The promise of Desktop Linux (DL) has been long coming. It’s made significant progress since the mid-90s when GNOME and KDE came out, giving Linux users a somewhat modern desktop to work upon. However, it’s been 7 years and DL hasn’t progressed much at all since then. Today, DL is still nothing more than a UNIX-clone with a task bar, a start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it. But why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?
Here are the reasons: lack of organization among separate projects, lack of standards, and an unwillingness to fix bad design which leads to counter productiveness. I’ll explain all of this in detail.
The Current State of Desktop Linux
In the beginning there was plain old Linux with X11 and a few ugly window managers. Using the ever (in)famous car analogy, we can liken this to a rolling chassis with engine, seat, steering wheel and gear shift. GNOME and KDE gave Linux the opportunity to add a frame, a windshield and a single-piece body. We’re no longer swallowing bugs, but the inside is still bare metal and there’s no stereo, carpeting, airbags, or anything else. Meanwhile you’ve got the Mac passing by with its plush leather interior, DVD satellite navigation system, and power everything. What’s wrong with this picture? Yes, the car is very much drivable, but who wants to drive around in unfinished transportation full time?
Missing Pieces To The Tux Puzzle Part I – Hardware
Linux is constructed in layers. Each layer builds upon the next from the kernel up to the graphical programs. But what holds them all together? How does the very bottom communicate with the very top and vice versa? How can I configure hardware from a graphical control panel on my GNOME desktop? The answer is I can’t, because GNOME doesn’t yet deal with that portion of my system. Why do I need to tell Linux what disks I have in my system? Because it doesn’t know! Windows and Mac OS both know when I stick a disk in my drive.
How To Fix The Hardware Problem
On the bottom layer, a daemon needs to be written that deals with hardware in an intelligent manner. It must be able to discover new hardware, find a proper kernel module for it, let the program at the top know when it can’t initialize a device, and automatically configure the /etc/modules.conf and /etc/fstab files. On the top end, a graphical applet must be written so that the user may enable/disable a device and manually switch kernel modules. Disks should automatically mount upon insertion, and if unreadable, a disk utility should be launched to initialize it. Applets should also be written for hardware devices to configure special features such as FSAA on the video card, preferably by the hardware manufactures themselves.
Missing Pieces to The Tux Puzzle Part II – Software
I just bought a new Linux computer. I turn it on and want to configure it for my internet connection and home network. But wait, how do I do this? On my Windows box, I could just go to my Network Connections icon and setup my IP/DNS addresses, configure my firewall, and setup my home network filesharing. On Linux, I gotta find out which file in the /etc directory has the configuration settings for my network card and try to figure out how to configure Samba and the firewall so I can share my files without getting hacked. There’s also an antivirus program I want to install for extra security. But, there’s no clear way to install this program. I don’t understand shell scripts and that stupid package manager complains of missing dependencies, whatever those are. By the way, where’s a good disk utility so I can setup up and check my hard drives in GNOME?
How to Fix The Software Problem
Create an all-in-one applet that configures all your network devices, sets up file sharing, and secures all your documents on the network, along with the usual diagnostic tools such as ping and traceroute. Second, make an installer system that automatically solves dependencies and makes a way to painlessly maintain them later on. For this I suggest autopackage (http://www.autopackage.org) with some better frontends.
Things That Need Serious Upgrading
What’s the one thing that comes to mind that needs a serious upgrade on Linux? If you guessed X11, you’re 100% correct! But why? Let’s dive into a bit of history. X11’s original purpose in life was to run several terminal windows concurrently and be run remotely over the network. Times change, but little did X11, which happens to be 20 years old now. X11 is big, bloated, and lacks support for modern features such as alpha blending and transitions. X11 really should be replaced with something leaner and more modern.
How to Fix X11
Please support the Y Window System. There’s no fixing X11 that doesn’t involve superhuman genius hackery. Workaround after workaround will only make it more big and bloated. X11 must be retired. Y Windows is a natural choice since the project plans X11 compatibility to ease migration. [Editor’s note: While new ideas are welcome, proven code can not and should not be shredded away. Read JoelOnSoftware for more on why you should work on fixing existing code instead of re-inventing the wheel.]
Interoperability & Aesthetics Issues
We have GNOME, and then we have KDE. Neither really plays all that nice with each other. Each has their own set of widgets and Open/Save dialogs and interface guidelines. When you run a KDE app on GNOME, you know very well you’re not running a GNOME app and vice versa. This is bad for interoperability and aesthetics. I don’t wanna be able to tell what kind of a program it is, I just want consistency.
How To Fix KDE and GNOME
GTK+ and Qt programs should not compete with each other, they should compliment each other. They should have a “When In Rome…” philosophy of interoperability. In other words, when a KDE app is run in GNOME, it should act and behave like a GNOME app and vice versa. This means running the same widgets and using the same Open/Save and Font dialogs. Think about how Cocoa and Carbon apps interact with each other. I’m sure this can be done.
General Philosophy
To both its benefit and detriment, the general philosophy behind writing programs for Linux and UNIX is “Created by Geeks for Geeks”. Unfortunately, this mantra doesn’t work well for designing software geared towards the average user. People don’t like digging through vast and complex filesystems and hacking config files to get what they want. The user’s Home directory should be the center of the Linux desktop rather than the root filesystem. The UNIX-related directories of the root filesystem should be hidden from view by default. Any programs that are extensible should provide means within the program themselves for installing new extensions and plugins. For example, the user’s desktop wallpaper should be located in his/her Pictures folder. There’s no reason for average joe to be poking around in the root filesystem where he might accidentally trash some system files. However, designated sections for things like plugins and application data can be stored in plain view on the root filesystem as long as they are in a designated place like inside the Library directory on Mac OS X. In short, think more rubberized plastic and less bare metal when designing your programs.
More Ideas
Due to the lack of good new ideas in the Desktop Linux field, I propose a few ideas:
1. Pooled Storage – Say you’re running out of hard drive space. Instead of upgrading to a bigger hard drive, you buy another, install it, and the space pools together in one giant vat of space. Adding hard drive space is easy as adding RAM. Of course this isn’t practical for small removable disks, but it makes adding hard drive space much easier.
2. Nautilus Viewer Plugins – Imagine opening up your Music directory and the viewing pane turns into a music player. If you want to view as files, just go to the View As dropdown menu and select View As Icons. The same could be done with email, documents, contacts, downloads, pictures, and movies. Just build a viewer plugin that enables you to work with the data.
3. Web-based Software Installation – I know this isn’t exactly a new idea, but lemme explain. The software world is changing. We’re moving away from boxed software to digital downloads from the web. Eventually, the actual programs won’t even reside on our computers anymore in many cases. Sure there’s the ClickNRun Warehouse by Linspire, but that’s a closed system. We need an open system. Here I’ll endorse the Zero-Install (http://zero-install.sourceforge.net) system for web-based programs. But for larger programs that span tens to hundreds of megabytes we need something open and intuitive. A web browser plugin that links website downloads with Autopackage would be a good choice. This way, when you click a program to download, the plugin pops up and handles the download and installation of programs.
4. Welcome Window – This program can be run as a window that pops up at login or as part of the desktop background, ala gDesklets. This program check to see if you have email, shows online buddies, automatically checks for software updates, fetches RSS feeds and weather info in an easy to use and customizable package. The same could be done with gDesktlets, but unfortunately it’s not a very friendly program to say the least.
