“So how’s that look-like-Windows thing working for the Linux community? Is the wave of desktop adoption far ahead of where it was in 2001 and 2002 when this started? And, if not, why don’t we stop doing it? Is it because we’re stuck on stupid?”
“So how’s that look-like-Windows thing working for the Linux community? Is the wave of desktop adoption far ahead of where it was in 2001 and 2002 when this started? And, if not, why don’t we stop doing it? Is it because we’re stuck on stupid?”
Everyone wants to make money or fame (for possible future employement on large corporations) out from it. Distros from the basements are splurting out. Fragmentations everywhere. Perhaps closed source has it’s advantages after all. I hope you will save FreeBSD from the same fate.
“Fragmentations everywhere. Perhaps closed source has it’s advantages after all.”
No, the problem IMHO is that corporations with closed source have managed to plant that in too many minds and very many people can’t even concieve that software development can somehow exist outside that framework (i.e. everything in one hand, control, slow improvements, slow iterative evolution instead of innovation and revolution, buying out competition, brainwashing the masses with billion$ campaigns to make them believe that your vision of technology and future will be their visions too).
dont feed the trolls….
You may not agree with the guy (I don’t), but there’s nothing trollish in his post, IMO it was a legitimate opinion.
Some people are developers, others are visionaries. The developers improve or write new software to make Linux better, the visionaries bundle the different available programs together into a distribution.
Linux distributions aren’t redundant, there is a reason greater than seeking fame behind 99% of them. Many of the people involved with Linux aren’t doing so for money or fame, they are doing so because they believe they are building something good that themselves and others can use and enjoy at little to no cost.
Linux also isn’t badly fragmented, that’s just a myth started by trolls. Prior to package managers software for Linux had to be compiled manually, the same still works on every distribution today. Package managers were introduced later to make installing software more convenient; packages from one distribution can’t be installed on every other, but the same software can be built into a package for the distribution you’re using. As for the different distributors making modifications to the kernel, those are usually patches or back-ports which will either be in the kernel later on or are in a newer version already. The layers added on to Linux for convenience may not be immediately compatible amongst different distributions, but in the end they all get their code from the same places and they all contribute their new code back to the same places.
“This approach seems to have failed.”
Oh my. Let’s bow to Mr. Murphy’s wisdom. All in all, he has a bit of truth in there. As almost everybody who knows more about linux and linux desktop environments than the average sixpack. Still, it sometimes – although less frequently these days – amazes me that some people actually get paid for such and similar shallow articles.
I used Linux pre Windows 95.
Linux had several nice window managers then.
For example olvwm.
It was Microsoft that was doing the copying
not the other way around.
heh..heh..hehhh….and i like to bash microsoft!
Indeed.
Although I never liked olvwm myself, I did like the other managers that were, (still are) around. FVWM2, afterstep, and the original blackbox to name a few.
I did not however like the FVWM95 blatant rip-off from Win95. Too close for comfort there.
I am happy enough with gnome and kde now though, and only ever use an alternative when I have older hardware to work with.
Even then, xfce does wonders.
This would make sense, if we completely ignored the plethora of DMs that are completely unique and origional. KDE and GNOME (which looks and acts alot more like mac classic then windows) arent the only choices to a linux user. The very fact that they are so popular blows this guys assumptions out of the water, because if they copy windows (debateable, but I’m not even going to go there.), then thats aparently what people want.
It seems like tech writers turn their brain off when they write about desktop linux.
Let’s face it, it’s trollish, but it has a point and a purpose, to energize the Linux community and take advantage of Microsoft before Vista appears.
I think it comes down to this, when you want to make money your driven, once you have employees to support your determined not to disappoint them. Once you have so much money that it makes money on it’s own you begin to relax and are not motivated anymore.
Look at Steve Jobs, he obviously felt cheated all these years from his rightful position as the head of the computing industry, he’s hot and motivated.
Who’s motivated in the Linux camp? Who’s out there pushing for companies to port their software to Linux? Where is the free and easy installation disks and downloads?
Linux, OpenOffice, Gimp, Games etc all in a nice big download to burn to a installation disk to pass around to dissillusioned Windows users.
Where is it? Just a geeks pipe dream, not reality?
Heck I’ll just install OSx86 instead and wait for the cracks.
Theres plenty of motivation in the linux camp, software improves at a rate that is unheard of in the propriatary world. I have been using linux for about five years now, and considering what has happened in between releases of windows, i cannot believe ANYONE would accuse oss developers of a lack of motivation.
Maybe there is a lack of evangelism, but im one of those elitist linux bastards who dont really want the hordes of stupid people using the same os as me anyways.
Maybe there is a lack of evangelism, but im one of those elitist linux bastards who dont really want the hordes of stupid people using the same os as me anyways.
I’m inbetween;
* I’d like more people to use Linux (or any X-based UI).
* The benifit to me would be that my life would be easier; better choice of hardware (though it’s not bad at all right now!), fewer odd looks from people who hear ‘Linux’ and think ‘has a thing against Microsoft’ (thought this is decreasing).
* If someone gets excited about tech, I’m with them as long as the tech isn’t propriatory. At that point, I’m much less interested. If it only runs under Windows, that’s fine…if it is closed and will not run under Windows, that’s not fine.
* If they use Windows, I’ll help them 100% if it’s work but only the minimum amount outside of work. Windows is such a PITA if you don’t spend gobs of time locking it down and making it clean. The amout of cr@p loaded on a typical system is annoying at best.
* For personal use, KDE is much more useful. I’ll give Gnome a try for each release, though I think they went too far with the minimalist design in the past year. I’m glad to hear they have added in a location field again…very very annoying not being able to type in a location I already know about.
Maybe there is a lack of evangelism
BZZZZZ!
Nope, sorry. I’m actually glad the rampant foam-at-the-mouth evangelism has died down a bit, even (or especially) on Slashdot.
Where is the free and easy installation disks and downloads? Linux, OpenOffice, Gimp, Games etc all in a nice big download to burn to a installation disk to pass around to dissillusioned Windows users.
Uh, do you know anything about Linux? Free and easy installation disks/downloads are everywhere!
And don’t forget the joy of LiveCDs. I’ve given out quite a few of these to people around me.
