Resellers are enthusiastic about recent moves by Novell and Red Hat to move Linux onto the desktop but warn that fear of the unknown and missing applications are holding progress back. Asked if he thought Linux was ready to grace the desktops of the average business Philip Burgess, sales manager at Sire Technology, said: “Blimey, I’ve just put the phone down after talking to SUSE Linux – I’m going to see them next week.”
Resellers Question Linux on the Desktop
2004-05-06 Linux 31 Comments
This whole “is linux ready for the desktop”-thing only shows how many people that are used to the OS monopoly. I mean seriously, no-one will question the same things about any other product. They will look at the price, the features, the design, the quality and make a decision if it’s worth it or not. It’s not a question of being equal to the best or the most used product, it’s a question of being worth the money.
And in my opinion a product like SUSE is well worth the money. It’s a very attractive product at a very low price. I get a nicely packaged OS with a huge amount of software for only $30. It looks fairly nice, it’s easy to use and I can do a lot of things with it, things that I would have to pay hundreds or even thousands to do in windows.
Sure, some companies are tied to certain software, so SUSE might not be a good choice for them (perhaps they should make a wiser decision the next time). But for someone who isn’t tied to a specific kind of software SUSE offers a great deal. It’s kinda pathetic to even question that.
Although I have seen articles rating Windows as if it were a Linux distro. Heh, I don’t know how to do it without bias myself, and I imagine most would have bias. But realistically, Windows XP is not ready for the desktop for a lot of the same reasons people accuse linux distro’s of:
-Lack of native support for hardware (searching for drivers online is not a newbie friendly task)
-Lack of applications
-A confusing start menu with too many programs in odd folders
-The installer can be confusing (mostly at the partition stages)
-The beginning updates require too many reboots, and newbs may not know to check updates on each reboot
But no one questions it. If it were up to the standards people expect of linux you wouldn’t see people fork over $40-$80 for reinstalls by local technicians.
One of the biggest problems I see for Linux on the desktop is ignorance. As someone who works in computer sales and technician in a small store (so I get yelled at and sell things): Let me tell ya, it’s not gonna be fun when some moron takes their linux box home and logs into root and does an rm -f somewhere. Then they bring it in and find out what we charge to reinstall the OS, and at that point they get mad! Sure, it happens in windows too. Just last Saturday a gentlement got a boot virus off one of this old floppies immediately after purchasing his computer; but that’s an easy fix and is hardly his fault. People know not to play around in the Windows directory because it tells them not to, will they know to stay out of /usr./opt,/etc, etc….
I don’t blame linux for people’s ignorance. But let’s face it, people view a computer as an appliance while they tweak it as if it were a toy.
THat’s why I get paid $50 an hour helping people on their user friendly Windows Operating Systems, cause they are so easy for the average person to use and administer. Total bloody joke. Yes I find Linux a little harder to setup only if the apps I am installing are not in packaged repositories but once done, it is much easier to keep running. Not like its commercial counterpart also Trustworthy Computing, an Oxymoron being pimped off onto Joe unsuspecting public in the name of safe computer usage. Just as safe as putting a rubber on and banging every pro on the beat. Not!
Maybe I just enjoy having M$ to blame when stupid people mess up their computer .
I agree with you. After using Windows since the first release many moons ago and then trying out several distros late in 2003 I settled on SUSE LINUX. It offered not only a friendly GUI, easy to use tools but also the power and stability of LINUX in a low cost solution. Not to mention the thousands of free apps that come with SUSE LINUX and things like network/server tools that typically cost extra in other LINUX distros and OS. I also found it less bloated and offered more peace of mind in regards to security compared to when I ran Windows entirely.
As for the comment regarding the lack of applications it all depends on what you need. Basically I have no difficulty finding Digital Content Creation apps which are ported to LINUX (ie: Shake, Maya, XSI, render software, CAD, etc). Also it’s easy for Graphic/Web Design Artists to either use an Open Source software solution or run something like Macromedia on Wine. I’ve also haven’t experienced any difficulty running the most recent games requiring DirectX on WineX (ie: Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, etc).
Just as when Apple came to be with their OS it took time for proprietory apps and hardware to port to them and this is true with LINUX. I’ve noticed a recent increase in support from not only hardware developers but also software developers seeing that money can be made when you port to LINUX. The great thing about distros such as SUSE LINUX is that they can be distributed on Servers, Workstations, Desktops and even laptops with out causing fear to new users. This can be done on an entire network of LINUX or a cross network with Windows or even OSX.
