Submitted by The BBC interviews Torvalds. I like this bit: “For me, Linux on the desktop is where I started, and Linux on the desktop is literally what I still use today primarily – although I obviously do have other Linux devices, including an Android phone – so I’d personally really love for it to take over in that market too. But I guess that in the meantime I can’t really complain about the successes in other markets.” Linux on the desktop is quite passe. Phones and servers is where it’s at.
I didn’t get that part. You mean it’s outdated?
What he means is the future of computing is the phone and the server market. The desktop as we know it is dead. Your future computer will be your phone.
If that’s true, it’s still somewhere in the future. At least until new technologies for displays will be developed. The size of the computer itself can change, but the size of the input interfaces (keyboard and etc.) as well as the visual interfaces (display) won’t go anywhere, since people remain people. So in order to make a tiny computer truly usable, it needs some interfaces akin to this:
http://blog.networkosaka.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/avatar_1.jp…
which could pop up out of that computer. Unless you are talking about built in computer augmentations, but that’s another matter altogether.
Otherwise current day handsets can’t possible fully replace computers with normal monitors and keyboards, because of basic ergonomics.
Edited 2012-06-14 07:00 UTC
No kidding? http://clamcase.com/clambook-android-and-iphone-laptop-dock.html
There is a laptop there right? So I don’t see your point.
That’s not a laptop. That’s an HID for a phone.
My point is, in your picture you need something else besides the handset to provide more usable interaction interface. This kind of solution defeats the point of handset being portable. So I’ll just restate what I said above – handsets aren’t going to replace normal interfaces, until these interfaces will be achieved in truly portable manner (some holographics or what not).
Edited 2012-06-17 05:42 UTC
I like this guy, he is so down on earth.
Edited 2012-06-13 22:41 UTC
I like Linus so much… but I think sometimes He’s too down to earth.
I mean, He’s so extremely pragmatic that He did more harm than good in some areas (i.e. allowing binary blobs… or refusing to define an stable ABI in the name of change).
That is a matter of opinion. IMHO it was a positive thing he did those things, not a negative thing. We wouldn’t for example have Android if binary blobs weren’t allowed.
WereCatf,
“We wouldn’t for example have Android if binary blobs weren’t allowed.”
Or maybe we would and open hardware drivers would be more common in android devices. There’s no definite way of predicting what would happen to the timeline if variables like this were tweaked.
If you were at all familiar with ARM-world you’d know that’s just wishful thinking. All the same drivers would still be closed-source, but we’d just have some other OS instead of Android. Even now you sometimes see this or that manufacturer ‘pledge’ support for open-source, but then they drag their feet for years and eventually just release an ‘optimized’ compiler toolchain saying that they never meant to open up their drivers in the first place.
You can never be sure though. Some manufacturers may close their drivers BECAUSE linux permits it and releasing open drivers could be seen as a competitive risk when other manufactures don’t have to open their drivers either.
Hypothetically speaking, if open drivers were a requirement, more manufacturers might be inclined to help out with open drivers if they wanted more linux market share. You can argue the opposite, like saying linux is too small to make such demands, but it’s all just handwaving…there’s no way to know.
Well in my opinion it’s one of the worst OS design decisions of all time.
Android could exist with a stable binary interface. People buy Android because it is an established brand and because they are cheaper than iPhones. No one would care if Samsung’s bluetooth driver wasn’t open source. Unix can have a stable abi and be successful. See OS/X and iOS for examples.
Linus is a talented programmer but he is also arrogant and unwilling to admit mistakes. He and Greg KH never explained how having some type of a middle ground like a 2 year abi would hurt Linux. They took the extreme position and have stuck with it.
Oh and the idea that “opening ur specs” will result in free drivers proved to be bullshit. There aren’t enough open source developers to meet driver demand. You can find driver requests that are years old.
Edited 2012-06-14 04:25 UTC
allowing binary blobs
I’m glad of that desition. I’m pretty sure that contributed a lot in the Linux adoption.