That was a worthless article.
disclaimer : my message is not to start a flamewar. do it on your own risk
The author of this article just spoke out of my mind. look at history of technology and software. copycats can never be rulers. ..anywhere in the world…now dont jump on to bash windows as copycats of apple and what not…MS suceeded because of its quality and consumer friendly approach….even though it cost a fortune……
As far as Desktop is concerned
Linux OS was chasing DOS in 1992
linux was chasining Win3.1 in 1997
linux was chasing win 95 in 2001
linux was chasing win98 in 2003
linux is chasing win2K in 2005
linux will be chasing winXP in 2010
linux will be chasing vista in 2020
wake up my dear linux fellows……we need some revolution…..some radical approach….need some more steroids to take on mighty MS gorilla….
You can goo**lize “Seth Nickell Luminocity”.
There is some upcoming steroids there … 🙂
— Bouh
if you are using firefox, or opera… before you reply to anything that looks remotely like a troll… right click on the username and open it as a new windows. The user stats usually give a clue if they are habitual trolls…
now this Rakamaka, has made 20 posts to this site, and 12 have been voted down… zero voted up… what sort of ideas do you think he will bring into the discussion ?
I’ll check that in the future.
— Bouh.
linux was chasing dos? you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.
linux was chasing dos? you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.
who was born first DOS or Linux?
DOS had at least wordstar, and graphics spreadsheet(i dont remember exact name) and games…
what linux had in similar timeline? to be considered as desktop….
That article is a big joke.
Explain your statement – anybody can say that
I have better things to do.
Who’s in favor of OSNews not putting more “I’m a unlimate guru, fan me! Here’s my word on FOSS-OS-On-Desktop!”. The bable goes on, and on. But if I’ll around my office, 5/5 computer runs Linux. Next door, there’s a server room. 16 machines runs Linux.
I don’t care for what people say about Linux being ready. Some people say that loud music causes sins. Some will claim that road rails makes cows stop giving milk. For others such project as KDE and GNOME are not ready for desktop.
Everyone is entitled to opinion. Just don’t shove it to our throats. We have mind of our own.
more like ZDnet is the ones stuck on stupid!!!
nothing to see here, just more FUD from the FUD_Machine…
Windows, KDE, and GNOME are awesome.
The above statement was a lie. I hate all 3.
Linux is not an operating system. Linux is a kernel for building an operating system. It’s about choice. If a certain distribution “falls behind” Windows, it’s due to the distro’s choice of software surrounding the kernel, and what the intended use of it is. It’s all subjective.
Not all of us need something like Windows. So, while some might say what I have on my computer is “behind” Windows, I have to disagree. I like the UNIX way of doing things. I don’t need bootsplashes and a filesystem hidden behind wizards and druids. I don’t need transparancy or eyecandy. I don’t even use a 2.6 kernel.
If Linux distributions want to be what Windows is, they need to play catchup. But not every distro has this goal, and not every user wants something like this.
Whatever happened to Linux being for enthusiasts? Now it seems like developers only care about snatching the great unwashed from Microsoft.
As i read sometimes on osnews…..
it is amusing when someone criticizes linux then geeks argue that it is just a kernel and blame desktops kde or gnome….
when someone praises linux …oh yes…it is just great OS f****ing MS right and left…..
I have never seen such hypocrytes ….in any other OS community….
Linux, the kernel, has many features that put it ahead of many other kernels. In the kernel are drivers and algorithms to handle scheduling, memory management, RAID, networking (firewalls, accelerated http, trunking, vlans, 10+GBps devices, etc.), paravirtualization, etc.
When someone complains about Linux their complaint is usually about the GUI, which is not the kernel. The GUI can be customized and reconfigured, there are 40 different GUIs to choose from. Often the criticism is without merit and somewhat ignorant.
When someone praises Linux, often they write about benchmarks and features that are related to the kernel.
So to say we’re hypocrites is just an ad hominim. Show us how we are being hypocritical with examples and facts or prepare for your complaints to be filed in the FUD bucket.
I cannot understant why he says Linux has stalled, these writers seem to think Linux will take market share in a flash. Do they understand that loads of people who have windows and have brought a computer, try linux and use it?
I get people just about everyday coming to our forums and saying they want to try or switch to Linux. The uptake of Linux has been huge but because these articals cannot put it into numbers/share then they assume no one is switching. what benefit is it to Linux to get market share percentage?, just people like SuSE will profit, not the community.
Come on RedHat Novell Ibm want a linux desktop whitout paying nothing.
where is research ? where is innovation ?
the only innovation came from kde side where there aren’t any commercial interests.
Your joking right?, have you seen what redhat, SuSE and IBM have contributed to Linux for a better desktop?. I guess not because like alot of people you dont read documentation.
HAL and udev are two that have innovation for desktop linux users.
“Come on RedHat Novell Ibm want a linux desktop whitout paying nothing.
where is research ? where is innovation ?
the only innovation came from kde side where there aren’t any commercial interests.”
I hope this is a joke, because everything you say here is completely and utterly wrong. Red Hat, Novell, and IBM are three out of the top five contributors of funding and manpower to Linux-associated projects and technologies by anyone’s count.
The innovation is in going back to the last system that worked: UNIX. I hope that when I’m old and gray, history recalls this Windows era of computing as the emergence of certain market conditions that pushed a suboptimal platform on the architecture that would come to dominate the PC era and commericalize the Internet. The PC is mostly a solved problem from a features standpoint. Users want the PC experience but without the security and reliability shortcomings inherent in the implementation. Basically, they want MacOSX on commodity hardware. While Apple is inching in this direction, the AppDell alliance will never happen.
The other key innovation is related to the PC being a mostly solved problem: commoditization of the platform. The people who claim that Linux will never replace Windows are absolutely right. However, Windows will eventually be given away free of charge. The fat bottom line and explosive growth of Microsoft in the 1990’s was due to the rapid advances in solving the PC platform. The drive to upgrade and pay dearly for new version was tied to these advances: the browser, USB, and networking (95, 98, XP respectively). Selling new PC platform improvements in the network platform era is a tall order. Microsoft will eventually realize that the projected demand-side volume and pricing for Windows/Office updates will soon fall short of the cost of doing business the MS way. While Microsoft may have mastered the problems of the PC platform, the free software movement has mastered the problems of platform development in the post-PC era.
The research is you and me. It’s OSNews and blogs across the Internet. It’s SourceForge and Freshmeat. Gone are the days of proprietary market research and internal prototypes. I put something out there, you flame me about how much it sucks. That’s the research.
