for, mainly file trading and voice/video. This is the fault of those companies, not Linux, but is an issue just the same. It does support all those protocols in a basic way, for text chat, but not what most people actually use them for.
GAIM and Kopete both lack basic functionality, which is what people use Yahoo and MSN for, mainly file trading and voice/video.
Video and file transfers work with Kopete/MSN, while file transfers are in progress for Kopete/Yahoo. Voice is supported for Jabber. It’s not all there, but it’s coming!
I would however disagree that people use Yahoo and MSN mainly for file transfer and voice/video. Text messaging is still by far the most common use for these apps.
Now, can you receive notifications from MSN contacts in the Yahoo client, and vice-versa? Because to me that’s a more useful feature than voice…
“Now, can you receive notifications from MSN contacts in the Yahoo client, and vice-versa? Because to me that’s a more useful feature than voice…”
That I have no idea of as I don;t know anyone who uses msn actually. Yahoo is used by business in the states for video conferencing, making that a very important thing to have working. If I use Trillian on Windows, then yes, I can get noptification as I can be logged onto multiple services at the same time, but then again voice and video do not work correctly there either. Yahoo messenger with voice and video is a standard home user setup.
Yahoo messenger with voice and video is a standard home user setup.
…maybe where you’re from, but personally I don’t know anyone who still uses Yahoo. MSN is by far the dominant player in my area.
Mind the Sample Bias…
“…maybe where you’re from, but personally I don’t know anyone who still uses Yahoo. MSN is by far the dominant player in my area.
Mind the Sample Bias…”
True enough. I am in the western US. No one uses MSN out here, or at least no one I have met. Is always “My Yahoo is..” type of deal. As well Yahoo with voice and video is in use for troops overseas to chat and video with family members at times…MSN was not sanctioned for use. Just trust me on that one.
GAIM and Kopete both lack basic functionality, which is what people use Yahoo and MSN for, mainly file trading and voice/video. This is the fault of those companies, not Linux, but is an issue just the same. It does support all those protocols in a basic way, for text chat, but not what most people actually use them for.
I don’t have a problem sending or receiving files with GAIM. As for video, it should have been in GAIM a while ago but it looks like we are going to have to wait until version 2 or 3 before that happens. Fortunately for me and everyone else I know, none of us use the voice/video functionality. Maybe voice/video is popular in some places but not with anyone I’ve encountered.
LinSpire does most of this already. The problem is lack of visibility. Until people can go into BestBuy, CompUSA, etc., and see Linux computers with equally as good of hardware as the Windows computers and be able to choose between the two people won’t start buying Linux computers.
Even better. Someone needs to partner with BestBuy, CompUSA, etc., and get an area where trained sales people can show people that Linux is just as easy (at least some distros like LinSpire) as Windows. You know, just like Apple shoes people how to use Macs in their stores.
Once they get to see how easy it is, and maybe even have the salesperson offer to help setup the person’s e-mail account with the e-mail software, then people will start buying Linux computers.
Linspire is already putting preloaded machines together… see http://www.linspire.com/linspire_letter.php
Howeve, you are correct about the visibility problem. These mini’s are only available online, AFAIK, and as such, it doesn’t seem likely that they’ll take the marketplace by storm.
//Someone needs to partner with BestBuy, CompUSA, etc., and get an area where trained sales people can show people that Linux is just as easy (at least some distros like LinSpire) as Windows.//
Not to belittle your point, but … “trained sales people?” … at Best Buy?
What planet are you from?
I’m afraid that while Linspire does some of this, it’s missing the boat on the most important aspects. You cannot go to Linspire’s site and truly specify the system you want in advance to buying. You can get a preinstalled system but Linspire fails to ask the options first and make the distribution, the user’s distribution (point 2 in the article). Furthermore, I don’t see evidence that they have the continuous flow in the product/service chain outlined in the article.
Linspire is still playing within the rules of the existing proprietary vendors’ industry. They haven’t differentiated a strong enough reason to shift customers’ mindsets from Dell or Apple.
I’m a beta tester, I know what people are writing in the Beta_program forum and Microsoft is not listening or replying. But many of us (beta tester) feel that Vista will probably be the worst OS Microsoft ever made (ok, except for ME).