Conclusion
People have a lot to say about the state of Desktop Linux. Mostly they just sit back and complain about its faults as I have, but few have proposed in detail the solutions to fix these problems, including some new ideas. Most of the issues have to do with unfinished and/or missing code. However, a good chunk of it has to do with the general design philosophies of open source software itself. People love reinventing the wheel, coming up with their own ideas, and pooh-poohing others. This sort of behavior cannot continue if we want a strong, competitive open source alternative to proprietary operating systems. People need to organize and work together, not against each other and not at a distance. Yes, two or three projects can compete against each other for the hearts and minds of Linux users everywhere, but not ten or twenty. I hope this article will inspire Linux software developers to work together and speed up the glacial pace of Desktop Linux, instead of fighting amongst themselves and reinventing what has already been invented. Too much valuable time and energy has been wasted this way.
About the Author:
I’m Sean Oliviero. I’m an avid computer user that has played with pretty much every OS out there. My dream in life is to see Linux become the OS of choice amongst the average user, not only easy to use, but competitive in features and creature comforts compared to Windows and Macintosh.
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
I think that 90% problems tha peaople have comes from difficult installation of programs and drivers to linux. This is also main reason why driver vendors doesn’t support linux, there is just too many incompatible distros to support. LSB and FHS standard are nice, but there is much more unification needed in dostro world. As long as you need to read readme.txt before you install anything, 90% of population is excluded from the Linux world.
I believe that a lot that you speak of HAL and hotplug is trying to be solved. Or, at least, building the foundation of hardware identification, notifications, etc. so that programs can be built to solve the problem. DBUS will also fit into this category for communications between the system, applications, and themselves.
Right now, some of the things you speak of are addressed by the individual distribution–like network settings and such. This is because how they configure these varies from distro to distro. If you want a cross-distribution tool, look into the Gnome System Tools. It is written in a way that a backend can be written to each distribution to be supported. Kind of similar to Webmin.
Automounting of media? Covered by supermount. Pooled storage? LVM (Linux Volume Management). X11? Xorg is actively working on new features such as composites. See this OSnews article: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=7634.
I believe you have some valid points, especially when it comes to the interaction of users with hardware and drivers as well as 3rd party installation of programs (which really doesn’t happen all that often yet due to the lack of commercial applications at the user level). You’ve mixed up some major issues regarding hardware and such with some trite issues that are dealt with at the distribution level, or just aren’t that important to begin with.
Cheer up, things aren’t as bleak as you are making them seem.
The only complaints the author presents involves the lack of alpha blending and transitions, both of which are possible without breaking the X11 standard. Check out Keith Packard’s work on XServer and Xorg at http://www.freedesktop.org.
The reason X11 is 20 years old and still chuggin’ is that it’s excellently designed.
Why do people keep bashing X11 without a single valid complaint? Reminds me of SCO…
This article has a good spirit, but ultimately fails in content and research.
I’ll go through each of the points.
THE HARDWARE LAYER
discover and kudzu are two hardware detection tools that work. discover is recommended very heavily, as it does a lot of the dirty work involved in hardware probing, and does it well. It has a library (libdiscover2) which provides programmers with a way to get information on hardware information. Havoc Pennington has commented on getting hardware to “just work” and Freedesktop.org is hosting a project, HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) which is attempting to provide programmers with access to hardware in an elegant way. In other words, there are efforts underway here.
As for configuration for things like a network card, distributions like SuSE (with YaST) have provided ways to do this which are very similar to Windows for a long time. Yes, if you are running a barebones distro, you will have to edit this information “by hand” in /etc, but remember, Linux is just a kernel; it’s the distribution that matters.
ON X11
X has already been identified as a bottleneck for desktop linux, but don’t underestimate the power bad video card drivers have on this impression. Nvidia produces very good drivers for Linux that provide excellent performance in X. But X’s free DRI support via the DRI project, although commendable in its effort, isn’t up to snuff in terms of raw graphic speed. Plus, ATI’s proprietary drivers are a joke. But this doens’t have much to do with X.
X does have problems, but listen to the editors: it needs to be taken in a new direction, not scrapped entirely. Keith Packard is on the right track at Freedesktop.org. Y Windows is something entirely different from X in MANY ways, by the by. Read the paper by the CS student coding it.
ON GTK/QT LOOKING THE SAME
This is such a minor issue IMO, but desktop “pundits” seem to constantly latch onto it. Windows users deal with non-standard interfaces all the time, but they don’t care. Look at ICQ, Yahoo messenger, WinAmp, iTunes, Easy CD Creator, LimeWire, to name a few. These are still popular and usable applications. And Mac OS, for all its uniform interface broo-ha-ha, has those metal apps and those aqua apps intermingled with blatant disregard for the user’s sanity
There are actually already efforts to unify gtk and qt, but it’s pointless to me. Besides, KDE and GTK already look pretty much the same (I think GTK apps tend to look a little nicer), so who cares? The more important thing is providing a way for a Gnome user to start up KDE apps without having to load up a billion KDE libraries, or at least make that process less noticable.
ON “NEW” IDEAS
Pooled storage? This must be a joke. I can pop in a new hard drive and mount it wherever I want on my Linux system. What the hell is the author talking about?
Nautilus viewers. Guess what–they existed. In some early 2.x version of Nautilus, there was a “View As Music Collection” that was a music player. Was buggy as hell though, so they removed it. The framework for view panes is there though, just that nobody has been stepping up to code some new views.
BOTTOM LINE
Stuff author is clamoring for is already under development, so put on your coding hat and help out. Most ideas in this article aren’t new, though some are.
By the way, I hate the tagline. “Why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?” Glacial pace? It’s taken Microsoft like 8 iterations of Windows to come to “Windows XP,” with a UI not much better than Windows 95. In half that time a slew of DEs, Window Managers, and desktop environments have evolved and flowered on Linux. Glacial? C’mon. Give these guys some credit.
1. X11 needs to go
2. kernel should not be tied to hardware so much. there was a article about dirrent kernels few days back. there should a base kernel which handles all low level stuff (memory management, scheduling..) and rarely changes.
3. dependency hell should be cleaned up. no not everyone has uber fast 1MBPS connections to use emerge/apt-get
No one person or group has enough control to make changes that impact several other projects.
There are simply to many involved parties and individuals for one person to say “everybody, please change this”
Linux is very layered, and changes can be made to one layer so long is it does not effect compatibility with other layers. This greatly limits what can be done to the system.
That, and even if such changes could be made, there would be another guy that wants to do it a different way, so instead of doing it, they just argue about who is right.
For as long as Linux is an open community project, it will mostly not change.
X11 is not the problem. I agree with Dev about exciting things like the Cairo project at freedesktop.org which will make X even better than it is now.
I agree that better hardware integration is needed. Project Utopia with HAL, D-BUS, and udev will achieve this, and will even include a GNOME front end for making hardware more user friendly on the Linux desktop.
Compared to where it was a few years ago, the Linux desktop is amazing and the pace of improvement is accelerating! Who here remembers trying to surf the web on a Linux box with Netscape 4.x and wishing just once that the fonts didn’t look like total garbage. There was a time when everyone was seriously worried that Linux would not have a competitive web browser at all! I remember reading an article on it. Now there are several excellent web browsers.