Companies such as SUSE and RedHat will definately make a big impact on the world market in the next year or two. Hopefully opening the minds of users while easing their concerns to using another OS. If anything LINUX growth in the world market will definately save consumers money which is always on a consumers mind.
Fear of the unknown is not really a problem for me personally, but the missing (or at least ‘not-as-functional’) applications part is a real pain in my ass. It seems the rhetoric of the Linux crowd is “Yeah, this free app is a great alternative to the high-dollar app you’re currently using, assuming you only want to ….” or “assuming you don’t need …’
If it weren’t for that, I’d have switched to Linux back around 1997 when I first compiled and got running KDE 1 in Slackware.
Well it’s a better argument than “All linux-apps are superiour to windows-apps.” Which isn’t true. Saying that “This is a great alternative if you don’t need a lot of advanced features” Is honest and true most of the time.
The only apps that I still haven’t found a replacement for in the opensource world is Macromedia Fireworks, other than that I can do pretty much everything I need to do as good or sometimes better in linux and BeOS than in Windows.
If you pirate all your commercial software then sure, it’s usually a better alternative, but if you stay on the legal side there’s a lot of great opensource alternatives to commersial software in the opensource.
eh, s/in the opensource//
I’m getting tired.
Btw, Linux has a lot more to offer on the desktop now than back in 97. Back then I was pretty much just using it for fun (and webserving) but now I can do all sorts of serious work on linux.
well, when i first used linux. when id install an RPM it would install in some unkown directory.. didnt even give a nice little desktop link back or start menue link back or anything. had to guess awhile till i found where it was at (i found it after i deleted linux and reinstalled it).
It’s also hard to find an RPM that fits your distro. there are too many distros that arent compatible with each other. like some rpms would be for redhat but not suse, etc.
alot of the tarballs and gunzip archives confused me too, very hard to deal with regarding that. too bad linux dosent have an easy tool like winzip or windows explorer. Alot of the applications I had to compile and i had no idea how to do that. I found it easier accessing the command line from PuTTY remotely than using what was on the red hat desktop.
That’s why I use windows & BeOS for the desktop and use freebsd and linux on the servers.
That, in my opinion is the only thing holding linux back, that and the lack of important applications, but applications or not, thats the reason for me and alot of people i know. Too damn hard to install stuff on the desktop.
Since then I studed on unix alot, now i administer linux servers & help people with these kinds of problems. I’m very advanced at it now and I love it.
this is the actual use of the system or not i could care less the useability of it were open source or not, although i obviously perfer open source OS’s that you can close.
“This is a great alternative if you don’t need a lot of advanced features” Is honest and true most of the time.
Actually, it’s quite relative and depends on what you’re doing. I will concede that there are some tasks in that are better done in desktop Linux than in Windows. I don’t exactly know what those are, but I’m sure they exist
Btw, Linux has a lot more to offer on the desktop now than back in 97
I know that. But then again, so does WIndows. Windows as an OS (sans much greater stability) has stayed pretty stagnent over the years, while Linux as an OS continues to evolve.
However, I’m sad to say that when it comes to apps and the desktop, Linux always seems to lag one or two steps behind. Either that, or else they come up with a few kick-ass apps and port them over to Windows. (Firefox anyone?)
oh yeah, one plus that windows + IE have is the ability o move the toolbars around and resize them with the mouse.
GNOME and Mozilla really don’t do that (Don’t argue with it because your probably thinking of something different).
It bugs me to the extent of just using windows instead of linux on the desktop. as an advanced unix admin. i would happily use a unix desktop if that small feature was implemented 😉 It’s those small things that people get acustomed to…
Your calling newbies morons, that’s very rude and uncalled for. I guess my entire family and alot of my userbase are morons?