I’m very happy for the pragmatic inclusion of binary blobs and such, it’s the only reason I am able to run Linux on all of my hardware. Otherwise I’d be stuck using a completely closed OS. I’d much rather compromise on a few little things (like firmware) than have to use an entirely locked down OS.
People who think a completely free Linux would cause the adoption of open drivers and firmware are seeing things backward. First the open system gets popular, then people start catering to it. Linux needed to be adopted in order to get hardware makers to become flexible, adoption required compromises.
I would have sworn that it was at my desktop now 🙂
I’ll take the power and flexibility of a desktop machine any day over the multimedia and Web toys they pass off as tablet computers and cell phones these days. Sure, they’re both nice for certain things, but not near as much as a general-purpose desktop (or even a decent laptop) system.
I own an Android phone. Okay… it’s excellent for making calls (duh, it’s a *phone*…), storing contacts (well, actually Google does that on their servers as a service) and quick text messaging, but for Web browsing it’s barely passable (size of screen and lack of real keyboard kill it). I guess it can be decent for occasional YouTube viewing. It would be useful for occasional GPS use, if not for one thing: it’s buggy as hell and is pretty much guaranteed to crash and reboot the whole phone before it even tells me the first direction.
Still, it can be used to get some minor things done that I otherwise would have to stop at the house to get done on my desktop system, like store my grocery lists, my list of beers to try, and quick checks on the reviews of video games. Ironically… any real work, like typing those lists up, is done on my desktop system and the file is sent over to the phone over a USB connection. The only thing I do on the phone with those files is delete items from the list as I pick them up and save the changes to the file, and even that is mostly a pain in the ass on the phone.
I don’t own and never used a tablet computer, but I would expect their larger screens to make some things that are a pain in the ass like Web browsing to be more tolerable, but still, lack of real keyboard still makes them a joke for the most part. They might be a bit better for watching videos on YouTube, but I would think their even larger screen (the advantage here) would work as a disadvantage by sucking even more juice, killing the battery even faster as you do so.
One thing I can say my cell phone is AWESOME for: using it as a portable remote control I can take anywhere around or outside the house to control the playback of my music through Music Player Daemon with an Android MPD client. Both MPDroid and Droid MPD Client are pretty decent. I think a phone would be best here in this case, because you could easily just stick it in your pocket and get it out of your way until you want to change albums and skip songs… a tablet computer wouldn’t be so convenient.
Edited 2012-06-13 23:19 UTC
Cellphones or tablets aren’t even meant to replace desktops and no one is telling you to do so, so I don’t quite get why you’re telling us this.
As an aside: a cellphone or a tablet *could* replace a desktop or a laptop for many people if there were any actually good docks for them and the device could run full-fledged desktop software when docked. They do not have the processing power to handle video editing or such, but they have more than enough for running various IDEs, photo editors alá GIMP, word processors, etc. etc. Ie. most of the stuff non-IT people need at home and at work. The plus side would be obviously the fact that you’d always have your files with you; no copying back and forth ever again.
I have thought about it quite a lot and I know more-or-less fully what and how I’d want in such a device to be implemented and thus I’ve sometimes entertained the thought that if I lived in the US I’d set up a Kickstarter – project. All the currently-manufactured big-name efforts fall short and are hampered by proprietary connectors, proprietary software, proprietary mechanisms for exchanging data and proprietary, poorly-designed docks.
WereCatf,
“I have thought about it quite a lot and I know more-or-less fully what and how I’d want in such a device to be implemented and thus I’ve sometimes entertained the thought that if I lived in the US I’d set up a Kickstarter – project”
I’m curious, what advantages do you believe you’d have in the US that you don’t have elsewhere? US venture capital is nothing like it used to be, alot of it has moved to foreign growing markets.
I’d be interested in collaborating on a software project like this but I think we’d quickly find that we don’t have access to the economies of scale or hardware facilities that the big guys have. Consequently our platform would be disadvantaged right from the get go. This says nothing of the fact that in the US we’d be sitting ducks in terms of patent litigation.
I think the most important thing the world could do to promote software innovation is to promote high quality unlocked open hardware on which developers like you and me would be free (and even encouraged) to develop our software on. But…the exact opposite is happening.