Go back and play with KDE 1.x or GNOME 1.x for a while 😉 (KDE 1.x was really the beginning of it all, I was amazed by it at the time). Or better yet fvwm95 which looked and behaved horribly, even for its time.
The Linux desktop got there for me this year. It meets my needs perfectly, though I will grant you I am not a typical user. Still, it didn’t meet my needs before. The pace of improvement is starting to really show. Wait another 12 months and if you have an open mind, you will be astounded.
As long as there are two dominant desktops(KDE and Gnome) and linux systems are cobbled together with programs/libraries with maintainers that might live in Outer Mongolia and have no accountability, then Linux on the consumer desktop will remain marginal at best. What needs to happen is for company(not some random hobbyists) to take the kernel and build from there.
Wait another 12 months and if you have an open mind, you will be astounded.
Yeah, and they year 2000 was supposed to be the year of the linux desktop. KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway. Gnome is technically inferior, but probably has a better chance in the longrun just for the fact that its underlying toolkit has a better license.
I don’t get it when people say that having two competitive desktops is detrimental to linux. Since when is choice a bad thing? KDE and GNOME are both fully functional, they compete with one another vigorously, they offer the user choice and variety.
I don’t understand what people have against variety. It is like they insist on a monolithic software culture… a one size fits all approach. Different users have different likes, needs and priorities.
I’d much rather see a healthy assortment of technologies and desktops that can interoperate using open standards, but allow for variety and competition. You just try to get every KDE user to use GNOME instead and see how they feel about it! Try and take Fluxbox away from the nerd accross the street and tell him that he must use GNOME with Metacity only. I don’t think the response will be very friendly 😉
I find some author remarks valuable, since I also think Linux lacks a lot of poslih, integration and API’s.
But, in my opinion, the goal of GTK+ and Qt cooperation can be only intermediate solution, not “final soklution”.
My ideal distro should support only one desktop, and even only one GUI library (GTK is my choice).
Reason is simple: when I start any Qt based program under Gnome it takes around 10 seconds just to start it the first time (loading Qt I presume). Gnome apps start almost instantly.
My point is: having dual/multiple toolkits supported is stupid in the long run, and makes Linux distros look slow and bloated, raising memory requirements big time.
“KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway.”
Yeah, and that MS-DOS thing would never fly, heck those Microsoft guys are a loosely run gang of college dropouts and nerds from New Mexico… all they know how to do is make programs run in BASIC!
I am not a KDE user primarily (Go GNOME!) but even I know that Trolltech has released their toolkit (QT) under the GPL so referring to them as a proprietary company is a tad misleading.
The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless people posting on osnews every week opinion about what other people should do with Linux.
I think the biggest problem with gtk(this coming from a Gnome 2.6 user) is Glade. Its an absolute abomination compared to QT designer.
When Mono 1.2 is released in Feb with its new GUI designer, I think well see many new gtk developers.
When will be see real working solutions to desktop Linux unreadiness rather than rants.
How come we don’t see opinion articles about how FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, OS X, Window XP, Amiga, SkyOS, Menuet OS, RiscOS, OS/2 etc suck? And how some of them look like tricycles instead of concords.
No, it’s always about how Linux isn’t desktop ready. It’s like Linux is the only OS that isn’t desktop ready. And guess why it isn’t desktop ready?
Because it doesn’t work like the author’s favorite “desktop ready” OS. Opinion articles are exactly what they are, opinions.
If you had to know my opinion on these so called “desktop ready” operating systems, I’ll probably be skinned alive. I’d rather read patches, bug reports and desktop reviews than rants and bogus “opinions.”
Here we go with another “Linux desktop” article. Can someone tell me what changed from yesterday? Oh nothing, so why the “news” item? Actually it’s not news, it’s propagandha hype. Can we end all those “ready for desktop” articles please.
What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that’s not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with.
Errr…toolkits don’t make an OS desktop ready. If so, how many toolkits do we have for Windows?
I’m on the y-windows list. The project got off to a good start then died. It was forked and development continued, but I haven’t been paying attention. I’d place y-windows as a very long shot to replace x.
We don’t see articles about how Windows XP and MacOS X suck because they are here at the average user’s desktop and they perform well for that average user’s needs. Parhaps they are not perfect, but really usable on their native hardware.
The whole OS world is now about searching for a Windows replacement. You can’t change it. The first alternative was OS/2, first aimed to replace DOS, and then — Windows. Due to marketing issues (IBM’s faults and Microsoft’s big wins) OS/2 failed. We have been left with Windows only.
The next one was BeOS. While the BeOS developers had seen it as a niche multimedia and content creation OS, the public tried to use it as a Windows replacement OS, especially when it became available for free. But BeOS failed, too. Unfortunately.
Now, there’s only Linux left to fight with Windows. And I think that because of the Windows monopoly there’s no reason to say “Linux is not aimed to replace anything”. Even if someone decides not to use Windows right from the start, installs Linux only and is sure that Linux is ready for his or her desktop, in fact he/she has replaced the industry standard OS — Windows — with Linux. And there are lots of people who are willing to replace Windows — in reality, by switching from it — in the moment Linux offers the same features set with similar GUI. Noone can deny it, we just have to accept it and either keep Linux different and hear “Linux is still not ready for the desktop” voices once every week, or change it so that it seems closer to Windows and make more people switch.
And about FreeBSD, SkyOS, AmigaOS and the rest mentioned: they just don’t seem to be an option for a Windows user. And that’s why hardly anyone writes about them.
I am a day-to-day Linux user and Linux server administrator, and I see many points where Linux is far from catching up with Windows, especially on desktop. While it may be sufficient for some people, it doesn’t mean that it should not be enhanced.
Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don’t each up all a systems resources.
128-192mb of ram is insane. I’d rather use Windows XP, atleast I’d get compadibility.
I loves the old KDE, that would run fine on 64mb of ram. Now what are my choices? Using some POS like Fluxbox? No thanks.
— “Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don’t each up all a systems resources.
128-192mb of ram is insane. I’d rather use Windows XP, atleast I’d get compadibility.”
Your perceptions on RAM usage are a bit skewed, both for Linux and WIndows XP, and as far as how much is too much.
I have a modern Gnome 2.6 desktop setup with a 2.6.7 kernel on a modern machine with 512mb RAM that I use regularly for various multi-media and gaming, but after booting and starting X Im generally using LESS then 100mb. After using it all day, and with Firefox, Gaim, and a few minor background things running to check my mail and update my xplanet generated background (so cool!), Im using only 113mb RAM.
There is no way Windows XP can be this lean. I know, I still have it installed, and I used it primarily for a while before I was finally comfortable to make the switch completely. Neither uses too much RAM though, not for a modern desktop anyway. Also, have you tried Vector linux? Its a great Win95-like graphical desktop that works ok on 32mb RAM.
If you want a light desktop, they are there, you are just ignoring them.
Please stop saying Linux isn’t evolving so much.. As a KDE programmer I can tell you that this isn’t true.
GCC, X.org, KDE, reiser4, QT4, the new kernel.. These only some of the great things that are in the “work in progress” list. The impact will be huge.