It’s not nice to say such things about people who have never used such software. I guess I was a moron when i first installed linux then. I sure hope someone like you dosen’t work in customer support 😉
no offense but i found that kinda offensive and rude
RPM stands for “RedHat Package Manager” ( http://www.rpm.org/ ) so you shouldn’t experience any issues installing an RPM file as long as your distro uses RPM and not (.deb) for Debian distros. The file is compiled as an RPM which should run on all RPM distros (ie: RedHat, SUSE LINUX, Mandrake, WhiteBox). I still primarily use SUSE LINUX RPM files but haven’t experienced any issues when installing a RPM file that has been compiled for RedHat. An example of this is with software such as Maya, XSI and Shake that are supported on RedHat and come with RedHat RPM files but still install with out any issue on SUSE LINUX since version 9.0. This is why RPM distros such as RedHat and SUSE LINUX have done so well in the global market since the systems are very compatible with each other. I’ve only experienced issues with installing some RedHat RPM files on Mandrake due to missing library files but this may have been resolved with the recent release of version 10.0.
It sounds like you haven’t used Linux as a desktopOS since 98 or something. While I agree that installing apps that isn’t provided by the distributor can be troublesome for a regular user, most people will do fine with the apps that are packaged for the distribution. An easier install for those apps is needed indeed but I actually don’t think that it’s something that should keep people in general from using it, perhaps it may even be a good thing
As for compressed archives, it’s easy to open them in Konqueror for example, and there’s other GUIs. Really, how updated are you? There’s an incredible amount of apps available for Linux nowdays. Sure some are at beta-stage and some are badly written, and it doesn’t have as many apps as Windows. But it still has a great amount of _free_ apps, and a lot of users will do fine with it.
Linux can be very easy to use these days, as long as you keep yourself inside the limits of the distro. But the same goes for windows really. None of them are as easy to use as BeOS though, but well, there’s not just enough apps for BeOS to please even the avarege joe.
“It sounds like you haven’t used Linux as a desktopOS since 98 or something. ”
never saw any change in 2000 either ok? I get the complaints all the time.
I actually use linux now as a desktop as well.
Yes, it is fine with the apps distributed by distro, my grandparents use a linux desktop but they dont need to install any apps so they dont have this problem. They just need Mozilla. I do know people that do.
i do agree with the number of apps on beOS. there are more apps on linux than beos.
the only problem with linux is its hard to install on the desktop for people that have never used it before.
If someone created a macOS compatible operating system in my opinion it would probably more successful than a windows compatible one, but thats just a wild idea that i have although the odds are against it.
But yeah.. the only proble, with linux on the desktop is that the apps don’t install pretty and its hard to find apps packaged for your special distro on the net and when you do its confusing (for a new user)
You know, majority of the linux apps don’t have pretty graphical installers like window ones
You know, majority of the linux apps don’t have pretty graphical installers like window ones
Sure it has (well not as pretty looking), you can just doubleclick an RPM and have it installed, with a lot less questions asked than with a windows installer. That is if you have required libs installed. Dependancy hell is what makes installing apps on linux hard, and while apt-get and the like tries to solve this you still run into it every now and then.
Including the libs in every package would result in huge packages since there’s pretty much no standard libs on linux.
I dunno, both solutions has their disadvantages.
Re: “the only problem with linux is its hard to install on the desktop for people that have never used it before.”
Difficult to install? What about distros such as Linspire, SUSE LINUX and Mandrake?
Re: “But yeah.. the only problem, with linux on the desktop is that the apps don’t install pretty and its hard to find apps packaged for your special distro on the net and when you do its confusing (for a new user)
You know, majority of the linux apps don’t have pretty graphical installers like window ones”
Lets not generalize the hundreds of LINUX distros out there. Distros such as Linspire and SUSE LINUX have very easy to use package (program) managers. For instance SUSE LINUX not only has YAST which is very similar to the WinXP Control Panel but also has the ability to install programs with in the Konqurer Browser due to the integration of YAST. Also automation tools in LINUX such as SUSE LINUX’s “SUSE Watcher” and “YOU” (Yast Online Update) that updates both the OS as well as programs is something Microsoft and Apple have yet to develope. These tools make it even easier on the end user. I admit SUSE LINUX is the easiest to install and add/remove programs compared to others. Distro standardization of program installers should improve since Novell released YAST to Open Source. SUN is the first company I have seen to take advantage of YAST going Open Source by integrating it into their next desktop OS.
I don’t understand why you continue to think it is difficult to find files for LINUX. Most distros already include at least basic programs with the distro to get the user started similar to Windows or you can purchase a proprietory program ported to LINUX. There are also very helpful online search engines that include both Open Source and links to proprietory software. Such as Apt-Get, Freshmeat.net, SorceForge.net, http://rpm.pbone.net/ or even just using Google.
