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 445845
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Darkmage
by Darkmage on Tue 19th Oct 2010 21:33 UTC
Darkmage
Member since:
2006-10-20

The problem with desktop Linux vs Mac OSX is that Linux isn't even in OSX's league. If I want to make a dvd menu on linux I am pretty well screwed. I have to learn a bunch of command line tools I have no interest in learning. On OSX, I crank open iDVD, select a preset theme that I like, and start dragging/dropping images into it. Instant menu in 5 mins and I can then burn it straight to dvd. No stuffing around. iMovie is the same for video editing, imports directly, does all the cutting and then burns out to DVD. I know you can do these things on Linux, but the tools are NOT as well designed, and its not even close to being the same experience. Go download/buy/whatever a copy of OSX and try doing that sort of editing work. What OSX does that Windows and Linux cannot do, is it GETS OUT OF YOUR WAY. The OS removes itself from your presence leaving you to work. One click and you are into a video editing experience, one click and you're in a music editing experience. This is stuff that Linux and windows has been unable to master even given 20 years. As I age into my mid 20s I really can't be bothered fighting my pc anymore, Mac is where I'm going to move to. I can't stand the cost of mac hardware but for $39 and an efi emulator dvd I can convert my pc, and for me the lack of effort is worth it. It's easier to run a pirated Macintosh install than it is to run a legitimate Windows install... Patches/security updates work fine, you don't need antivirus. Most home user installs have pirated software anyway, office/adobe/games/open source software/(wine if I really want stuff like Crysis) Don't get me wrong, I love linux, I would love for it to take over the market, but it's never going to happen while Linux continues to chase Microsoft.

Edited 2010-10-19 21:38 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Darkmage
by BlueofRainbow on Tue 19th Oct 2010 22:13 in reply to "Comment by Darkmage"
BlueofRainbow Member since:
2009-01-06

This summarizes pretty much what have been my thoughts about the Linux-OS X-Windows distinction (minus the use of pirated applications for more than an exploration beyond what a legitimate demo/limited trial version could provide).

OS X tends to do its thing to support the applications, in appearance as a simple matter of fact. The developers most likely have to deal with the complexity to make it so simple for the users.

Linux have plenty of powerful command line tools to do things the graphical applications can't. However, these commands, and their multitude of option switches, seem more cryptic to a casual user as the old DOS commands.....which are still underlying many aspects of Windows. By the way, I still use the "Command-Prompt" in Windows for certain tasks which I can do easier/faster and with greater control on the outcome than through the graphical interface.

Interestingly, all three have an UNIX (or UNIX-Like) under-pinning. Quite dramatic differences in how they present themselves to their users.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Darkmage
by Darkmage on Tue 19th Oct 2010 22:34 in reply to "RE: Comment by Darkmage"
Darkmage Member since:
2006-10-20

The developers don't actually have to handle that much complexity at all... I've been dabbling with Objective-C it is a really powerful language. You can add features to applications without recompiling... you don't even have to write code to call a lot of functions. This is why I talk about GNUstep with some of my posts. Cocoa is a very powerful framework. It's a shame that Gnome didn't adopt it back when they were looking at it (before they settled on GTK).

An example: in the gorm editor, I simply added a menu option for New Window in a web browser application I had the code for, the application automatically used the new feature without any code being written. Obviously the api had had support for spawning new windows already in it and just adding the menu item was enough to automatically call that feature. I've seen a lot of things snapped together in seconds using objective-c I recommend anyone who hasn't to look into it as a language. Versus writing gtk applications in C or windows software in C++ objective-C is a dream. checkout the videos of steve jobs in the 80s showing off Next to see why OSX is so much more powerful. It's the language it uses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j02b8Fuz73A - notice how this is about 8-10 years before COM/OLE?

Reply Parent Score: 1