Mabe when people realise what Vista realy is, Linux will gain a few more users.
BUT : Still missing in action for Linux, REAL SOFTWARE, the likes of Adobe CS, a better Office Suite, Multimedia creation software like iLife on OS X. A better Visio and MS Project. And on the server side, a real challenger for MS Exchange.
Until we get professional grade software made for real users (not made for other Linux geeks), Linux will fail on the Desktop and Microsoft will still win even with something like Vista.
BUT : Still missing in action for Linux, REAL SOFTWARE, the likes of Adobe CS, a better Office Suite, Multimedia creation software like iLife on OS X. A better Visio and MS Project. And on the server side, a real challenger for MS Exchange.
Ok… You lost me right there. A real challenger for MS Exchange? For Christ’s sake, you people have no idea of what you’re talking about. Anyone who has spent countless hours running eseutil and isintag in order to repair corrupted Exchange databases crossing his/her fingers and hoping that the damage will be minimal surely can appreciate troubleshooting of real e-mail servers on the Unix side like qmail, for instance. And I’m not making this up… I used to be a Microsoft Enterprise Technical Router working on their Product Support Customer Services and saw that happening on a daily basis!
Sure… Outlook integration and all is a good thing, but I don’t think that running Exchange for that is really worth it.
Yes, true, if more video games were offered for Linux the way they are offered for Windows (and even Mac) then yes, there’d be more Linux adoption.
But, other than playing Mahjonng and a brief detour into Myst, I don’t game.
What’s really needed is 2 fold.
1) Software vendors need to pull their heads out of their asses and offer up their flagship products for Linux. Big business/Education does not want work around solutions to documents and pdfs and artwork.
We want Dreamweaver and Acrobat and Photoshop so that everthing plays well across departments. If we are going to migrate, the transition needs to be as painless as possible.
If I could throw Dreamweaver on my Ubuntu laptop, I’d do it in a heartbeat.
2) Users of Linux need to stop pissing and moaning about wanting everything to be open source.
I don’t give a rat’s ass if my ATI drivers are open or closed source. I just want my screen to display correctly.
Adobe can keep p-shop closed, I just need a photo editing tool that isn’t GIMP.
“I don’t give a rat’s ass if my ATI drivers are open or closed source. I just want my screen to display correctly. ”
Then there’s no real reason for you to want to use Linux in the first place, is there?
Then there’s no real reason for you to want to use Linux in the first place, is there?
Oh, silly me. Yeah, ’cause futzing around in various files tweaking settings, that’s such a good use of time and the purpose of using Linux.
I’m a Mac and Linux user. I cannot honestly say that I spend any more time futzing around in “various files tweaking settings” in Ubuntu than I do in OS X. Some things are easier in OS X (installing binary software), and some things are easier in Ubuntu (keeping your software up-to-date), but both are quite simple indeed.
futzing around in various files tweaking settings
Sorry, someone probably should have mentioned Linux was a UNIX clone.
Adobe can keep p-shop closed, I just need a photo editing tool that isn’t GIMP.
Try Krita (free), or Pixel (non-free).
Linux on the desktop is a little bit like Utopia. We live in a Free world, where money is not needed and everybody can own whatever they want without paying for anything.
WAKE UP. Open Source does not mean FREE as Beer.
But up to now, when you talk about Linux, not only does it have to be ONLY about Open Source, but it has to be FREE. Nobody seem to want to pay for a good Linux distro, they run away and go where it’s still Free (like Ubuntu). Same thing for the software. Why PAY for StarOffice when you can get (almost as complete) OpenOffice for FREE?
We are NOT in Utopia, people still need to make money like everybody else do. Linux will not gain anything in this FREE (as Beer) mindset.
I have everything I need for my desktop. I would love to have TurboTax run on linux without messing around with Wine. It would be nice to have games install easier. Other than those two issues I am good. Gnome 2.14, Open Office, Gimp, Mozilla Seamonkey, emacs, and the Bash shell meet my needs for all office work.
I would love to have TurboTax run on linux without messing around with Wine.