Sigh.. Notice what I said was to describe a computer illiterate person’s experience with linux…’
no, i dont want to be jumped all over because of an opinion and opinions of others i have noticed.
it’s simply easier to find and install applications on windows withour worrying about compatabilities and what not. hundreds of distros is a good example. but anyway…
im not trying to be biased EITHER WAY.. and i sure hope you can understand or try to grasp how a person who has never used a computer and boots up linux would think
Yeah right newbies are definitely not morons.
Newbies are the new lifeblood of the user base.
I hate being “deemed” a moron just because I have the curiosity to become a newbie, and then switch completely to Linux.
Just like I hate those condescending books “For Dummies….”, just because one is trying new things, people seem to assume that one is dumb!
That is just stupid. I would never buy such a book.
those are pretty excellent books, and because you are offended by the title, you did not buy the books to find out exactly what they could teach you ?
are you a dummy ?
do people assume you are a dummy because of your unwillingness to learn ?
do you have an aversion if you think you are being condescended ?
>> well, when i first used linux. when id install an RPM it would install in some unkown directory.
Incase your still having difficulty finding out where RPM puts stuff ‘rpm -ql <packageName>’
>> Since then I studed on unix alot, now i administer linux servers & help people with these kinds of problems. I’m very advanced at it now and I love it.
In any of your unix studies, did you ever find Solaris’ equivalent to ‘rpm -ql’? The package manager knows where all the files are installed (how else could it uninstall them), but I can’t find any way to get it to tell me.
>> the only problem with linux is its hard to install on the desktop for people that have never used it before. (tim h- rack64)
Installing Linux isn’t much of a task for someone who has installed MS-Windows before. I am sure there are people for whom Linux is too difficult to install, however I don’t think there is anything Linux distributors can do for them (except offer installation at their local computer store).
I always thought of the “for Dummies” part of the books to be said in jest, or that the person buying the book considers themselves dumb, not actually calling the person dumb. Did that make any sense?
>> alot of the tarballs and gunzip archives confused me too, very hard to deal with regarding that. too bad linux dosent have an easy tool like winzip or windows explorer. (tim h- rack64)
Looking at my system, I have Konqueror and Ark, they seem to offer (atleast) everything I can remember of Winzip an Windows Explorer (WRT archived files).
>> im not trying to be biased EITHER WAY.. and i sure hope you can understand or try to grasp how a person who has never used a computer and boots up linux would think
I reckon that they would have an easier time with Linux than someone who has been using MS-Windows for years. I would go so far as to say they would probably have an easier time with Linux than they would with MS-Windows, particular if they had to install themselves and were using a nice boxed distro with lots of documentation (such as SUSE Personal)). I’m not trying to be biased either but I doubt either of us truly know how somebody who has never used a computer would respond.
>> it’s simply easier to find and install applications on windows withour worrying about compatabilities and what not.
I don’t totally disagree with you, but a lot of the time you don’t need to go searching for apps in Linux, the default (<1 hour) install of many Linux distros includes lots of apps and drivers and can save you hours of Windows’ search, install and reboot cycle. Not to mention Debian’s apt-get, Mandrake’s URPMI, Gentoo’s Portage and Linspire’s Click’n’run repositories make things a lot easier to find (you don’t really even have to search).
I’m not saying MS-Windows is rubbish and Linux is great, just that although you lose some things when you migrate to a new Operating System and you gain other things. The gains might not always outweigh the losses but it is a certainty that the losses will come before the gains.
>> oh yeah, one plus that windows + IE have is the ability o move the toolbars around and resize them with the mouse.
>> GNOME and Mozilla really don’t do that (Don’t argue with it because your probably thinking of something different).
I have to agree GTK is lacking in that respect, I also prefer the way that MS-Windows and Qt (hence, KDE and Konqueror).
>> It bugs me to the extent of just using windows instead of linux on the desktop. as an advanced unix admin. i would happily use a unix desktop if that small feature was implemented 😉 It’s those small things that people get acustomed to…
That’s another thing about losses and gains, you will always always encounter the losses before you encounter the gains. I imagine that what you said (that you would use Linux if weren’t this one thing) is exaggeration, but if it is true then it not surprising you can’t see any benefit in using Linux. If you give up at the first sign of any cost it is not likely you will find any profit (horrible analogy I know).