Kickstarter is US-only.
WereCatf,
“Kickstarter is US-only.”
So what? They probably don’t even make up 0.1% of startup funding here in the US. The lack of venture capital may be a legitimate problem for you, but the lack of “Kickstarter”? Sheesh!
Kickstarter would fit the bill for multiple reasons. One is obviously the fact that I have no other means of obtaining the required monetary assets to get the project going, the second one is that for the people who pledge to a project it becomes a personal thing; if you make a concious decision to use some of your own hard-earned money to support the creation of something you enjoy you create an emotional attachement to the thing, too. That’s a powerful thing, it allows you to gain a strong fanbase from the get-go, and these people are also very likely to talk about the project to anyone they think might be interested, resulting in lots of completely free advertisement for you. Oh, and then you’d actually have some hard numbers to present to others about how many people wish to see you succeed, something that is worth several buckets of gold if you know how to use the knowledge.
Kickstarter != Venture Capital…
Kickstarter lets the person asking for the funds decided what strings they are willing to attach to the money they receive. Those wanting to “invest” simply decide if they like the terms or not. There is no heavy handed negotiation involved. Everyone wins and no one has to sell their soul. People investing in kickstarter projects want to see the result of their investment – it is generally not about seeing a financial return.
Venture Capital firms? They generally want your first born child. Sure you can set the terms, but good luck getting them to accept them… They will almost invariably negotiate terms that heavily favor the investors in the long term. It is about long term money making potential, not genuine interest in your product or service (other than its ability to make money).
Of course there is TONS more money available through traditional channels, but kickstarter is great if you have an idea that just needs a gentle financial nudge to get going.
I’m just saying it isn’t the same thing – many people who would be more than willing to do a kickstarter project would _never_ accept funding through traditional venture capital avenues.
galvanash,
“Kickstarter != Venture Capital…”
Well, they clearly exist to serve the same funding role, but your right they go about it in different ways. Kickstarter is just one of many crowd funding models.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_crowd_funding_services
I wonder if any are available to WereCatf? Truth be told, since her project would require custom purpose hardware, the “All Or Nothing” model used by Kickstarter is probably not the best funding model. The wiki list includes other models such as “Keep It All” “Equity” and “Loan”.
I would like to hear the experiences of anyone who’s actually tried any of these!
The problem with these alternatives is mostly the fact that, well, no one has heard of them. Hell, even *I* haven’t heard of any of them and I’m a computer nerd. That means reaching the same kind of audience as with Kickstarter would be more-or-less impossible.
As an aside: yes, I realize what I have in mind would require me to actually set up a company, hire a patent-lawyer, some engineers and developers and thus even getting a prototype out the door would likely end up costing in the excess of 400,000 euro. Ie. there’s no way anyone sane would want to finance that. Alas, one can still dream, dream of an open, multi-purpose ARM-device that’s first and foremost built with end-users in mind, not profits.
WereCatf,
“…and thus even getting a prototype out the door would likely end up costing in the excess of 400,000 euro. Ie. there’s no way anyone sane would want to finance that.”
Alas, this is why I stick with software that I can develop myself and distribute to users running existing commodity hardware. A small team of efficient devs can out-perform significantly larger corporations at software. But the same cannot be said for hardware where being resource strapped places the bar infeasibility high for most devs.
“Alas, one can still dream, dream of an open, multi-purpose ARM-device that’s first and foremost built with end-users in mind, not profits.”
It’s not that for-profit is bad, I really want open hardware vendors to be profitable. But the trouble is that manufacturers are selling out to corporations like MS & apple who want to control the entire hardware & software stack at the exclusion of everyone else. It is terrifying to consider what the proliferation of closed devices is doing to the software-only business model.
Edited 2012-06-14 05:27 UTC
That is good if it works for you, but the things I have in mind just cannot be done with commodity hardware.
WereCatf,
“That is good if it works for you, but the things I have in mind just cannot be done with commodity hardware.”
I do realize that, but that’s just the nature of hardware business. Alot of people have (good) ideas for hardware, but we aren’t able to pursue them like we can for software. This is what I meant by “sticking with software”. Trust me there are alot of things I’d like to do with hardware if I had the means.