KDE is the one using the commercial toolkit!! Now, we all know about the dual licensing and I won’t rehearse that here. But do you think that the KDE project would be thinking along the lines of KDE4/Plasma if NOT for the advancements made by Trolltech between Qt3 and Qt4? If you perceive a difference in innovation between KDE and everyone else, then you might as well chalk that up to commercial interests. Is the commercial toolkit working for KDE? Is it good for free software? Is it driving innovation? I don’t think you could sell me the emphatic “no” argument for any of these questions.
I agree, at least to a large degree.
But, seeing that “lUnix n0t ready for desktop OMG!!!111!!” articles are a sure way to get hundreds of posts and thus add revenue for osnews, we’ll probably have to live with them.
And the hundreds of posts do of course also indicate that people enjoy those little flamewars, so why take this away from them?
It’s probably best to simply ignore them, or amuse yourself reading what our trolls are up to today.
But, seeing that “lUnix n0t ready for desktop OMG!!!111!!” articles are a sure way to get hundreds of posts and thus add revenue for osnews, we’ll probably have to live with them.
Ralph, how many times to I have to make clear to you that WE DO NOT GET PAYED. All “revenue” from our ads goes to buying our bandwith.
We have told this a million times, and next time I *will* set comments like that to minus 5.
You are warned. Any replies to this comment will be modded down.
But, seeing that “lUnix n0t ready for desktop OMG!!!111!!” articles are a sure way to get hundreds of posts and thus add revenue for osnews, we’ll probably have to live with them.
Ralph, how many times to I have to make clear to you that WE DO NOT GET PAYED. All “revenue” from our ads goes to buying our bandwith.
We have told this a million times, and next time I *will* set comments like that to minus 5.
You are warned. Any replies to this comment will be modded down.
Typical. Mod down or whatever pleases you. It doesn’t change one bit the fact that this is pure flame bait and that indeed its purpose is to generate more and more ad revenue, whether you like it or not.
But, that’s OK. Go ahead and mod it down. Meanwhile people will keep wondering why clueless comments like yours regarding how open PDF is compared to anything that Microsoft pushes will remain untouched because you’re “OSNews Staff”.
Geez… And I thought that Eugenia was hard to grasp.
Really, you should use a nick. “BrokenLogic” would probably be a good choice.
WE DO NOT GET PAYED. All “revenue” from our ads goes to buying our bandwith.
Ie, you do get paid. The fact that the revenue apparently doesn’t pay more than bandwidth doesn’t change that fact. And the more clicks you get, the bigger chance there is that it pays for more than that.
On a side-note, not strictly related to this posting, have you pondered to get a normal account or even post anonymous for the times you feel like being commenting/argumenting on actual news, and save the “OSNews staff” stuff for the occasions where you actually speak for the site and not your personal beliefs?
I am a single admin for a windows network that has 200 clients in 7 US states and 4 countries and the only linux we run is on our firewalls.
HOWEVER, I have been talking to a friend of mine that loves Ubuntu, and he convinced me to take another look at linux or bsd. He said that linux and BSD’s have gotten much better since I looked at SUSE in 2002.
While I think that Vector Linux with Enlightenment will make a really snazzy desktop, I won’t go to linux for a couple of reasons – and it kills me because Linux seems to be a good stable OS
The primary reason I can’t switch to a linux distro is:
I can’t run solid works or my ERP package on it. Without those 2 apps being ported, I am tied. If the apps get ported and they are stable and as equally functional, I could have a real shot at switching to linux.
One KNOWS that if the CEO and Controller have both asked about researching the idea of switching to linux, that this stuff must be showing up in their news circles (e.g. Wall Street Journal)
Anyway .. that guys article sucked and wasn’t worth all the electrons…
DS
The author’s quite clueless. There are tons of different environments around Linux and *nix in general and they’re not all Windows like. Most distro’s default to the Windows “like” ones because that’s what people are accustomed to and those are the most feature complete systems.
But then there’s enlightenment, which is basically just an extension of where old X11 wm’s were going.
Windowmaker, which is a shot at Next.
Afterstep, which is a really bad shot at Next.
Fluxbox, which is sorta-kinda a little bit Windowsy, but not really. And other slit based ones like blackbox.
Xfce which is, unfortunately, getting more Windowsy but not really there.
Gnome, which is pretty Windowsy if you set it up right, but by default it’s a bit different.
KDE, which is Windowsy by default, but throw a menu around and kasbar in and it’s nothing like it.
Not to mention. In 2001 Mandrake was in the hole, now it’s a growing business buying up other distros. Lindows wasn’t being used by hardly anyone anyway, since it was a new buggy mess that made you root by default. Linspire is still going strong today. Ubuntu has handed out thousands upon thousands of cd’s. Knoppix is a household word among geeks, and for it’s abilities not for jest! And hey, me and a few friends have switched since 2001, so it looks to me like people are still getting into it.
Clueless….
Thom, where did I say you were making money from it or getting payed?
I said it increases add revenue for osnews, which is a good thing as this side has to be financed after all, so what exactly is your problem here?
My linux desktop doesn’t look anything like windows at all. I guess this ‘fragmentation’ thing is becoming synonymous with Choice and Customization, also Personalization.
BTW how do I install ION2 onto windows. Oh wait, it doesn’t work there, guess I’ll have to be uber productive elsewhere. Linux = Unix and Unix is where the real work has always been done.
Oh yeah! Anyone who uses Linux to do some real work should test ION2/3. This WM makes wonders to upgrade your productivity! 🙂
Thom, would you please stop publicly accusing me of something I have not done without even giving me the possibility to respond.
This is just silly.
We’re not only no further ahead now, we may actually be further behind because we seem to have lost momentum.
Sry but it’s not hard to notice all the new/existing projects that increasingly deal with Linux amongst other OSS OS’s.Unless you get paid to seed doubt or you only visit msn.com.A lot more businesses are aware of the advantages Linux,*BSD,.. can give you on multiple terrains.
Most financial institutes have migrated to Linux long time ago,but didn’t bring it to much in the open.
Linux is booming in the server rooms just not that much on the desktop but that’s only a matter of time.Increasingly big global players line-up to (actively) support OSS innovation.
Just have a look how much more substantial news if brought forward by OSS as opposed to MS.
Personally, I’m a little suprised by the responses here. I found the article to be insightful and accurate within the context that was intended by the author.