WAIT AND SEE…
Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don’t each up all a systems resources
Yep, and when you use that one KDE app on your Gnome system you’re bringing in most of the KDE libraries along with it. Today’s linux desktop is more bloated than XP, unless you use one of the boxes, maybe XFCE, and don’t run any QT/KDE apps.
proof is on my box at home: I have only ONE application that really forces me back into that other OS. And as soon as someone points me to something for creating video DVDs with menus and stuff, as easy and user friendly, yet powerful as DVD Lab on Windows, there’s none left at all.
Anything else I use my box for, I can do (and in fact do) on linux as well as (if not better than) on windows. And that’s not counting the “hee hee i don’t care” i get every time I see the daily worm/virus/exploit warnings on various news sites.
Oh and for the Article: there’s nothing left to say that hasn’t been said already, so I just throw buzzwords around.
“SuSEplugger” “kernel 2.6 hotplugging” “subfs” “SuSEwatcher” “apt-get (apt4rpm)”
Only one thing left to be said: I fully agree with this comment here…
Here we go with another “Linux desktop” article. Can someone tell me what changed from yesterday? Oh nothing, so why the “news” item? Actually it’s not news, it’s propagandha hype. Can we end all those “ready for desktop” articles please.
Only one thing left to be said: I fully agree with this comment here.
Yeah, and then did you read his second paragraph?
What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that’s not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with.
proof is on my box at home
That arguement is tired, so stop using it. I think the yugo is a good car. The proof is *I* drive one to work every day.
I think diet cola is just as good, the proof is *I* drink it.
I think “Hooked On Logic(tm)” is a successful program, proof is you used it.
Lemmy, checkt this out if you are interested in Linux DVD creation:
http://www.apple.com/shake/
http://www.apple.com/dvdstudiopro/
You’re lucky that there aren’t 3 or 4 incompatible linux-like kernels.
Erm… What do you call the Solaris kernel? the FreeBSD kernel? the Hurd? the AIX kernel? Darwin? But I suppose you’re right. There’s substantially more than ‘3 or 4’ of them…
>The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless >people posting on osnews every week opinion about what >other people should do with Linux.
I wish OSNews had a moderation system like slashdot, because I’d put that at about +20.
A article like this was here yesterday, and today there is another!
WAIT!
I’m not against the author like the (almost) rest of you, I think the author not only has a good point but my own opinion is even more extreme, I won’t say my opinion because I would be flamed with 200 comments or more but anyway I agree with the author of this article and with the other one.
But the thing is why that there are a lot of articles like this, probably because as more people start using Linux, either completely new to computers or comming from Windows, they that are not blinded by geeky and freedom (anarchy) dreams, can see the obvious and write articles about what they see…
So it’s just a matter of time until these issues are fixed or another OS takes Linux place, my wish is that is wasn’t so slow.
As for some of these stupid comments I have to say some things:
1. You are always babbling about freedom, so let people express their opinion freely on medias (OSNews for example)
2. Not everyone is a coder so flaming with comments about patches, fixes, coding and compiling is not nice, that’s the programmer job, not users.
3. Comments saying to people go buy OSX are quite dumb because not everybody has the money to buy one.
4. To those who say that some basic features like desktop integration will never happen unless you pay the developers to do it, well… you are probably right and that means I’m (and probably many people) willing to pay about 100? to 150? to have a good Linux desktop, that work, behave and do what I expect from a desktop.
5. Finally about Qt, I don’t see anything wrong with it, is GPL but even if it was closed source and commercial I wouldn’t mind as long as it work and doesn’t make the final product too expensive.
If you don’t like Linux, if you find it unusable, don’t use it.
You, like everybody else who contributes nothing but constant whining, won’t be missed.
If you honestly would like to see Linux succeed on the desktop, then do something useful – file bug reports, join user communities and make it crystal clear what is is the ‘masses’ want, or get off your ass and learn to code.
Scratch your itch. Thats how it has to happen.
And it’s the only way it’s going to happen. Spare me your ‘I don’t have enough time, or I don’t know how, or I don’t see why i should need to’.
Thats just utterly irrelevant, either you personally make the choice to help, or you deal with the fact that nobody really gives a crap about what you want, and any support you get will be from companies who think they can make money from you eventually.
Basically, you might as well stick with Windows, because theres nothing for you in ‘Linux Land’.
What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except “desktop linux.” I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren’t desktop ready. Yes…yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already!
quit saying linux sucks.. linux fucking rules it’s the FREE SOFTWARE on top of linux that SUCKS the kernel is pretty damn standarde, make all the software on top play nice, then get the kernel to add stuff. the only thing wrong with the linux kernel itself is that supermount has to be patched onto it.
It’s a rant. So is this.
“The Current State of Desktop Linux”
Did the author expect the Linux desktop to be as good as a commercial desktop – with development being salaried work during working hours as opposed to voluntary work outside working hours? I think the current state is remarkable considering those odds.
“How To Fix The Hardware Problem”
Has the author tried YaST? Read about it? Never heard of it?
“Interoperability & Aesthetics Issues”
It’d be a mistake to fuse KDE/Qt and GNOME/Gtk. Let them evolve freely on different paths. Let them compete freely from different paths. It will make them stronger – also against Windows. It’s not like one DL has 50% of the apps while the other has the other 50%. If an app is present in one DL and missing or no good in another then fill-in the void with a new app rather than bending the existing app to fit the void.
Why has DL not yet taken off in the work environment?
FUD. Inertia. No guts. Playing it safe. And the various Linux Office wares could be a little better. But that’ll come. As time goes by more and more old systems reach retirement – like the NT systems in Munich and Paris. And by going Linux they are providing the leadership and push that others need to cross over. That in turn will increase the pressure for better apps. And suddenly the flood gates burst open.
This has to be one of the worst articles published on this site recently and it is running against strong competition.
So, why is it so terrible? Because no one is allowed to criticize linux? Because linux is perfect?
No, because the author doesn’t seem to have a clue what he is talking about.
Take for example his claim that you have to edit something under /etc to get your networking working. This is simply false. Sure, there are distros where you have to do that, but if you take any of the more “userfriendly” distros like Suse, Mandrake, etc. you don’t even have to know something like /etc exists.
I’m sorry, there is a lot of things to criticize about linux on the desktop but if you want to write a critique of the state of desktop linux do yourself and the readers a favor and inform yourself about the subject before writing an article. This way we may be able to read an article about the subject that is actually worth reading and that could lead to new ideas and a fruitfull discussion and not simply an uninformed flamebait.
This article runs arguments that are simply based on factual assertions that are simply false. For example:
How can I configure hardware from a graphical control panel on my GNOME desktop? The answer is I can’t, because GNOME doesn’t yet deal with that portion of my system. Why do I need to tell Linux what disks I have in my system? Because it doesn’t know! Windows and Mac OS both know when I stick a disk in my drive.
First point – control panel. A lot of distros provide graphical config tools. They all work on a gnome desktop – Yast and Drakconf. Both work on the gnome desktop. They are not part of gnome, but so what. They are available on end-user oriented distros.