“it’s simply easier to find and install applications on windows withour worrying about compatabilities and what not. hundreds of distros is a good example. but anyway…”
Finding, well. We can discuss that. If you know what you want and where to search you’ll find it on either of the 2 OSes. And many others as well.
However “worrying about compatabilities and what not” is plain bull, i tell you that. What i just have to do is “apt-get install <application> and it is there. Compatibilities? Those are all automatically done. What not? Yeah well, tell me “what not”. There’s a lot of Debian packages.
Compare that with downloading a .exe (or .zip, even in < XP), clicking on it, next, yes, ok and APT does a lot of stuff automatically. I wouldn’t say Windows Update is a bad design though, although i don’t very much like the dependancy on (unsecure) MSIE.
Now go rant your ass off. I know from several personal experiences where i explained Debian GNU/Linux that they found the install near okay, but installing applications extremely easy.
I also think the same is true for Pkgsrc, Ports collection, Emerge, Urpmi, and “what not”.
Package management on Linux is not an issue. Ty again.
package management in any particular linux distro and their spinoffs is usually not a problem for an experienced somebody installing apps. But someone who knows jack about computers would get confused over the many distros and their package installation methods. What I think would help linux on the desktop is a linux-wide package management standard. Actually, I believe this MUST happen to help linux attract new users and convert to linux and make it a true force on the desktop.
I don’t agree. One who understands the principles of package management ought to learn another one just as well. Given they’re all easy, that should not be much of a problem except a small learning curve.
I also don’t agree a non-experienced user will have much problems with package management since there are all kind of frontends for the tools as well. The common user is perfectly able to learn the package management utilities in their distribution; and, why would they actually learn the one from a different distribution when they’re already using a distribution?
That’s like installing Windows 95, using it for a while, then switching to Windows NT and wondering why it is so different and why things need to be relearned. I do not think many people do such things. I think they rather learn and experience their current OS after which they decide to switch to one or another or stay.
“Ought to?” In order for linux to reign supreme on the home desktop, saying that one “ought to” learn the different package management utilities used by the many distros would not fly as an argument for switching to a particular linux variant. People don’t feel like it, IMHO. And they shouldn’t have to.
I don’t think several different installers is the answer. Also, I have been using linux for good while, but even I can concede that package installation can be a nightmare for joe user. I see it all the time on the Xandros forums, especially when installing games (ex. UT2004). Even though it runs natively in linux, it still requires command line intervention in that distro. And that is one of the easiest distros to use. Joe user will not want to have to learn that, nor should they.
Windows application installation has been pretty much the same from Windows 95 through XP, and I am pretty sure that it’ll be the same for Longhorn. An autorun or a double-click is all it takes. That is what the masses need for linux to help move it closer to acceptance.
“In order for linux to reign supreme on the home desktop, saying that one “ought to” learn the different package management utilities used by the many distros would not fly as an argument for switching to a particular linux variant.”
My argument was that they’re pretty much all using the same principles, except for binary vs source, the name the program is called, and the syntaxis. For GUI’s it doesn’t differ much more.
So yes, one “ought to” learn when they switch [why would one in the first place before a learning curve has been somewhat completed?] after which it wouldn’t be very hard.
“especially when installing games (ex. UT2004). Even though it runs natively in linux, it still requires command line intervention in that distro. And that is one of the easiest distros to use. Joe user will not want to have to learn that, nor should they.”
Uhm ok well, what was the problem? If it were a demo, RedHat (as example) could provide the demo as RPM and Linspire (as example) could do so as well. Now if it were a binary, there’s already a nice installers made by Loki. But even that could be transformed into a package. Yes that’s more work when people do it in a different way, but why is that bad? It’s not your work or something.
“I don’t think several different installers is the answer. Also, I have been using linux for good while, but even I can concede that package installation can be a nightmare for joe user.”
Ok well now i’m done with this, i want to know how you’d convince the distributors using Emerge, RPM (different flavors), Slackware Package Management, Deb (different flavors), Ports collection and Pkgsrc to merge to one format (which one?). I don’t want to burst your bubble, but even when i assume you do have a point, how would you see this realized??? Don’t you think it is quite an impossible task? Or that a lot of in-depth arguments and convincing are unevadable?