It seems that whenever anyone is in any way critical of Linux, even when the critisim is meant to be constructive, a mob forms that trys to squash him/her. This makes Linux users appear to be unreasonable zealots.
The author did not say that there is no innovation in any Linux desktop projects. What he said was that the major commercial desktop Linux initiatives have been more about emulating the desktop experience of Windows and Macs then developing something completely new and compelling enough to cause someone to use Linux. And I believe this is true. What we need is to rewind to the 1980’s and look at what Apple, Commodore and Microsoft were doing on their desktops. It was true innovation and completely different than anything that came before. Thats what we need today. If a new visionary approach to interfacing with computers were to be established on Linux, then it could be the tipping point that would cause Linux desktops to become mainstream.
Until we see a completely new way of approaching this issue, the major Linux desktop enviornments will continue to be perceived as poor spin-offs of more mainstream desktop environments. Remember, free is simply not enough of an incentive for many, if not most, desktop users.
[quote]What we need is to rewind to the 1980’s and look at what Apple, Commodore and Microsoft were doing on their desktops. It was true innovation and completely different than anything that came before. [/quote]
no, it was not completely different… they actually ripped of their predecessors. They only changed it a little. Windows continues ripping of what they see in other desktops, other desktops rip of what they see in windows. How would you make something completely different ?? You would end up in reinventing the current systems.
This articles is completely rubbish because it draws strange conclusions from some vague facts on some linux desktops.
“no, it was not completely different… they actually ripped of their predecessors. They only changed it a little.”
And who are you referring to then, Xerox?? Apple was the first personal computer with a GUI. And if youre claiming Apple only changed the Xerox interface “a little” then you are crazy. And like it or not, Windows had many innovative features. The Amiga took the cake, there was stuff in the Amiga Workbench that still does not exist on other platforms even today.
“How would you make something completely different ??”
The ability to see things in a completely different way is what defines a visionary. Your inability to comprehend this probably means you are not one, sorry.
There’s plenty of innovative stuff in KDE that is not in Windows or Mac OS, such as kio_slaves.
Remember, “innovation” is not “revolution”, it’s finding a way to do something better. Very often it’s not flashy or spectacular.
Also, doing something completely original doesn’t mean it will have any value. There’s a reason why the command line is still used: it’s still the best tool for some jobs!
The hammer has been around since the beginning of human history. Sure, it has improved, but it hasn’t been replaced. They’ll still use it in the year 3000…
So what’s the nail gun then? Just a power toy?
The hammer is still in use because it is cheap and portable, but if you are going to do some serious carpenting, I bet you’d choose the nail gun.
Of course, there has been a mechanization of the tool in the form of the nail gun, however there are still a lot more hammers than nail guns. The hammer isn’t obsolete, that was my point. In other words, innovation isn’t always a requirement for popularity.
In fact, there are numerous examples of better technologies losing out to competitors.
Desktop Linux will have begun to fail when the number of users will decrease. Since the number of users keeps increasing, I hardly see how you could consider it a failure…
Of course better technology loses out once in a while. We all know the story of VHS vs. Betamax for instance. But your logic is still flawed.
Your claim was pretty much that there’s not enough room (or users) for two ways of doing the same thing, when in fact there is. Even though this “new way” of doing stuff doesn’t add value to you, it very well might do for someone else. And maybe “they” even outnumber “you”.
I installed Red Hat Linux AS 2.1, 3.0 and 4.0 recently. Both 3.0 and 4.0 come with options to install an office suite, choice of dev tools for any language and legacy libraries for compatibility, servers for most network services, multimedia utilities, choice of databases, choice of GUIs, Internationalization, drivers for most hardware, etc.
To say there is less innovation than the commercial products is a lie.
I can get this same suite of software for the cost of a few CDRs and the bandwidth to download them, from Scientific, CentOS, etc.
Microsoft would have to include their entire software suite and sell it at a reasonable price ($100-$300) to compete. They would have to offer us choice of alternative GUIs and programming languages and dev tools and an office suites and web browsers and databases and IM clients, etc. They would have to make cmd.exe or command.com a tabbed terminal. They would have to expand the CLI with hundreds or thousands of commands. They would have to do ALL of this, just to keep up.
And Linux is moving forward. Every distro gets free access to all this software and its source code and has the liberty to innovate in any way they want. We’re not limited to a single corporation in Redmond. We’ve got China, India, Brazil, the EU, Russia, Canada, Mexico, the US, Australia, New Zealand, and many more using this software, looking at the source code, and modifying it to fit their needs. Their changes should be available to everyone else to include in their products and so on.
Everyone can sell it and give it away.
I bet that last statement confuses you.
I think it depends much on what you are aiming at. If you want to provive a smooth transition from people coming from Windows, is obvious you should make the DE look and feel as much as possible as Windows, maybe changing subtle details to offer some advantage over it. To such a purpose KDE and Gnome are great. Now if you’re aiming at advanceed users, you sure gotta provide different options because Windows-like environment is not the best for everyone, it’s just more common, and different activities trigger different needs. A lot of people feel way more comfortable in Fluxbox for example. I feel very productive in E16 and find it very powerful.
Thom, where did I say you were making money from it or getting payed?
I said it increases add revenue for osnews, which is a good thing as this side has to be financed after all, so what exactly is your problem here?
And would you please either delete your post making this false accusation or at least give me the possibility to respond?
Feel free to email.
The point is here is that you are accusing me of posting news just to get ad revenues for the site. This is not true, and we have stated that a million times before. You are falsely accusing us of pursueing more ad revenues by posting articles like this.
I post articles because I find them of value to our readers. Obvioudly, I cannot help but step on people’s toes every now and then because I post an article that does not fit into that someone’s paradigm.
Deal with it. This discussion is now closed, I’ve been far to gentle already by re-stating the obvious. Again goes, replies will be modded doen.
Got complaints? Email us.
I don’t think you get it.
If none of these types of articles were posted, there would be less users. Less users = less bandwidth = less costs = less NEED for users to generate revenue. The more users, the more revenue they get, BUT more bandwidth they pay for as well.
It doesn’t have to do with ad revenue at all. It has to do with getting discussions going, and keeping things from getting stale around here.
LINUX WILL NEVER BE READY FOR DESKTOP
Without taking any sides, would it be too much to ask that at least OS News *staff* refrain from gross abuse of the moderation system?
My solution has been simply to browse at -5, but it seems that there ought to be a better way for a group of adult OS enthusiasts to handle disagreements.