With respect to disk identification, why is it on Mandrake that every time I put a CD-R in my burner, K3B opens automatically? I find that quite annoying, because I burn using the command line, but there’s auto detection going on. Why is it when I plug my digital camera in to a usb port, an icon appears on the desktop for a graphical application that will download photos off my camera? Why when I put a music CD in the drive, KSCD opens? Why is it when I change my motherboard, cpu, graphics card, and sound card (leaving my hard drives as is), and reboot after that massive change, linux boots, detects all hardware, configures it, and I’m up and running without reinstalling th OS, or manually installing any drivers? Because linux is capable of doing this. Your factual assertions are just plain wrong!
Then there’s software. Drakconf, and urpmi solve the problems discussed. A wizard to set up network – just like windows. A package installer that resolves dependencies without user input – and it’s graphical as well. Furthermore, there are many package managers that do this for other distros – apt, yum, portage. Again, factually inaccurate.
X11 – I don’t know enough about X11 to respond to this. However, I do know that kde3.2.3 on kernel 2.6 feels just as snappy on my pIII 600mhz laptop as Windows NT on my big arse overpowered desktop machine at work.
KDE/Gnome – What is the obsession with consistency. There is no consistency in Windows, so why does KDE/Gnome need to live up to such high standards. Despite this, there is a tool (GTK-QT theme from kde-look), that will faithfully reproduce the kde theme that is installed on gnome/gtk based apps. Hey presto – consistency (at least on a superficial level).
To argue that the Linux desktop has not moved very far in 7 years is just a joke. I started using linux when Mandrake 8.0 was released. The desktop has come a long long way since then. kde has become more featureful, and yet less bloated and quicker. When compared with Windows, that is a fantastic acheivement. The key application areas are now repleat with high quality apps: K3B, Digikam, Kino, Kaffeine, Gaim, Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office, Gimp and on and on. A lot of people that see my desktop who are windows users just drool at some of these apps. To say that the desktop has not progressed seems farcical. Nothing is perfect, and Windows is far from perfect, but this article is an insult to the developers who have spent the last 7 years taking it to the heights that now is.
Linux has almost everything it needs now to make a good DE. Unfortunately OSX has a few additional tricks which put it anywhere from 1 to 4 years ahead of Linux in its GUI, but most of that useful functionality can be copied or is currently available in metacity. Other windowmanagers might catch up to OSX sometime in the next few years, but I don’t see that happening anytime soon.
Anyway, the problems Linux faces are mostly just taste, style and having a person/group focused on providing a simple default configuration. This will be addressed eventually, but until then we have to deal with the ugly defaults chosen by Redhat, Slackware, etc. I haven’t seen the latest Linspire, SuSE, Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake configs but I would assume they aren’t much better. Mandrake is probably the most user friendly, from my perspective, but its been a while since I looked at it.
I would tell you what is needed, but I think it would be easier for me to show you. So I’ll continue my work and one day will be ready to contribute my idea of the perfect linux DE if someone else doesn’t beat me to it first.
X11 is a big problem, the configuration sucks, selecting a resolution sucks, using different mice and tablets sucks. wacom tablets are supported by the kernel but x11 uses it’s own driver which just doesn’t work.
Not even to mention the 20 different window managers which
are either slow or lacking in features, write ONE that does work.
I still like the BeOS way of doing things most of the time.
I think the most fundamental mistake people have when it comes to Linux is assuming all the developers out there are working together towards some kind of utopic-distribution for the average Joe. Seriously, this is not the case.
It is clear that the people who write these pieces want to help. Opinions and criticism are helpful, but this stuff is so old and reiterated. It isn’t helping. Helping is doing some kind of development, words don’t do much. Not all development is code.
My take: stop posting bs of users who just found out about that OS called “Linux” and think they are all knowing while they don’t even have the capability to do some basic research.
I know it’s the season for cucumbers, but that’s not a valid reason to post bs.
KDE and Gnome aren’t the only usable desktops/X-environments available in Linux. Yes, they have useful system configuration tools but several distro makers offer similar tools, so KDE or Gnome are not really necessary at all (think of Libranet’s Adminmenu). Once you’ve got your system configured to your liking, there are better alternatives to the bloated KDE and Gnome.
XFCE4 looks and feels nice and you can configure it’s behaviour graphically. I like WindowMaker’s look and feel even better, and WindowMaker also has a graphical program to configure the desktop. Fluxbox is a bit more simplistic but it has nice looking themes. My point is that you can install any of these smaller desktops and use them to launch your usual desktop applications. They are good-looking, easy to use, stable and fast. And they don’t imitate Windows.
If you want to convert the Windows desktop users to using Linux on the desktop, you should offer something different, preferably something better. If people are offered KDE and Gnome as the only usable choices in Linux, they will inevidently feel that Linux on the desktop is the free but uglier, slower, and less user-friendly version of Windows. Instead, Linux distros should offer Windows users something refreshingly different. IMO, they should forget about KDE and Gnome altogether and build their Linux desktop around XFCE4, WindowMaker or Fluxbox.
Why do I call this a troll article? Quite simple, cause that author did not mind to verify if his claims still are valid, if at is worked on solving them. For the hardware detection problem for instance I just want to ask what he guesses, why the entire Linux kernel has become hot-pluggable, why sysfs has been introduced, why devfs is obsolete now. Did he ever hear about freedesktop.org’s desktop bus (http://freedesktop.org/Software/dbus) and their hardware abstraction layer (http://freedesktop.org/Software/hal, http://freedesktop.org/~david/guadec2004-hal-and-gnome.pdf) – First programs for it exist, the virtual file system of GNOME 2.8 will be able to use it. Only purpose of this stuff: Make hardware gadgets easy to use.
Same ignorance applies for eye-candy like transparency in X11: Transparency was one reason for the XFree86 fork (know Keith to fight for it for years now). The next release of the xorg-server definitly will contain true transparency plus window-update notification (aka. DAMAGE extension) – which allows efficient support for on demand remote user support via VNC (as known from windows). Did he mention the VNC problem? Don’t know, as I give up reading the entire article, after being upset by the initial thesis.
X11 doesn’t suck. The examples you gave are examples of Xorg/XFree86 sucking, not X11.
My first computer experience (1982) was on a DEC PDP-11 minicomputer. Starup consisted of flicking a few switches and it was command line only from there.
My first computer was a Commodore 64 in 1983.
Some other “fun” experiences – using a teletype terminal on a HP 300 mainframe and a Sanyo desktop running MSDOS 2.0 (I think) with a single 360k floppy and no hard drive.
I’m always amazed by people who seem have to have only being using computers for 5 or so years saying that something isn’t ready for use. If you were properly taught to use a CLI you would probably think a mouse and GUI was a a silly way to operate a computer. “Desktop readiness” is mostly a matter of familiarity with the OS.
I switched from MacOS 8.6 to Win 98 and found the experience strange for a few months until I became familiar with windows. The same thing when Itried Linux- once I became familiar with a system it was desktop ready.
You know you are winning when they cannot tone the rhetoric down. If Microsoft was not fearful, they would not send all of these paid astroturfers out en masse.
I have it on good word that they have a whole group of people that they pay to comeo out to osnews.com and even slashdot and post endless anti-Linux tirades.
I mean, if Linux is so hopeless, leave us alone. Don’t write about it.
some of us poor windows n00bs want more thn anything for linux to suceed, but we feel that will only occur when the ‘usability’ approaches that of the current flavour of windows.
i dual boot with windows and SUSE, and i am trying to transfer as many of the thing to linux from winblows as i possibly can, but i cannot run all my games on Linux otherwise the transition would be complete.
i installed UT2k4 on SUSE the other day (you may laugh but for me it was a triumph), and i had to mount the blinking DVD in order for SUSE to recognise that it was really a collection of CD installation disks, i mean WTF!?!? yes i managed it (with assistance), but seriously guys this has to change.
