Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Oct 2010 21:54 UTC
Linux Well, it's been a while since we've opened this particular jar (box is not historically accurate) owned by Pandora. Desktop Linux... Yes, that ever elusive readiness of the desktop that is Linux-powered. Some story on ComputerWorld argues that the desktop Linux dream is dead, and apparently, the story is causing some stir on the web. Well, paint me pink and call me a lightbulb, but of course desktop Linux is dead. However - who gives a flying monkey? Linux is being used by more people than ever!
Thread beginning with comment 445636
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Why you shouldn't care
by SlackerJack on Mon 18th Oct 2010 23:44 UTC
Member since:

I've been a happy Linux user for over 10 years and it's desktop share is irrelevant to me. Linux has millions more users than 10 years ago and that proves how successful Linux is. Linux is successful on other platforms and devices.

How do you define success? Being used by millions of users is successful. I think people want it to beat Windows to be successful since it's all a good media storm made up by the cliché "Year of the Linux desktop", which doesn't actually mean anything if you put it in context.

Reply Score: 11

RE: Why you shouldn't care
by deathshadow on Tue 19th Oct 2010 03:28 in reply to "Why you shouldn't care"
deathshadow Member since:

For me, as a desktop OS linux is a total useless toy - it's unrefined, unpolished and the dearth of quality applications, piss poor font rendering and clunky dated interfaces make it intolerable.

BUT, SlackerJack is entirely correct in the question "How do you define success?". People endlessly talk about percentages without asking the question "Percent of how much?"

Realistically there are just under 3 billion computer users worldwide. Single digit percentages of userbase is therein MILLIONS of users -- anything with millions of people using it CANNOT be considered a failure.

Not suited to every task? Not for everyone? Rinky toy that's unsuited for day to day use on a desktop PC? Sure. No problem, I can agree with that...

But calling it a failure, being "over" or outright "dead"?!? Hardly. Not even close.

Though if as SJ suggested you look at other Platforms and devices for *nix based OS as a whole (so count iPhone's Os on that) there's an interesting trend -- be it android, the embedded versions on media devices like the gp2x or Pandora, or even the replacement OS on MIPS devices like Dingux -- Not one of them even TRIES to rely on x11.

Which I still say is the dead albatross hung around Desktop *nix's neck. There's a reason Apple chose to run X11 as a translation layer atop their API instead of AS their API...

For all the hacks and bypasses and other improvements X11 is more of a hindrance than a help in terms of delivering on the user experience or even developer experience. If it didn't suck so bad would we even HAVE WM's in the first place? You go back fifteen to twenty years and everyone would say "don't bother trying to program X directly, use something like Motif instead!" -- now we have QT, GTK+ -- NONE of which would even be neccessary if the very nature of the X server/client relationship didn't get down on it's knees behind the donkey. Half the time you STILL can't even tell if the UI acknowledged an attempt to open a program until half a minute later five copies of firefox open en-masse from your clicking again thinking it didn't work, you still constantly have cross-application cut/paste headaches, much less that on 'simple' things like multiple displays it still lags a decade and a half behind Windows and MacOS. Hell, most of the time it can't even pull the DDC info from a monitor properly!

But is that enough to count it out and call it "dead"? Far from it. As always, linux and it's kine are a moving target... Shame that movement is nothing more than constant 'catch up' mode to the more mature Windows and Apple UI's.

Reply Parent Score: 6