Hi,
Often with large open source/free software projects it’s easy to point at something and say “let’s make a free version of that”. It’s easy for software developers to understand the goal and how everything is meant to work.
Often it’s extremely difficult for a large open source/free software project to be innovative. Typically, someone thinks of a great idea, tries to explain it to other developers and get them excited about it, and then everyone stands back and watches until after the poor sod has spent years getting it working by themselves. People normally aren’t willing to help until all the hard work is done.
IMHO that’s why most free OSs are Unix clones, and it’s also why I’ll be extremely surprised if I ever see anything radically different on Linux desktops. My crystal ball shows more of the same old thing, probably with a few more options and a bit more eye candy, and possibly with some tiny bits of innovation in isolated areas.
– Brendan
What he said was that the major commercial desktop Linux initiatives have been more about emulating the desktop experience of Windows and Macs then developing something completely new and compelling enough to cause someone to use Linux.
Exactly,that’s what i don’t agree with.You seem to forget all the OSS apps that have been ported to the windows desktop.There’s enough that could make you decide to at least try Linux.I think more and more people will be fet up with the increasingly ongoing soft/hard-ware rat-race relationship wthout any usefull consensus.
Linux isn’t emulating windows desktop experience.Windows itself without third party apps is nothing,but a spyware catching ugly toys-ar-us bucket.
It hardly has any functionality but playing internet checkers,patience,or writing a letter in notepad.*If* Vista is realeased on shedule this time it’s been 6 years since the introduction.MS still more or less petronises the generall intellect of it’s target audience on the desktop market.I’s sad that most users don’t even have a clue.
Sry for the whole industry in and around MS and all the jobs involved but it’s not the lucky eighties anymore.People hopefully are increasingly aware of recources and where and on what spend.For one box of XP-prof (home edition doesn’t even have unix it’s acl structure from the sixtees) you have to spend 450 euros .Well SuSE 10 costs about 59 euros,has a DVD9 and 5 CD’s inside,and two manuals.
“And what about me? Do I look stoopid?” he asks.
Enlightenment baby =) =)
I support Linux, but there’s still A LOT OF work to do.
Or if you prefer,
“if you want to know your faults, listen to your adversaries/enemies”
mramirez
Nothing gets a message board’s blood up quite like an article that attempts to point out a weakness in an open source project, especially desktop Linux (of which there are plenty of weaknesses).
But of course, no one wants to hear it. It’s either FUD or trolling or flamebait. I couldn’t possibly be an honest attempt to better the community by providing insight into problems and issues that plague a project.
Instead, let’s all shoot the messenger. No one likes to hear bad news anyway.
“In its context at Camp Shelby the expression summarised an attitude to received wisdom: if it doesn’t work, stop doing it.“
– What is Camp Shelby? What are they famous for?
I have an expression. It goes like this: “If you can reasonably judge that something is possible and beneficial then keep trying until you suceed!”
I have a second expression: “If you enjoy doing it, then do it!”
“Sun’s Java Desktop System… [snip] …replicated Microsoft’s x86 based client server architecture, and delivered the Windows experience…“
– What is this MS client server architecture? The 30 or 40 year old client server architecture?
MS Windows architecture is just a slow progression of so many desktops in the past, in rough order of date (and omitting a lot): MAC OS, Amiga OS, GEM, NEXT, …
“John Carroll says dropping this approach will mean the end of Linux but ask yourself: what would total success make Linux? Right, a copy of Windows, and that’s not really the point, at least for us, is it?“
– Copy of Windows?
Don’t think so, Linux is so much more powerful than the current Windows architecture in a number of ways:
1. No centralised ‘Registry’. A more distributed model.
2. More thorough designed access rights
3. Scalability
And most importantly of all:
4. The source code is entirely free to change and recompile without any additional licenses, fees, or permissions. That is where the freedom lies.
Linux can be used anywhere to help companies compete thus spawning competition and innovation in the competitive free market economy.
The only thing is that as everyone has grown up with Windows, and children are now taught solely on Windows then that is the system they find easier to use. So it maintains ‘useability’ momentum. And useability exists as the interface between the people (with their experience and training) and the system.
When you see how many hidden configuration files that are not inter-distro compatible stand in this mountain of bizarre stuff you can’t just stay cool !
Think of the time you passed, upgrading, configuring, debugging, burning CDs, waiting for fixes that never comes because you have “wrong hardware” ( I know that Manufacturer don’t play nice with linux but the multiplication of ditribution doesn’t help them a lot !! ) And for what result ?! Something that you can do on windows / Mac OS in ten minutes without being computer engeneer !!!
I assume that on linux you’ve got some kind of stability but for how many times ?! There is also good softwares for free !
The only thing that could help “linux” is just a kind of standard base not LSB but something really easy to maintain without tons of dependancies.
This remark goes for (Free)BSD too ! You just can’t install for exemple Mysql 3.23 on an up-to-date linux / BSD ! Whith dependancy “game” mysql 4.0 or 4.1 installs.
SO what next ?! Vista … linux … freeBSD ? My god I hope something new a futuristic will come otherwise we are in deep troubles !!
Here are more linux desktop users than Mac-OSX, so please stop with the “linux not ready for desktop” crap and show some real facts. Tell me again why Windows is a desktop OS that breeds, virus’s, spyware and worms?
Me,my mum and uncle dont have that probelm on Linux, yet my grandma brought a laptop, within 1 week see had to take it back because of spyware(using SP2 and firefox). Call that a OS ready for the desktop?
I believe that the points the article makes are sound except that they’re based on a fundamentally flawed premise. The author seems to be assuming that Linux is a company. As a company, success will be measured by market share and research will be driven by whatever will increase that market share. In line with that, he assumes that all Linux developers have the same goal of increasing market share. Therefore, since market share is not growing significantly, Linux needs to change their direction. Copying Windows, as he puts it, is not working and Linux needs to reinvent itself to remain a viable company…
I respectfully disagree. Linux is not a company, it is a loosely knit community. Everybody in the Linux community wants to make it better. However, not everybody agrees on what it is that will make Linux better. Is this a problem? Heck no! This is one of the foundations of Linux’s appeal (at least to me). There’s a flavor of Linux for almost everybody and anybody is free to to make their own.