You could also use a VMWare virtual machine for those occasional programs that run under Windows only (that’s what I do).
“You could also use a VMWare virtual machine for those occasional programs that run under Windows only (that’s what I do).”
That is what I did for awhile myself..until it dawned on me that I still needed a physical windows machine to use some apps, and found myself rebooting into Windows quite often to do basic things that will not work currently in a VM. Also in your scenario, you still need a legal copy of Windows to run, so are spending the money to get it anyway. Where is the incentive to run it in this way?
That is what I did for awhile myself..until it dawned on me that I still needed a physical windows machine to use some apps, and found myself rebooting into Windows quite often to do basic things that will not work currently in a VM.
Which apps don’t work in VMWare? I’m curious, now that VMWare has 3D support (albeit experimental, it’s still working quite well), I certainly don’t have any apps that require a real physical Windows machine (I guess apps that use specialized sound hardware, perhaps?)
In any case, I’m not saying that this is the ideal situation for everyone, however it would work for the vast majority of users.
Also in your scenario, you still need a legal copy of Windows to run, so are spending the money to get it anyway. Where is the incentive to run it in this way?
Well, considering that most computers come with a version of MS Windows, that’s not a problem. I used the OEM copy for my laptop, which was completely useless after I wiped out the Windows partition.
Same thing goes with my copy of MS Office 2000 that I use with Crossover Office. I have paid for that copy, I might as well use it! 🙂
“Which apps don’t work in VMWare? I’m curious, now that VMWare has 3D support (albeit experimental, it’s still working quite well), I certainly don’t have any apps that require a real physical Windows machine (I guess apps that use specialized sound hardware, perhaps?) “
Yahoo IM with voice and video, or rather very few USB devices actually work correctly. As for the OEM copy of windows, you do know that it can not legally be installed anywhere but on the laptop it came with, including as a virtual machine right? OEM is strictly tied to the hardware.
Yahoo IM with voice and video, or rather very few USB devices actually work correctly.
It’s true I’ve had some issues with some USB devices (iPod in particular). Other have worked quite well.
So, in your particular case then VMWare might not be a viable solution, however it might be different for the poster I was originally responding to. This still doesn’t disprove my assertion that Linux is ready for a majority of desktops, though obviously not all of them.
As for the OEM copy of windows, you do know that it can not legally be installed anywhere but on the laptop it came with, including as a virtual machine right? OEM is strictly tied to the hardware.
If by “illegal” you mean “contrary to the terms set out in the EULA” then you’re correct. However, I don’t see EULAs as binding, and have yet to read a compelling argument as to why I should care about them. There are very few places where their legality has been upheld. So I think it’s pretty safe to say that if you have a OEM copy of Windows you can install it on a virtual machine (especially if the virtual machine runs on the hardware the software orignally came with).
They said it at LinuxWorld in Toronto a few months ago. They’ve buzzed it at analysts, and now the press is saying it to the public. Novell says this is the year of the Linux desktop,
<snork> never heard that before. Shouldn’t they call it something else?
What do people mean by this “year of Linux on the desktop” business? Back in the late 1990s, people used it to mean the year when Linux would break into the desktop market. Looking at the past years in retrospect, this goal was accomplished years ago. Linux today has roughly the same desktop marketshare as OS X, which only the hardiest of Windows diehards would argue isn’t a “mainstream” desktop OS.
It seems to me that a lot of people are defining “the year of Linux on the desktop” as when Linux takes over the desktop market. This is a ridiculous critereon for success, because of Microsoft’s monopoly status. If market domination are what people are expecting, they’ll be sorely dissapointed. Of course, they probably won’t be, because the people defining success in this way seem to be doing so mostly so they can deride Linux for not attaining this definition of success…
The people deriding the success of Linux on the desktop are seriously delusional. Linux is a tremendous success by any practical measure. We’re talking about an OS that is the youngest of the ones competing for the desktop market. At the time the GNOME project was started, Apple had recently acquired NeXT. That means that Apple had two complete, mature GUIs, as well as billions in the bank, under its belt by the time GNOME had just a couple of programmers. It wasn’t until 2002, with GNOME 2.0, that the GNOME project shifted its focus to creating a desktop environment usable for regular people. That means that since Windows XP was released, the GNOME folks have gone from a niche UNIX desktop to a general-purpose desktop that rivals even OS X. If you don’t see the success in that, you are either blind, or in denial.
to start off I am a linux user and have been sence 1997.
looking back at why i installed linux in the first place was that I needed a Unix like system on my Intell Pentium 100 that did not cost a arm and a leg. and i still use linux for the same reason.