Lemmy, checkt this out if you are interested in Linux DVD creation:
http://www.apple.com/shake/
http://www.apple.com/dvdstudiopro/
and software for apple hardware and mac os x is helping me how?
yes, i saw, shake is available for linux as well. for the little amount of five thousand us dollars. which still does not account for the fact that shake is not for dvd creation, only for special effects. now, go ahead and compare that price tag with the $99 for DVDLab.
“However, it’s been 7 years and DL hasn’t progressed much at all since then”
we can say that of windows since windows 3.1…
Let me guess, suse <= 9.0…
since 9.1, suse uses subfs for exchangeable media, no more mounting of cds…
How many articles are people going to write about how DL is not this and is not that. And how come all these writters seem to ALWAYS overlook Linspire, Xandros and Lycoris??
I don’t get it when people say that having two competitive desktops is detrimental to linux. Since when is choice a bad thing? KDE and GNOME are both fully functional, they compete with one another vigorously, they offer the user choice and variety.
Unfortunately having two desktops limits the choise. Once you have chosen your desktop environment applictiations from other environments will look foreign and give your desktop and inconsitent look & feel. E.g. if you have a KDE app in Gnome you will have to manage font and color settings both in the KDE way and in the Gnome way.
I’d much rather see a healthy assortment of technologies and desktops that can interoperate using open standards, but allow for variety and competition. You just try to get every KDE user to use GNOME instead and see how they feel about it! Try and take Fluxbox away from the nerd accross the street and tell him that he must use GNOME with Metacity only. I don’t think the response will be very friendly 😉
The secret of a succesful desktop environment is having good defaults. Even if there was one standard Linux desktop environment there is no reason to disallow individual users from making their own choises. If the geek doesn’t like Gnome he will have no problem installing his favorite Fluxbox.
The secret of a succesful desktop environment is having good defaults. Even if there was one standard Linux desktop environment there is no reason to disallow individual users from making their own choises. If the geek doesn’t like Gnome he will have no problem installing his favorite Fluxbox.
Finally someone figured it out. This is what sucks in windows, you can’t tweak it enough without getting a buggy environment (Litestep etc etc). Linux problem is that nothing is consistent ever however tweakable for the experienced. So they really not even competing with eachother… I’d say Linux main competitor is the BSDs and other Unices but not Windows. Even if some distros try to be consistent it is impossible as GNU/Linux in it’s nature is inconsistent.
I don’t even want Linux to “succeed on the desktop”. As far as I’m concerned, BSDs or Solaris or Haiku or SkyOS are better choices as their future seem to have far wider options than the current GNU development model.
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2004/view/e_sess/5195
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/3450
“Did he ever hear about freedesktop.org’s desktop bus (http://freedesktop.org/Software/dbus) and their hardware abstraction layer (http://freedesktop.org/Software/hal, http://freedesktop.org/~david/guadec2004-hal-and-gnome.pdf) – First programs for it exist, the virtual file system of GNOME 2.8 will be able to use it. Only purpose of this stuff: Make hardware gadgets easy to use.”
I agree it is mostly usable for the home end users, but its not only for hardware gadgets. See above! See any sane review of it. It’s for ALL the hardware including when you plug in an external harddive, out in a CDROM, etc etc etc
ON “NEW” IDEAS
Pooled storage? This must be a joke. I can pop in a new hard drive and mount it wherever I want on my Linux system. What the hell is the author talking about?
He is talking about logical volume management LVM. This is already available in Linux. But most distros doesn’t turn it on by default though. The idea is that you have an extra layer of abstraction between your mount points and your physical media, making it possible to extend and schrink the available storage space available at each mount point.
This is very handy e.g. if your mail system requires your inboxes to reside on /var/spool/mail and you get out of space. You just add some more disk and to the mount point holding /var/spool/mail. No need to copy files to a new and larger disk, just add some space.
“The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless people posting on osnews every week opinion about what other people should do with Linux.”
Genius!
> Hey idiot, what should a DE be other than a task bar, a
> start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it?
Ever heard of Ion or things: no fucking taskbar, desktop icons, etc. but still fully useable:
http://modeemi.fi/~tuomov/ion/
And btw: no matter how much you disagree with somebody there’s no reason to call somebody ‘idiot’.
if some the windoze sheeps really find it to be a more intuitive WM, then try to install XPDE on your box.
Maybe it makes migrating to linux a less frightening experience.
http://www.xpde.com/
Now, there’s only Linux left to fight with Windows. And I think that because of the Windows monopoly there’s no reason to say “Linux is not aimed to replace anything”. Even if someone decides not to use Windows right from the start, installs Linux only and is sure that Linux is ready for his or her desktop, in fact he/she has replaced the industry standard OS — Windows — with Linux. And there are lots of people who are willing to replace Windows — in reality, by switching from it — in the moment Linux offers the same features set with similar GUI. Noone can deny it, we just have to accept it and either keep Linux different and hear “Linux is still not ready for the desktop” voices once every week, or change it so that it seems closer to Windows and make more people switch.
>
>
The parasites you are refering to can go and off themselves as far I’m concerned.
I don’t care about them and never have or will. I don’t care if they never switch from Windows to Linux. I use Linux because *I* want to and not because a bunch of idiot Windows users think the OSS world *OWES* them asomething.
What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except “desktop linux.” I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren’t desktop ready. Yes…yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already!
If it makes you happy, I could whine about both windows and MacOS, there is plenty of reasons in both of them. But unfortunately neither MacOS nor Windows follow a development model that makes it worth while. When whining at Linux you can at least hope that some skilled developer will pick it up and do something about it.
“…because a bunch of idiot Windows users…”
“…Hey idiot, what should a DE be other than…”
“…if some the windoze sheeps really…”
Now this is one reason why I lost my interest in Linux, OSS, and especially its community.
Too bad, I really liked Mandrake.
And a lot of people have lost interest in you and your constant whining about “linux should be like windows”.
Mmm, I didn’t write this article, so I’m not really sure what you mean.
it is an absolute support NIGHTMARE!!!
i’ve worked 3 years in tech support before getting a porgammer job and even the tiny differences between different windows versions where complicating support. when offereing tech support for inexperienced users, having two desktops doubles support costs (at the minimum) and in many countrys you are required by law to offer tech support for a coomercial product.
Now this is one reason why I lost my interest in Linux, OSS, and especially its community.
Too bad, I really liked Mandrake.
Well, I’d say, your other reasons were a reason why you got to read something like that, especially if you repeated them endlessly.
I hope that at the same time you also learned that really _nobody_ (who you dont pay) actually cares or even should care for your reasons. Nobody owes you anything.
If among various OSes MS Windows or even the Mac OS meets your needs the best, just stick with that. Theres nothing wrong with choosing the best tool for the job and nobody will whine about your decision.
I wished those article “authors” actually tried to *use* their Linux distro (better yet: try a few) before telling others what they should do.