It’s a hacky solution but what about an Asus Transformer or Pad Phone with http://linuxonandroid.blogspot.ro/ or http://androlinux.com/android-ubuntu-development/how-to-install-ubu… ?
I don’t know how well it works, but sounds interesting…
Also there are some Java IDEs running on android, and at the current Transformer sales, I am sure a lot of interesting software will appear.
Ubuntu for Android? Please?
There is iMovie for iPad… performance-wise, it’s already mostly a matter of tapping into DSPs/GPGPU.
Yeah, that iMovie perhaps is a bit sub-par – but, really, already much better than early NLEs. As a side note: I can imagine touchscreens being actually awesome for video editing, perhaps in conjunction with (wirelessly communicating with? …people don’t seem to like, don’t adopt docks) “big screen” – like a TV, but which could even be quite smart, and/or offloading large part of heavyweight processing when required.
Kinda like those projections ended up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcomputer_revolution#The_Home_Comp… – everything just started including its own computer. Now, that can mean something at least on the level of RPi, and in a few years…
Or, I can see MS being well positioned for such “blended” usages – they already have probably the most popular set-top-box, and now they’re introducing to it the connectivity with touchscreen devices.
Edited 2012-06-18 14:55 UTC
So what other device do you have with you for that purpose then? Most of the time my phone is the only device in reach with an internet connection. And browsing on it is useful even for reading complete articles on anandtech.
So I get that _you_ don’t use the functions but the way you state your opinion makes it sound like you mean it as fact.
So I think that in order to make it in a consumer market, you really do need to be pre-installed.
…
And on the laptop and desktop market, we just haven’t ever had any company making that kind of play. And don’t get me wrong – it’s not an easy play to make.
Ever heard of Dell?
And as I have pointed out before the Windows 7 RC eclipsed the marketshare of Linux even though it wasn’t pre-installed on a single computer.
Linus and much of the internet is in denial of a harsh reality: geeks don’t want Linux on the desktop. It comes with more problems than it is worth. It breaks from updates more than its fanbase wants to admit and still has problems with sound and video. Blaming M$ or OEMs at this point is a cop-out.
You just lack imagination. Let me help you with that. Imagine that ubuntu grabs 10% desktop marketshare and really begins to make a profit. Ubuntu is also selling apps, games, music movies etc. Dell, HP etc. all have a few machines with Ubuntu on it.
Because of this ecosystem consumers are more demanding and businesses make enough money to fix the problems and sell more. (kind of like how Windows works)
There was a time when I imagined something like that just as everyone does who goes through the Linux desktop cycle. I don’t lack imagination, what you lack is a understanding of how problems like broken updates are a part of Linux and always have been. It’s just part of what Linus created.
What you also don’t understand is that the economic case for a Linux desktop has never been worse. It won’t be long before Android phones can be used as desktops and your distro X that you dumped millions into still won’t have the software compatibility of Windows or Mac. It’s a dead end and Linus knows it.
It is not a flaw in linux it just needs more testing. Linus is one guy in hundreds of thousands of people that define linux. And what does the linux kernel have to do with update systems?
Once you plug in your phone in your 24 inch 1920×1200 monitor with your mouse and keyboard you will want to use it as a desktop. This means browsing with a hundred tabs, using a spreadsheet, writing a letter etc. You need different apps for the desktop. Linux already has those apps and it is very easy to support android apps if you would want to.
First of all Linus not just ‘one guy’, he is the guy at the top and self-described dictator for life. He has decided to just release a kernel and doesn’t give a f*** about full systems that update themselves properly. Now that’s his prerogative but be aware that full OS design is not in his plan. Neither is a stable abi or creating a kernel that would be useful to an OS engineer. Then toss on the shared library system and competing standards and you have incompatible distros that can’t be relied upon for updates.
The base OS will be Android, all that functionality will be added. The Linux desktop is a dead end, Linus is just putting on his best face by calling it passe.