That being sayed i could rilly care less if its the year of the linux desktop or the year of the pink elephent this push to make linux into a “Windows Replacmet” is ruining linux. lately your avrage distro is so clutred with resource hoging librarys (ie beagle mono) and and the usefull xhosts take a wayside.
Linux will go ware the comunity takes it and the comunity needs to focus linux on what it does best
as fr me linux goes with vfwm and a text based login
Its here, it works. Does it have problems? Sure — everything does.
However, it does have a lot of apps and capabilities. I can email, browse the web, watch videos, play music, manage my business, create databases, crunch numbers in spreadsheets, write letters/reports, play games (granted limited, but they are there..).
I can write programs, develop websites, chat (instant messaging, voice over ip), access remote systems (ssh, rdc, vnc), monitor full networks of systems, manipulate graphic images, build photo libraries, sync music to my mp3 player, print to my printers, create music and data CDs and DVDs..
While I don’t, I know some people who even develop 3D designs and animations on their Linux desktops.. There are others that do professional level music notation and multitracking ..
Heck, with minimal effort, I can configure my system to serve up thin clients, allow multiple simultaneous users and allow me to access my full desktop over a secure connection from a remote system.
To increase my productivity, I can (with the help of ssh, fish and kioslaves) manipulate files on remote systems as if they were local .. great for managing computers, developing websites and the like.. It truly cuts away the complexity that people utilizing such tools as FrontPage have to put up with.
Not only this, but I can install the system and be productive faster than the leading competition with their pre-installed systems (driver/security updates, removing pre-installed trail-ware, loading up security/protection suites, yada yada..).
Could I say this a couple years ago? Doubt it. But it is quite a compelling desktop option. Obviously there are some issues — particularly with specific application developers who have not ported their software to the platform (which unfortunately is more the rule than the exception) — so if you need a particular application, you do have to put up with some form of emulation, compatibility, virtualization, dual booting, etc.
However, it does have some notable “killer apps” such as amarok, k3b, kontact to name a few (I base this on the fact my non-Linux using friends continue to request those apps for their particular platform).
Will it ever gain a majority or monopoly in the industry? I don’t know.. it would definitely take a long time and some mis-steps from the competition to achieve this level of use.. but obviously, to be “ready for the desktop” does not translate into “everyone is using it”. There are quite a lot of people who do use it and have for years.
I would also like to add, it would really help to have better support for wireless internet (wifi), Ubuntu came with network manager while it is a great solution, it still took some tweaking to get WPA to work.
In general i would call myself a typical day-to-day desktop user.
I was infatuated with ubuntu dapper for a while, but then reality struck me and it dawned on me that ubuntu is still an exciting novelty in my life.
So i ended up going back to windows xp, not so much because of windows itself, but because i like being able to play games i like, those by Valve. I like photoshop, windows picasa2, windows opera, MS office and so on. Im sure you get the picure.
I will be happy when its the year of the Linux, I like much of the OSS philosophy and community … it’s just not there yet.
I will be happy when its the year of the Linux, I like much of the OSS philosophy and community … it’s just not there yet.
You mean it’s not there for you. For many others, Linux is quite sufficient for their needs (and that includes many people who use Windows now).
Games: I play consoles, because that’s where most of the games are anyway. PC gaming is becoming increasingly specialized, with fewer titles and genres. Console gaming is where it’s at. (That said, you can play Valve games using Wine, and the performance is quite good on modern hardware.)
Photoshop: runs under Crossover Office if you really want it. However, for me Photoshop CS2 has serious performance issues, and is a step backward as far as I’m concerned. For any non-print work I much prefer Gimp, Krita or Pixel (non-free).