If I want a Windows-like distro, I can find one. If I want a more Mac-like distro, I can find one. If I want something totally different, I can find that too. Some people want to make Linux more Windows-like. Others want to go their own direction. Many, myself included, don’t care all that much that Linux doesn’t have a huge market share on the desktop. I need a good stable OS and Linux fills that need nicely.
Although there are many Linux fans as well as some businesses that want to see Linux kill Windows on the desktop, that’s not the goal of Linux. Linux is a hobbiest OS. Now if IBM and Novell and Red Hat and Linspire and Xandros, etc want to take it and make it into a Windows killer, that’s fine. More power to them (I’m not really a big MS fan), but I’m not losing any sleep over it.
What I’m saying is that Linux itself is above all that. Linux doesn’t have aspirations except to keep improving. It doesn’t have a business plan, it’s not trying to compete in the desktop market, it’s not trying to kill Windows, it’s not trying to take over the server world, it’s not trying to do anything other than become more and more useful to its users. Now there are businesses out there trying to do all of those things with Linux but IBM, Sun, Novell, and the others are not Linux and people should stop assuming they are.
BTW, in the interest of discloser, I’m writing this from the Xandros 3 box I use at work. At home I use Windows XP but I am planning on trying out Ubuntu. I love all the choices I get with Linux.
Indeed, Linux is a community.
The way businesses are using it though makes it very much like a coop (A cooperative).
Cooperatives don’t directly compete as businesses do so they can ride the rough times and exist where companies would normally be destroy or not even think of existing.
But not being a company indeed it has no PR department, and no big payments to media companies for advertising directly or indirectly and so cannot take opportunities to gain market share.
But market share is not a problem. Being a cooperative, only the people that are already using it are the ones who want it. Why would they want to increase market share? That is hardly anyones aim.
I’m using it, its beneficial to me, its got enough people developing now that far exceeds the number of people in Microsoft so I’m sure it’ll remain competitive. It would be nice if more people decided to join the cooperative and the number of people doing so is set to continue. But most people using it and taking advantage of it are not bothered about it gaining a significant market share!
Of course he attacks Sun too, but what he’s trying to do is cement a lie in the reader’s mind: the network computer is dead.
Um dude thats not a lie the “NC” has long been dead in the form Ellison originally proposed. it may see a comback in a different form.
I believe that the points the article makes are sound except that they’re based on a fundamentally flawed premise. The author seems to be assuming that Linux is a company. As a company, success will be measured by market share and research will be driven by whatever will increase that market share. In line with that, he assumes that all Linux developers have the same goal of increasing market share. Therefore, since market share is not growing significantly, Linux needs to change their direction. Copying Windows, as he puts it, is not working and Linux needs to reinvent itself to remain a viable company…
I respectfully disagree. Linux is not a company, it is a loosely knit community. Everybody in the Linux community wants to make it better. However, not everybody agrees on what it is that will make Linux better. Is this a problem? Heck no! This is one of the foundations of Linux’s appeal (at least to me). There’s a flavor of Linux for almost everybody and anybody is free to to make their own.
If I want a Windows-like distro, I can find one. If I want a more Mac-like distro, I can find one. If I want something totally different, I can find that too. Some people want to make Linux more Windows-like. Others want to go their own direction. Many, myself included, don’t care all that much that Linux doesn’t have a huge market share on the desktop. I need a good stable OS and Linux fills that need nicely.
Although there are many Linux fans as well as some businesses that want to see Linux kill Windows on the desktop, that’s not the goal of Linux. Linux is a hobbiest OS. Now if IBM and Novell and Red Hat and Linspire and Xandros, etc want to take it and make it into a Windows killer, that’s fine. More power to them (I’m not really a big MS fan), but I’m not losing any sleep over it.
What I’m saying is that Linux itself is above all that. Linux doesn’t have aspirations except to keep improving. It doesn’t have a business plan, it’s not trying to compete in the desktop market, it’s not trying to kill Windows, it’s not trying to take over the server world, it’s not trying to do anything other than become more and more useful to its users. Now there are businesses out there trying to do all of those things with Linux but IBM, Sun, Novell, and the others are not Linux and people should stop assuming they are.
BTW, in the interest of discloser, I’m writing this from the Xandros 3 box I use at work. At home I use Windows XP but I am planning on trying out Ubuntu. I love all the choices I get with Linux.
I knew the article was in trouble when the author decided to use a quote from a beret wearing general / politician who can barely speak grammatical english. Generals and politicians have nothing to do with linux. Linux moves as it needs to move, it is community driven, and as for success, Linux server use is at an all time high, desktop use is excellent for those who wish to use it. For those who prefer to use Windows or OS X, that is their business and is no skin off the backs of Linux distro developers.
To call the hard working Linux developers ” stuck on stupid ” is an insult.
Paul Murphy is stuck on stupid-maybe he and that general can get together and hand out some MRE’s in New Orleans, and talk shop-while the real workers toil quietly and persistently-for Honore that would be the power crews et al, for Murphy that would be the Linux developers.
I dont know if this guy knows his stuff, but I honestly dont think so.I dont know how long its been since he last saw a linux desktop but all these FUD about “Linux desktop is stalled” is hillarious. If this guy is a reporter, I am an astronaut.
P.S. These people/trolls are keeping linux desktop behind, by scarin em off.
it was fedora going to beat MS, then linspire/xandros was a craze for a while, then came knoppix to knock down windows, then it was Mepis on the top of distrowatch and now everyone likes U- word.(i am not correct about timeline)
Do linux developers consider average Joe is a monkey jumping from one distro to another?? Pleaaaase give me at least one eatable banana.
linux is not ready for desktop.
When it will be ready in future, by that time desktop landscape might have been changed and people may not need any more desktop. All web based applications (Google and Sun) have potential to kill both linux and MS at the same time.
We all know, stop bitching about it.
And not just any kind of stupid, but on “The stupid, it BURNS!” is in the area of software installs.
For instance, where I work we’re considering making use of a browser plug in called jybe to help with instruction and chat reference.
There’s a jybe version that runs on Firefox for OS X and XP. Which leads me to believe that it’s some sort of universal coding that any OS/Processor can run. For the sake of completeness, I’d like to see if I can get it run under Linux. (Which is not mentioned at all on the jybe page.)
So, I’m going to end up with this little .xpi file on my Linux desktop.
I have no frelling idea how to get it installed.
1) I have no command line instructions
2) It’s not like I can import it into Synaptic, and it’s not going to just show up in Synaptic, either.
