Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 24th Mar 2007 18:55 UTC, submitted by irbis
X11, Window Managers "The Compiz and Beryl teams are discussing a merger. Posts on the Compiz forum and Beryl mailing list indicate that the projects are discussing how to execute a merger and work together to deliver a single compositing window manager to give 'bling' to the Linux desktop."
Thread beginning with comment 224413
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Small wonder desktop linux has never caught on, the developers just don't get it. Developers are practically tripping over themselves trying to overload linux with more and more bells and whistles and eye-candy.

But, is that stuff really what's keeping linux off the desktop? Every talk to people who have rejected the idea of linux on the desktop? I have. The reasons are always the same: "linux won't work with my winmodem", "linux won't work with my wireless card","linux won't run world-ship","linux won't run my favority game", and so on. It's never: "linux doesn't have enough cutesy-poo dancing monkeys."

I have the upmost respect for linux developers. I think linux developers are generous, and technically exceptional. But, they don't get marketing.

Reply Score: 3

bnolsen Member since:

And how is it the developer's fault that the hardware manufacturers don't support linux?

And yes, bling will only get you so far and yes, it can be fun (as a developer) to see what kinds of neat effects you can get out of the system.

At least people are enjoying themselves developing on this system. (I can't really same the same about developing on windows).

Reply Parent Score: 5

Obscurus Member since:

"And how is it the developer's fault that the hardware manufacturers don't support linux?"

For end users and the widespread adoption of a Linux based desktop OS, it is utterly irrelevant who's fault the lack of support for hardware is. All people know is "Linux doesn't support my hardware (or software in many cases), therefore I won't install it" (and the same story for any other OS in the same boat as Linux)

So no-one cares if it is the fault of the hardware manufacturer for not providing the specifications for their hardware or releasing open source drivers, and since the only other option for developing drivers is to reverse engineer them, developers spending time on non-functional eye-candy could be construed as misdirecting their efforts into something that is not very important. So in that sense, it could be said that it is as much the developers fault as it is the hardware manufacturer's with regard to drivers, not that end users give a monkey's arse about where the blame lies anyway.

Having said that, the hardware support of Linux is generally very good, considering the number of devices out there that have had drivers written from scratch without any help from the hardware manufacturer.

The main thing holding me back from using Linux as my main OS is the lack of decent music creation & sequencing apps - there is nothing out there in Linux land that even vaguely compares to Sonar, Tracktion, Abelton Live or Cubase, and until there is, I can't seriously consider switching completely. I would much prefer a few developers put the eye-candy to one side for now and wrote a decent multi-track audio/midi sequencer with native VST support (without resorting to the complexity of trying to get it all working with Wine)and simple, uncluttered workflow...

Reply Parent Score: 1

google_ninja Member since:

Windows and Mac both have 3d compositing. A side by side comparison would make linux look archaic by comparison.

And I think you are being a bit harsh, if even 5% of the developer community is working on bling, I dont think thats such a big deal.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Flatland_Spider Member since:

You're right about that. Shiny buzzwords sell.

This is just the latest round in the feature war.

Reply Parent Score: 1

apoclypse Member since:

You cant' really blame Linux for a winmodem not working properly, You have to put the blame on the hardware manufacturer. The same for software not running in Linux, the blame goes to the developers of that software for not porting their software. The hardware thing is always why people seem to say that Linux is not ready for the desktop, yet OSX runs on far less hardware and yet it is considered ready for the desktop. Linux supports far more hardware out of the box than both macosx and windows. Windows supports very little hardware when first installed, Linux supports all types of hardware that will usually just work right out of the box without having to install a whole bunch of drivers from all over the internet or having the install cds. If you are going to say Linux is not ready for the desktop please do it on something that Linux doesn't do better than the other dekstop systems out there. Say Linux is not ready for the desktop because they lack 3rd party support or Linux is not ready for the desktop because the Gnome/KDE/XFCE doesn't cut it as a GUI. This whole hardware thing is just old and tired and is not true for the most part, because out of the box Linux supports more hardware than the other players in town. Now when OSX is running on all kinds of x86 hardware, we'll see how well they do. When windows installs my video card drivers by default then I'll say Linux is not ready for the desktop. Otherwise you can't really blame Linux because you can't run photoshop, or can't use a WINmodem, talk to Adobe or the manufacturer who was stupid enough to create hardware that relies so heavily on one OS.

Edited 2007-03-25 05:48

Reply Parent Score: 5

drfelip Member since:

The difference with hardware for Mac is that Mac users know where to buy hardware for Mac, but Linux users don't. Sites reviewing hardware and testing it on several popular Linux distros, and online stores selling Linux-ready hardware, would be very useful for end users. Maybe even a "Linux ready" branding or certification would be good for both Linux and hardware manufacturers. So if something works out of the box on Linux, anybody could find it easily. I'm aware that some distros provide a list of compatible hardware, but those are usually incomplete. There is a lot of work to be made in this area.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Morin Member since:

> The hardware thing is always why people seem to say that Linux is not
> ready for the desktop, yet OSX runs on far less hardware and yet it is
> considered ready for the desktop.

That's entirely correct, but you don't go to a store and buy OSX for your computer. You buy a Mac/iBook/whatever and OSX works on it, because much effort has been put into this combination to work.

> If you are going to say Linux is not ready for the desktop please do it
> on something that Linux doesn't do better than the other dekstop
> systems out there.

Linux is presented as an OS that runs on generic PCs or notebooks, yet on many of them something doesn't work. Many have pointed out that if you carefully select your hardware for Linux, then it will work fine (which is no surprise given the amount of hardware it *does* run fine on). What we need is more shops doing hardware selection and pre-installing Linux (maybe even a fine-tuned specialized version of some distro) and selling this as a complete package to end-users, much like Apple does. Add to that a good selection of software, *not* choice! Choice is good for the system builders, but not for the end users. They want one name they can trust.

And I'm not talking about Dell here, but the "little ones" who are far more flexible.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Gooberslot Member since:

The problem is that when hardware isn't supported out of the box it's far harder on Linux to get it working. Some of that is due to lack of manufacturer support but the kernel developers certaintly don't make their jobs easy.

Reply Parent Score: 1

leech Member since:

"linux doesn't have enough cutesy-poo dancing monkeys."

I can agree with this! We need some plugins that will have dancing Monkeys and maybe some squirrels that eat your application when you close it.

As far as Linux and hard ware goes, others have answered that, I'll just add that most wireless cards do work fine in Linux, and if someone has an issue with one, I always just recommend that they buy an Intel wireless card. They're inexpensive, and work flawlessly with Linux. Winmodems are also supposed to work with the right driver. The odd thing about that though, is that the company that provides the full driver charges 15 USD. For 20 USD you can buy hardware modem that will work a lot better. Maybe even less now.

As far as applications go, Wine is making huge inroads lately in getting things to actually work quite well (I remember back in the day, the only program I could EVER get to even load was notepad, and that usually crashed on me.) Granted since there are really a billion different ways for Windows apps to work, it's almost impossible for any API layer to work 100%. Hell, even Windows itself isn't 100% compatible with other versions of Windows. How many people right now are saying the same things as you listed about Vista?

Reply Parent Score: 4