Picasa: now available for Linux. There are some nice alternatives as well.
Windows Opera: I use Firefox, but Opera is available for Linux as well, and AFAIK the two are comparable feature-wise.
I use Microsoft Office everyday on my Linux laptop. It runs flawlessly under Crossover Office.
There are a few programs that don’t run under Wine (or don’t run well) that I still need to use – TurboTax is an example. I just run these in a VMWare virtual machine, and all is well.
So clearly, Linux on the desktop is ready for me, as it is ready for lot of dektops. So the “year of the Linux desktop” has been here already for quite a few people…just not for everyone, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
n general i would call myself a typical day-to-day desktop user.
I was infatuated with XP for a while, but then reality struck me and it dawned on me that XP is still an UNexciting novelty in my life.
So i ended up going back to linux, not so much because of linux itself, but because i like the philosphy and the community. Also being able to play games i like, frozen-bubble, tux-racer, and others. I also like gimp, dia, gaim, opera, galeon, evolution, openoffice, and I get all that for free or for a nice donation if I can afford it. I also like that I can select from so many flavors of linux and well you cant do that with XP can you. I have so many package managers to choose from. Heck so many desktop environments that Xp will never have. I can use various types of file systems an read/write to many otehrs as well. I can actually browse the web without being bothered to constantly install flash player, without constantly being told their is a update for XYZ available. Oh so many things are so much better on linux than on windows…or BSD for that matter. Well I am sure YOU get the picture.
I am afraid it will never be the year of XP since they are lackign so many great things.
That article suggest that the user should be able to configure on demand both hardware and software, get it configure exactly to his need and get all the possible suppport when he needs it.
Nice, very nice but how much would it cost?
Such customized but just work right solution for everyone would be so expensive that no mass market could afford it!
Listen Guys and Girls once again our very geekyness defeats us…
Most of what you are dicussing is WAAAAAY over the heads of many average Windows users, many of whom cannot tell the difference between the OS and the Office Applications let alone make some kind of informed judgement about whether or not Linux might be a viable desktop replacement for their needs (even if all they actually do is WP, Email, Browse and IM their mates…)
The very fact that you are reading OS News marks you out as orders of magnitude above these users… try not to forget that when discussing subjects such as this one.
😀
Nothing is needed, except better UIs all around, and more of The Snappy, which has been happening as KDE, Gnome, and E have matured (I like E17 best, of course
). Oh, and maybe some more OEM options.
My mother used a Linux laptop off and on for over half a year, before KDE’s aggressive task grouping got her confused, and I told her it was Linux, this desktop and decor was KDE, and she just had to click the button, like in XP; those gray ones are minimized windows.
We will be in the Year of the Linux Desktop until MS gets out of the desktop OS market; plain and simple. If Linux starts to take a foothold, apps will get ported (in addition, WINE just keeps getting better…).
is really what is needed. The fact that Voice and Video do not work with standard IM like Yahoo and MSN completely is a barrier. Linux is good, and it handles gaming very well as the likes of ID Software and Blizzard release games with Linux in mind. One of the items stopping me from using it full time is the Voice and Video for IM. Yahoo for example has released the specs for it, and there is libyahoo2 with the support for it, but no developers seem to want to use that to work it in. Once Linux developers start listening to features people ask for, instead of deciding for the people what they need, then it does not have a chance. On another side, this is not the fault of the Linux developers per say, even though the tools to add this simple functionality in are out there, but rather the fault of the software companies not supporting Linux.
This guy has made a decent fist of trying to find out what’s wrong and what’s required, but he’s missing the target. There’s nothing fundamental in there about how a distribution like he’s describing would be funded and the issue of creating a small market and building it into something larger, rather than jumping the gun.
MSN was not sanctioned for use. Just trust me on that one.
Oh, I believe you…for some reason, there are large variations in market share depending on one’s region and/or field of work.
Yahoo! has a Linux client, I believe…I wonder if they’re planning on adding file transfer and audio/video any time soon…
There is no year of the Linux desktop. There are only timespans of constant improvement for Desktop Linux. No revolution but evolution.