3) I can try a double click, but only once has that gotten me anywhere with a software install.
With Windows and OS X software installs start one way: you double click the icon.**
With Linux … who knows?
—
** Okay, okay, I know it’s still possible to use the command line to install under OS X and Run to install in XP, but I’ve yet to see anybody choose that option when presented with an icon to click.
I have no frelling idea how to get it installed.
http://www.jybe.com/site/help/install.aspx
No comment on stupidity.
Anonymous says: “http://www.jybe.com/site/help/install.aspx
No comment on stupidity.”
Yo, Dood. Those are the instructions for Firefox on XP and OS X.
Actually, it was the first thing I was planning to try, but since Linux is not mentioned at all why should I assmue it will work? (It’s not like I expect the instructions for how to change a spark plug on a Ford Focus to work when I’ve got a Honda Civic. )
In my experience, with one exception I’ve had something not listed in Synaptic install the way it’s supposed to in Linux and also in my experience Linux handles the installation of software completely differently than XP or OS X.
There needs to be ONE way to start a Linux software install.
I don’t care if it’s command line, or mouse, or dancing the hokey pokey.
This kludgy system of sometimes I can double click, and sometimes I use Synaptic, and sometimes I have to go the the CLI is bad.
And even at the CLI, it’s not consistent. Sometimes I type apt-get and sometimes I type dkpg-i, and sometimes I have to type a bunch of extra letters in addition to apt-get or dkpg-i because it’s one of the species of .tar file. And I also have to know all my .tar file types, because the command that unzips and installs this file name.tar.bz2 is not the same as what will unzip and intstall this file name.tar.gz.
If all of that’s not a steaming pile of stupid, I don’t know what is.
@kadymae
You’re making a fool of yourself. The instructions for FF are true on all platforms.
Extensions to FF are installed the same way on ALL platforms. If you’re a regular user of FF you would know that.
Besides that, there are not only one, but many ways to install applications on windows and mac and all other systems, including GNU/Linux.
As a regular user of one of these systems, you ought to know that.
There is no such thing as a only-one-way to install. Besides that, the “one-size-fits-everyone” philosophy doesn’t work at all.
I expect your next statement to be: “640 KB is enough for everyone.”
This is of course subjective and it disregards political issues, but I think the best choice for having a productive desktop at the moment is using windows with open source apps. Firefox, thunderbird, openoffice all run better and faster on windows.
Using open source apps like firefox, using the lastet service packs and not running as admin also gets rid of most of the spyware problems gives you a stable system.
I can’t really comment about OSX because i’ve never really spent much time with it.
The articles and blogs on ZDNet are all decidedly anti Linux, even the so called Linux/Open Source bloggers can’t write much positive stuff about Linux. ZDNet is a huge partner of Microsoft (MS is a big advertiser on ZDNet, and MS has financial interest in ZDNet/CWnet). They also have a lot of posters on their forums that constantly flame, bait, troll, rip Linux.
ZDNet is very much part of the MS FUD machine, and has zero credibility, and should be completely ignored.
What prevented Linux to spread faster on the Desktop was the GUI. Most of the people that predicted a rapid growth of Linux a couple of years ago had a UNIX background and had no problem using Linux, the majority of the desktop users didn’t have that background.
Unlike the Linux chear leaders most of the potential Linux desktop users had problems using the command line to do things like mount their USB digital camera by saying “mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/camera” from the command line. They expected things like this to just work. Today it does perhaps even better than in windows, but that is a quite resent improevement However, the “Just works” thing that have emerged in late versions of Gnome and KDE is not enough.
To be succesful on the desktop Linux GUIs needs to meet their new desktop users on their own terms. That means using methapores that they feel comfortable with and hide stuff that doesn’t concern them or their work process. This is what Apple have done, and this is what Linux people need to do if they want a bigger share of the desktop market.
Some examples: Only sysadmins should need to see directories like /etc, /bin, /sbin, /lib, /boot, /proc, /usr, /lost+found,… To all other users this should be hidden files just like the dot files containing personal settings in their home directories. By the way you can allready make this happen in Gnome/Nautilus by plasing a file .hidden containing the names of the directories to be hidden in the / directory. The problem is 1) it is not the default, 2) it doesn’t hide the folders where it is most needed, the file dialogs.
Another needed improvement would be to make the parts of the composite desktop methapore used in Gnome, KDE and many other DEs used on Linux to behave more close to the every day things that they model. E.g. Who is storing their desktop in their file cabinet. In other words things like the Trash can, The file cabinet, inserted media such as CD roms, ipods or digital cameras should constitute the top of their own tree.
Another problem is that Unix people tend to think that users never need to leave their home folder. That is not true in most work place situations. There need to be easy ways to access common file resourses e.g. shared work of your co worksers. And by the way, most people doesn’t refer to their coworkers by login names, they tend to use their real names.
When thes kinds of problems are addressed Linux will grow much faster on the desktop. The process will be even faster if you add good administration tools that fits in large organizations. E.g. a LDAP backend to GConf data with an easy to use GUI would be an Active directory killer in large organizations.
People had choices years ago. One was to come together and take on Microsoft headon with one desktop/toolkit. The other choice was to do something that wasn’t a copy of windows. Instead we got two desktop that are essentially copies of windows.
So as Linux enters middle age, and they hype is dying down, LotD is pretty much competing with OSX in the low single digits.
Maybe there will be enough resources to try something different. Komodo is interesting, so are some of the other new desktops, but probably don’t have enough resources to compete.
He did not criticise desktop Linux for the sake of it. The gist of the article was that desktop Linux should try and stop focusing too much on Microsoft’s bloated and outdated client/server vision and look to implement more web based applications and support infrastructure. Of course, you’re still going to need Outlook replacements and all the rest of it, but his point is that too much focus is being put on getting bogged down in that battle.
He said the NC had failed, but that the idea and concept of it very much lives on. Yer Larry Ellison doesn’t talk about it these days, but honestly, how many failed visions have Microsoft had which have been supported by the cash cows they have in Windows and Office? Tablet PCs are one such fallacy, but BG still seems to want to paint over the practical problems.
I read ‘Microsoft’s client/server architecture’ wrong at first, until I realised he was talking about the actual model, not Microsoft’s actual client/server technology.
…silly news that aren’t news but only work as flame bait.
This has been discussed before. Let’s sat: No more discussion about said article… it’s way old! EOL for that article!