I am telling you, I’ve used Linux for about 2 years now and using SuSe for a bit over one month now and ditched XP (well it’s still on my dual-boot but I don’t use it any longer). But I can tell you only now am I beginning to get ‘loose’ of the Windows “brainwashing” (or “Windows paradigms” if you prefer to be more tactical about it).
I think Thom Holwerda uses SkyOS or Beos or a Beos-clone (wasn’t he author of that Haiku or SkyOS article of last week?).
Thom appears neutral to me, so I don’t think it’s any use getting all hot-headed on him.
What is desktop Linux? I’m using Linux only for more than 2 years. Because it’s more comfortable and easier to use for me. How can you say that i don’t have a linux desktop? Of course I do! It fits my needs far better than Windows “desktop”.
Hardware.
The apps from top layer are not supposed to communicate with the bottom layer. Try to study more about layered architectures. Even my Linux knows when I stick anything in my computer. But it doesn’t do anything on its know, it would have to know what i want to do. But it can’t, noone else can know what I want to do! That Windows “action predict” system really sucks. I have just put a CD into my computer, containing many different files, how do you know what am I going to do with it? View the images? Play the video? Check the total size? Copy something? Search for some content? Burn another track on it? Rip the audio part? No, boy. I just put it in to protect it, because i cannot find the original plastic box for it!
Do not compare to Windows. Compare to your memory. Do you know how to do it? If not, ask some one else.
I plugged in my firewire hard drive into the windows box and after several month of perfect work it decided not to show it up on the desktop (even in the hardware manager). So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?
I plugged my mp3 player and copied some music on it. Now I want to pull it out. Windows says that I can’t do it right know. Ok, I wait one hour. Nothing changes. I wait another 5 hours. Nothing changes. Finally I pull it out anyway. The files are damaged. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?
“Other Computers” in windows sharing don’t show up, even after several Windows professionals tried to fix it, with cooperation of everyone in the local network. They failed. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?
I choose to switch the computer of. It says it cannot stop the battery meter (on my desktop computer, the only battery hold the CMOS memory alive), and than, instead of switching of, it ends up with well-known BSOD. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?
Firing up any HW accelerated game leads to immediate reboot. Windows even don’t recognize it and do’nt check the disks afterwards. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?
The problem is. We tried to reinstall it completely many times, but these problems didn’t go away. Linux runs absolutely ok on that box, memory+disks+hardware tests pass without any problems.
These are daily problems. Every day, some critical flaw comes out on that windows box. Do you dare to call this “desktop ready”?
Why do you think that alpha blending and transitions are modern features? They are modern fashion. For proper work you don’t need it. Desktop environment may be very cute and usable without them. And it is, indeed.
Why do you mix up Gnome and KDE apps? Do you mean, that desktop ready means having no other interfaces to choose? Use just one of those. I use neither. I stop pretending that Windows are consistent. Try to install all the applications from the CDs you get with your computer. Those CPU temperature meters, strange multimedia centers, add winamp, CDR Win, Avid, Cooledit, some video players and enjoy the “consistent desktop”. When in Rome…. When using Linux-like system, stop behaving like a Windows user.
Linux made by Geeks for Geeks. Yes, you understood. Not for average Windows user. “The user’s Home directory should be the center of the Linux desktop rather than the root filesystem.” said the saint Bill. Any reason? What the hell is Home directory, that it is so important for you? What do you store there? Apps? no. Data? no. Just configuration and a few private files, nothing else. Average joe cannot accidentaly trash any system files when not in Windows. My computer is made of bare metal, not rubber-duck-plastic.
Pooled storage? Like two harddrives behaving as one big? Do you mean RAID? Well it’s not OS-thing at all, man.
Nautilus, hm… How do you wnat te dive into directory with more than 20000 minutes of music, if it tried to scan it in advance? I just use one keypress for the music to be played. Do you really think it is too much?
Why should be inatallation web-based? Do I really need to connect my computer to the internet, to be able to install anything? How would you click on that link on a computer without a monitor? Or do you really mean that I need a monitor just to run my router? Oh my god, nobody told me that 😉
Welcome window? Why would I switch the computer of? When I want to read mail, a read it. When I want to read RSS, I do it. I can’t image, that I can save that one keypress I need to do that.
You complain that other people just complain, and do not propose anything. OK, here it comes: I suggest you not to tell me what should my desktop do. I am the only one to decide it.
And I recommend you to use Windows. Because they are the best desktop around for you. Windows look like Windows, they have applications compatible with Windows, they even sometimes behave like Windows, and finally they have all the Windows bugs, that you are a must-have for a desktop to be called READY!
@ drynwhyl
I hope that at the same time you also learned that really _nobody_ (who you dont pay) actually cares or even should care for your reasons. Nobody owes you anything.
Of course they should care! They lost a potential customer! Your post makes sense in total, but this remark doesn’t at all.
If among various OSes MS Windows or even the Mac OS meets your needs the best, just stick with that. Theres nothing wrong with choosing the best tool for the job and nobody will whine about your decision.
That’s the whole point! People do whine about it! for instance, in the time I use Windows (BeOS is my main OS) I prefer IE. I just like it, never had any problems with it. People yell at me for that! I’m called a troll, and MS idiot etc. simply because I prefer IE! That’s crazy!
@ Anonymous:
I think Thom Holwerda uses SkyOS or Beos or a Beos-clone (wasn’t he author of that Haiku or SkyOS article of last week?).
I’ve used almost every OS for the x86 platform. But yes, BeOS is my main operating system. Windows is my second. And yes, I was the author of that SkyOS article/interview.
Thom appears neutral to me, so I don’t think it’s any use getting all hot-headed on him.
Thank you.
What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except “desktop linux.” I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren’t desktop ready. Yes…yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already!
There is a good reason to that: Linux (and not Slackware, Mandrake, RedHat, Debian, etc) has been hyped as a desktop replacement for Windows (and had that ambition) for years. A lot of people have said that it was on the path for world domination, and Microsoft’s demise.
That hasn’t been the case with any other OS.
What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that’s not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with.
Could you tell me was is explicitly different between the two systems other than increased configurability and modularity for the Linux approach?
Ah come on. I dont, and I suppose you dont too go on Beos and SkyOS boards and list all the points why you cant use their system.
I mean, I never saw Thom repeating “I want a My Documents folder, or I wont use Linux and I’l tell anybody not to use it” or a similar childish troll, but I’m quite sure that he _knows_ what requirements and problems tend to annoy a typical linuxer when you throw them repeatedly at him, and one of these are without doubt the often heard threats that one will quit using linux because another user responded in a way he doesnt like.
I personally simply dont care if he uses Mandrake or another distribution, or if he or somebody else quits using Linux at all this very evening, but I find it annoying when he has to make all other Linux users indirectly responsible for his problems.
(I personally havent been laughed ot trolled at even at the time i didnt know how to shutdown (!) a machine, which without doubt wouldnt be so if I had firstly griped that the system is unusable and there is no Start/Shutdown button, and than asked for help. Or so.)
I loves the old KDE, that would run fine on 64mb of ram. Now what are my choices? Using some POS like Fluxbox? No thanks.
Hey! I know it’s only opinion, but I’ve got my desktop set up with fluxbox 0.9.9, rox filer and gtk apps, and it is SWEET and intuitive, mostly drag and drop driven.
Yeah!