Imagine if Amiga did that; or Mandrake. Imagine that new Blackberry OS does so (well, not desktop), or WebOS now that it is open, or Meego. So many things to imagine!
Also, http://www.last.fm/music/John+Lennon/_/Imagine
If you would have to bet on those OS’s or Ubuntu to really make it in the market. Which one would you choose and why?
Irrelevant what you or I “bet” on. Point is, imagining things has often little to do with reality, doesn’t make them any more likely.
But if you really want to know – sorry, you must face the harsh reality that all of those have little chance, they will probably linger on at most, with hardly any momentum (like Ubuntu had at the beginning, oh how great it seemed; I still have the first shipped CD somewhere). Missing their window of opportunity (there is something like a crucial time period), in the end less optimal overall than what took over (not saying that what did was super optimal, only more at the time), like many here http://www.osnews.com/permalink?522221
Realistically, if there’s any ~desktop Linux on the horizon, it’s probably Chromium / Chrome OS now…
Edited 2012-06-20 21:13 UTC
I use Kubuntu 11.04 (when I have more time, I will try other versions) in my computers and some friends also use it, and we update it and it doesn’t break. Ubuntu server doesn’t break either in the servers that I manage. And those computers don’t have problems with sound and video. By the way, ZaReason sells laptops and other computers with Kubuntu preinstalled and working, if someone does not want to install it.
Ah, and that’s being told just there, in OSNews. Readers can look at data if they want to know:
http://www.osnews.com/story/25485/OSNews_Browser_OS_Stats_2012
http://www.osnews.com/story/24579/OSNews_Browser_OS_Stats
Edited 2012-06-14 08:59 UTC
I have multiple times had the system become unbootable on Ubuntu after installing updates. Sometimes GRUB-settings have been corrupted, sometimes kernel modules were missing and so on. Especially upgrading from one Ubuntu – release to the next tends to be really hit and miss.
Not meant as a response to your post specifically but it is good as any to reply: I just HATE that Ubuntu and Linux are lumped together even among geeks these days!
I have been using Debian Testing and Sid on my machines continuously upgrading them for the last several years and, with the occasional exception of Sid (where some level of breakage is actually expected even though it works better than most “stable” releases of some popular distros IMNSHO) I have yet to break these systems to the point that a full reinstall should be even considered.
Despite its Debian heritage, Ubuntu has never done very well on the upgrade department. I realize that there are several cases of people managing to get a working Ubuntu system after a full upgrade but these are the exception rather than the norm. Distro upgrades are strongly discouraged in Ubuntu-land.
Linux CAN be upgraded to the latest and greatest with little or no effort; Ubuntu can be upgraded under certain circumstances or maybe not at all (and I am not even sure it was ever meant to).
I am looking forward for the day that pundits will finally stop measuring Linux achievements and/or failures based on whatever Ubuntu is doing at the time.
Ubuntu is sold as “linux for human beings” and continually pushed as the best distro for Grammy.
Any Linux distro can be upgraded but the question is how easily can it be done by novice users and how often will it require a trip to the command line to fix something. I bet you can find that every distro has broken a working sound or wireless card in the past few years.
It’s really just the nature of the beast. The solution is to buy Grammy an Android tablet and forget about the Linux desktop.
In our case, the one we know better: we use Kubuntu for the desktop and not Ubuntu. We just use Ubuntu in their server version. It hasn’t break when updating (we just do regular updates).
We don’t update from one version to another (like from 10.04 to 10.10, it’s not a very good idea, in my humble opinion), we have at least two partitions in each computer, because we install (we always do a clean install) in one partition, while keeping the old one (just in case we need the old version meanwhile).
I’ve had one Linux install corrupted by a patch push in the past 12 years (in no way questioning your experience, you understand). I wonder why our experiences vary so much. I guess that’s why we use YMMV so much. 🙂
However, I never upgrade major versions of an OS – I always clean install, which means I always use a separate partition for my data. This is true of every device I own regardless of OS, btw, including Windows.
WorksForMe(TM)
FYI I’m not new to operating systems so don’t give me the Linux shill job. Find me a distro from 3 years ago that can update itself along with OpenOffice, Firefox and Flash to the latest versions without needing the command line. You won’t be able to.