…as can be seen from a number of posts is that zealots go crazy when anybody is critical of Linux desktop efforts.
Oh well, with that attitude nothing will change and Microsoft will continue to dominate the desktop for decades to come.
Mr.Noname… You’re wrong. As can be seen from this thread is that we’re sick of the same old articles being reposted shortly after the first posting.
We’ve been discussing that darn article before, and no need for another flamewar on it.
Besides that, the article is extremely flawed. And before you flame me, Mr.Noname, remember: I’ve been using Windows since 3.0, DOS, OS/2, Mac OS classic, Mac OS X, GNU/Linux (several distros) and a couple other systems, so I’m no zealot.
I’m just tired about stupid articles being discussed repeatedly, usually by extremely biased persons, who tend to forget facts.
in usability and should be in double digit numbers by now.
But that didn’t happen because there is no desktop for linux – just desktops that happen to run on linux, as well as the problems with people not working together to take on the resources of Microsoft and Apple.
So you can throw around the term choice all you want, but that doesn’t help desktop linux’s growth.
Linux is fine in the server closet.
LOL… Now I know who you are :p
Desktops running on Linux ARE Linux on the Desktop, and it works quite fine.
Define usability, Mr.RecognizedNoname.
Remeber that the windows desktop is 20 years old and Gnome is only 6 years old. How usable was the windows desktop after 6 years? Less usable than the first Gnome release.
What can you do on the windows desktop that you cannot do on the linux desktop?
What are missing?
Come up with some facts, instead of just trolling like you did in the other thread where you didn’t answer me.
The guy’s got a point. Where’s the innovation?
The de facto way of adding OSS UI features is pretty much by copying it. And maybe pass it through the usamajility machine to make it easier to learn, but impossible to use efficiently.
Some people here seem to think that the large number of desktop environments proves innovation. Slits and animations are not innovative. Things might look and operate differently, but they do pretty much the same thing. Even Luminocity with their wobbly windows aren’t really improving things much (atleast not yet… I’ve still got hope
).
We got compositing and kick-ass graphics cards, but the best we can do is shadows, transparency and wobbly windows?
OSS is the perfect breeding ground for experimental UI design. I reckon it’s about time we took advantage of that…
We got compositing and kick-ass graphics cards, but the best we can do is shadows, transparency and wobbly windows?
This has nothing to do with UI nor with usability. It’s only interesting in regard to eye-candy and let’s be honest. Eye-candy is to be avoided unless it clearly ADDS needed functionality.
Perhaps the home user wants a bloated system, but I want a system with the smallest possible footprint without sacrifing usability. So eye-candy is the only thing to sacrifice
[quote]
This has nothing to do with UI nor with usability. It’s only interesting in regard to eye-candy
[/quote]
Really… Have you seen expose? How would you acomplish that without compositing and modern graphic cards?
And that’s just scrathcing the surface, even when only looking at spatial task management.
Besides, just adding “feel” to the user interface increases usability. It’s a large part of what makes an interface intuitive.
I don’t know what you think is usability, but I suggest you read up on it.
The only hope for desktop linux is for someone to make a desktop for linux, and not a desktop that happens to run on linux.
Someone needs to pull an Apple for the linux kernel.
Now linux is falling further behind Vista and OSX. Linux had a good chance 6-7 years ago, but now that chance is almost gone. Copying windows will always result in failure.
I’m sorry, but in my opinion KDE offers a superior desktop experience to Windows XP (Vista isn’t out yet, and won’t be for another year, so anythign about it is speculative). It no longer tries to copy it, but now is trying to go further than it, which explains the recent hostility from pro-MS posters. FWIW, I feel the experience is on par with OSX.
It’s funny how people don’t claim that OSX is an inferior desktop to Windows, even though it has the same market share as Linux…I guess that’s a pretty good indicator of anti-Linux bias!
…that “Linux is not ready for Desktop”. I suppose that is how one defines “ready”. In all my past experience with Linux distrobutions since 2001, it worked on the Desktop. Was I able to run the apps I use on Windows? Not really, no more than I was able to run them on a Mac, so I suppose if Linux distros were not ready for Desktop, neither was any Mac OS.
I suppose the real thing that people are saying when they say ‘not ready for desktop’ is that it is not Windows. I would pretty much switch over to Linux completely except for 3 details: the need to be compatable with my work, the desire to play a wide variety of games, and a significant investment in windows compatible software. Of course, the same argument applies to switching to Mac and even future versions of Windows depending on backwards compatability.
Innovation on a large scale is more difficult than innovation on a smaller scale. As a larger percentage of a population adopts an innovation, the more difficult it becomes to switch them to something similar but more innovatove unless there is a direct force to give them momentum to move over. The adoption of the metric system outside of technical and scientific fields in the USA went no where. 100% of the population was using (adopted) the Imperial system, and the external force to push them to the metric system was insufficient. On the flip side, the push to use smaller and more fuel effient cars in the ’70s was given good momentum by the Oil Crisis. It was not 100% conversion, but such are the laws of thermodynamics.
So, for non-Windows OSes to get more of a user base, there has to be sufficient force to give users momentum for change. Since the user base is larger than it was in the ’80s, it will take a lot of force to make a significant dent. That force, however, may exist in the form of user inertia with the current installs of Windows – if it works, why upgrade to Vista? The comparable out of box insecurity of Windows was/is a good force to make change, but MS is working on dampening that. …anyways, I am going to stop talking now…
Hey, this might be an interesting arti….oh, it’s Paul Murphy, nevermind…wonder what else is on OSNews that is interesting…
I’m running Linux…
get this..
On My Desktop!
Whoa… freaky, huh?
The failure of desktop linux is mostly the result of no strong leadership. If the desktop had been developed like the kernel then desktop linux would have had a better chance.
“I hope you will save FreeBSD from the same fate.”
‘save’ FreeBSD?
– This discussion has little to nothing to do with *BSD
– Money is not always the motivation. Often it is, often it is not. Sometimes it is the selfish and altruistic things combined. Linux is not about money. It is good people *can* make money from it if they want to, but it’s by no means a necessity. Most popular projects use a combination of a small core of paid developers and a loyal network of volunteers.
– *BSD is doing fine
– *BSD does not need saving
Methinks you are neither supportive to Linux nor to *BSD. In fact that’s a nice piece of FUD of yours bashing the two in one breath.