Open Standards, Uniformity. People will never agree on certain things, hence diversity and differences. Might sound cheesy as argument, then don’t see it as argument but something to think about…
Hey dpi, don’t get me wrong, I know the cause and support it with my money on a few distros. But, think about it. What does success on the desktop truly mean to you? Linux going head to head with MS to me. I mean, tell me if I’m wrong. Because I don’t think so.
And I believe that SuSE, Redhat, Sun, and whatever, really won’t declare success until they SELL so many copies of this or that. That is why concern over usability of linux has increased because the average computer user (consumer) must be convinced that they have an easily workable system if they are going to buy linux. And that means easy and standard package management, more apps, etc. And more often than not that is not the case. (ref. “Linux must be Slicker to Grab Desktop Space” 2004-04-26)
And when I say that “ought to” is a bad argument. It is. To us geeks it is not. But to the average home user it is. Because they will not want to. Most people can care less about being computer literate, they just want their computer to do what they want with ease and less confusion, caring nothing about how it does it. And “more work” is not what the average joe wants to hear.
And, lol, it’s not me that’s going to convince the distributors to merge, it’s the market. When the bug has bitten enough folks to want to try linux out and drop money on a distro, and they cannot get it to work? Working for the masses generally means minimal effort. That better be enough to convince the distributors, if they want to increase their user base. And no, I am not talking about a free download of whatever. Because I don’t think that 8 year old johnny (although many 8 year olds are better than me) wants to compile the drivers from ATI hoping it’ll work with his ATI Radeon 9800 Pro due to poor driver support just so he can play Counterstrike. Too much work for joe user.
“And I believe that SuSE, Redhat, Sun, and whatever, really won’t declare success until they SELL so many copies of this or that. That is why concern over usability of linux has increased because the average computer user (consumer) must be convinced that they have an easily workable system if they are going to buy linux.”
Unfortunately for them, they have no power over other distributors who don’t behave according to their specifications.
It also isn’t an argument for why a unified package management model is required. Somehow it is in the advantage for [distributors you state] since the user learns RPM instead of DEB. They get accustomed to RPM, not DEB. Or Emerge.
“And, lol, it’s not me that’s going to convince the distributors to merge, it’s the market.”
It ain’t gonna happen, at least not anytime soon, and not until there is some package management which is superiour to the other ones currently existing. Since the market doesn’t have much to say in distributions like Gentoo or Debian because they do not get money from the people of the market at all. Why would they give a rat? They’re not in it for the money.
If this would be really such an important point (i don’t think so) it would be a fata morgana to believe Linux will become much more adopted anytime soon.
“Because I don’t think that 8 year old johnny (although many 8 year olds are better than me) wants to compile the drivers from ATI hoping it’ll work with his ATI Radeon 9800 Pro due to poor driver support just so he can play Counterstrike. Too much work for joe user.”
Oh come on, that’s a whole different point isn’t it? NVidia’s installer is fairly easy plus there is a README included. There are even packages for that. Can’t speak for ATi, but i thought i saw one around for my distribution. And who’s to blame for this inconvenience? It’s easy to blame “Linux”. I’d argument against NVidia/ATi, but i know there are arguments before their vision. I don’t like the situation either. Quite frankly i find it a shitty situation since the only near competitor in that price mark is Matrox, which is much more expensive…
However, why would you say compile when there’s simply packages for this? What gives? When there’s NOT a package at all, nor the installer is easy thus the user must learn how-to untar, do the autoconf abacadabra, and then install/run it (including non-tested for their distribution), yes then i’d agree that is slightly non-user-friendly.
Geez, even prprietary Linux Games are currently not sold as RPM… they come mainly with Loki installer. Ever heard a complaint about that (CS is a different story!).
Of course they don’t have any power of the other distributions but they are our best bet for linux to emerge supreme on the home desktop. And of course Gentoo or Debian wouldn’t give a rat. I wasn’t even considering them when I said the market will convince the distributors. I was talking about where the money is. That is why I mentioned the commercial guys. The commercial boys are our biggest hope of mainstream desktop linux, and they have already started making the user-friendly changes.
Ah, I think I’m about done. It was good talking to ya. But I think the “Desktop Linux To-Do List” sums it all up for me. Hits on the points I’ve been trying to make. Installing games even with the Loki installer requires a command at the terminal to even start it sometimes. Oh, and where’s Loki now?