I would describe most of the users here as pro-open source and yet most run Windows. The fact that most run Windows but only 8% use IE speaks volumes. They are aware of software alternatives. I doubt even Linux.com has a majority of Linux visitors.
As I wrote, Kubuntu in the desktop works for me, my friends and the laptops and other computers sold by ZaReason. I even left a VirtualBox Machine image in https://minus.com/mX2I0UnLl/1f
If you want to try to update it, you’ll see how it does not break. Yes, you can update there OpenOffice, Firefox and Flash to the latest versions without needing the command line.
> > > geeks don’t want Linux on the desktop
> > Ah, and that’s being told just there, in OSNews. Readers can look at data if they want to know:
> I would describe most of the users here as pro-open source and yet most run Windows. […] I doubt even Linux.com has a majority of Linux visitors.
I was answering about the “geeks don’t want Linux on the desktop” sentence. The stats, of the operating systems of the visitors of OsNews, showed almost 30% of them using Linux on their desktops. At least a 30%, knowing that when people are working, a lot of them can not choose 🙁 another operating system than Windows.
You sure about that?
http://www.kubuntuforums.net/archive/index.php/t-58681.html
Most geeks don’t want Linux. That is what it boils down to.
As I pointed out earlier the Windows 7 RC eclipsed the market share of Linux despite it not being in stores.
Linux is fun during stages 1-5 of the Linux Youth Experience Cycle but at stage 8 where X crashes over a Flash video you are watching with a date the fresh factor really wears off.
Clearly, the geeks I know and the geeks that you know are completely different, the geeks I know won’t use anything other than Linux.
Most people these days, just use what the “sheep” use, there is no getting away from Windows if your a “normal” user, it is in all the schools and everywhere you look from the very moment that you become self aware… Also most people don’t like change on their precious machines. – Bring back the days when you actually had to install your own OS and actually know something about what you are doing to get started.
Linux is fun because I can do what I want, when I want and how I want, and noone sitting “up there” gives a sh*t.
I don’t know how people “break” Linux, if your savvy enough to install it and use it, you can quite easily google what’s happened and fix it in 5 mins.
Right but the Windows 7 RC showed that there are millions who are capable of downloading and installing an OS. I would bet that 90% of those users have tried Linux. It just doesn’t provide enough value over Windows to be worth the annoyances.
People don’t break Linux, the updates do that.
If Linux was sold as “if you can install it then you can fix it” then I would have zero problem with it. But we have a Linux cult on the internet the continually sells it as an OS for everyone. It’s not for everyone. As a general rule I don’t think it should be installed anywhere unless the primary user is willing to learn the command line.
As I wrote, if you care to try it by yourself, you can get Kubuntu 11.04, the version I can talk about, in a live cd or ( in a virtual machine in https://minus.com/mX2I0UnLl/1f ) and you can see by yourself how updates don’t break it (don’t update to Kubuntu 11.10, just do the normal updates) and you can see how you don’t need the command line to update.
As I wrote before, if you care to try it by yourself, you can get Kubuntu 11.04, the version I can talk about, in a live cd or ( in a virtual machine in https://minus.com/mX2I0UnLl/1f ) and you can see by yourself how updates don’t break it (don’t update to Kubuntu 11.10, just do the normal updates) and you can see how you don’t need the command line to update. And you can see how X does not crash over a Flash video you are watching.
Uh, the ones that want it on the desktop ARE geeks.
Unless you’re into pro-audio I can’t think of any.
Yes I must have imagined seeing complaints about pulseaudio recently and the same old solution of removing it.
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=197&t=60485&hilit=how+t…
Audio has gotten better in Linux but problems still exist.
Reading this FUD got me all worried for a second, I thought I had entered a space-time wormhole and I was back in the 90s.
OK I guess the Linux Action Show must be spreading FUD then:
Tired of fighting sound issues under Linux? We’ve got solutions for you! Linux audio can be tricky, when it works it’s great… But when it sucks, it sucks real bad.
http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/14846/sound-card-troubleshooting…