The truth is that Linux is set, in 18 months, to be a killer, complete OS. Right now, it’s only right for me and those like me.
Unfortunately having two desktops limits the choise. Once you have chosen your desktop environment applictiations from other environments will look foreign and give your desktop and inconsitent look & feel. E.g. if you have a KDE app in Gnome you will have to manage font and color settings both in the KDE way and in the Gnome way.
Yeah, wouldn’t it be great if there were only one application for each purpose? Each could be so highly developed. You could even have a locked down suite of languages that all development was done in, and stop support for all others. Of course, you’d have to use forceful tactics to get this done. Maybe ignoring standards on the web and the like.
You could even have only one OS!!!
This is a great idea. Why hasn’t this occured to anyone yet?
I never claimed that you did.
I guess I’m just so sick of *all* whiners that I wasn’t very discriminant. “Linux neeeeeds this, Lihnux[sic] neeeeds that, it doesn’t work like windows, X is a resource hog, x gotta go, linux is bloated, linuxs is slow, choice is bad, linux is this and linux is that”… bleh. What a lot of uninformed drivel.
What is *needed* is
1. People realize this is *not* windows, never was, and hopefully never will be.
2. Something isn’t bad just because you lack knowledge. Hell, you aren’t even capabel of riding a bike with out some pains i the beginning. Yet I have not heard anyone complain about the usability of bikes.
So, as long as people fail to acknowledge those two points there will be whiners, and I won’t miss any one of them if they decide to use some other tools.
I personally simply dont care if he uses Mandrake or another distribution, or if he or somebody else quits using Linux at all this very evening, but I find it annoying when he has to make all other Linux users indirectly responsible for his problems.
The only people I’m holding responsible are those people who cannot stand critique, who cannot stand someone saying something they might just not in some way agree with. I know a lot of Linux users who are perfectly sane and who can stand critique, whether the critique is viable or not. They just reply with sane comments instead rambling on about the virtues of OSS (note: I’m not syaing you are one of the last group
).
Let me guess, suse <= 9.0…
since 9.1, suse uses subfs for exchangeable media, no more mounting of cds…
hi,
no, i use SUSE 9.1.
my *guess* is that the problem arose because the DVD version of UT2k4 is really only the aggregation of the 6xCD version.
if you check the DVD the files are still contained in 6 folders titled; CD1-CD6.
SUSE found the DVD and started the install, but obviously got confused and asked me to insert CD1. thus the need to mount the disk.
regards
Dimble
Of course they should care! They lost a potential customer! Your post makes sense in total, but this remark doesn’t at all.
Of course the companies behind Linux should care. And also the distributors should care! But not the non-profit hobbyist community (which is still the main driving force in free software development), especially when day after day, somebody overwhelms them with complaints how unusable their system is, and succesive threats how one will stop using it.
That’s the whole point! People do whine about it! for instance, in the time I use Windows (BeOS is my main OS) I prefer IE. I just like it, never had any problems with it. People yell at me for that! I’m called a troll, and MS idiot etc. simply because I prefer IE! That’s crazy!
Of course is it crazy! As crazy as people who yell at Free Software developers because of their dissapointment that a system with such a nice price tag (zero comma zero) is unusable for them, whereas others dont seem to have problems with using it.
Why is everyone in such a tizzy over turning Linux into a ‘consumer desktop.’ Who cares if Aunt Agnes can use it or wants to?
I use it because I like it. It doesn’t affect me at all if someone else doesn’t like it.
What’s the deal, yo yo?
I’m looking for new insights and factually correct articles by intelligent people who know what they’re talking about (GNOME/KDE devs, distro devs, etc.).
Dude, users are just as important as dev’s.
in the OSS world in general
my reason is i’ve always thought computers should help humans accomplish real life tasks… instruments, no more no less with the advantage of development speed and flexibility that SW “openness” in my opinion could carry…
now i see that advantage is a chimera, because of the “community” being shredded in competing development parties who work on their own little field and hordes of supporters who accuse others of not being able to “bend” to the philosophy of the tools: but the tools are in service to man, they are to be designed to adapt to man, or at least to offer man a uniform way of dealing with the problems
if one replis to this post “you’re not accepted here” or “nobody will miss you” the snobbish attitude it would would confirm my perception that linux or other OSS are seen not as mere democratic (in the sense of accessible by everyone) informatc tools, but as a mean for personal gratification, or to prove one’s superiority
PS: the other argument a “free” SW would offer is, not costing additional $/€ to the user…. i see Maya 6 is available for linux (Red Hat only) – but that’s obvious given the SW was born on SGI’s Unix, …
but for someone buying an application like that, wouldnt it be better to run it on a tested OS costing very little in comparison?
PPS: X IS SLOW, that’s true: not only Xfree was an awful implementation, according to not just one source, the synchronous (locking) calls the protocol is based on , cause higher latencies and make a thread safe implementation more difficult
to me it seems not by chance that BeOS (the highest responsive OS ever imho), MAC OS X and Enlightnment dont use X (the latter 2 have emulation layers for X though)
>> users are important as dev’s
agree! 🙂
if users arent valuable, who/what does one develop for? 😉
other dev’s ? (hmmm sort of tail biting snake here)
gratification of the personal ego? uhmm maybe 😐
http://www.linuks.mine.nu/gnustep/
Because they are Redmond worshipers. They can’t see past Gate’s legacy long enough to realize there is more than one way to do things. They’re stuck on gui configuration (which btw, I’ve met Average Joe and he can’t work gui configs either) and centralized system registries. They want proprietary binary file formats that get oversized and difficult to read. They want package managers that don’t clean up that central registry, and they want their desktop to be the configuration for their whole OS. They want properties to be synonomous with settings, and they want little dialogues with tabs and a picture of the end of logical thinking (a broken Window).
Linux becomes ready for the desktop when people use it on the desktop. And no it’s not just the 1337 uber geeks using it, some small time geeks who just like to tinker on their computer like it. Sometimes you even find Aunt Tillie’s chatting away in Gaim and e-mailing their friends on Evolution.
I suppose I should stop feeding the trolls, but I think these articles are getting quite old. They just repeat the same tripe over and over. It’s like those 80 FC2 reviews we had. How about a big expose on how the Y-windows project is coming along? How about a big story on what x_org is doing?
Most surveys on public computer experience show only 5-8% of the computer users in the US are experts capable of solving “complex” problems, like terminal commmands and solving dependencies and God forbid, compiling from source.
If the Linux community is aiming to saturate that market, which would also include prying Windows .NET programmers away from ther $65k jobs, then Desktop Linux shouldnt be a priority.
However, if the community hates the hold Windows has on 97% of the market as much as they apparently hate each other in discussion forums, then consideration HAS to be made to those who haven’t seen a terminal prompt. They’ll still call the ‘guy down the street’ to get a program to work if they cant figure it out, just like they do in windows of OS X. Linux just needs to be on the same playing level.
My grandmother brings cash with her all the time, because CHECKS are too much to bother with. My uncle can’t for the life of him understand why she just doesnt use an ATM card. “Its simple, just put the card in, press a few buttons and your PIN, type the cash amount….” .. from the same uncle that is ammazed by his inkjet’s ability to PRINT COLOR on shiny paper.
Business 101 (also applies EVERYWHERE): Know your market.
I’m a longtime Linux user and frankly the zealotry (which was always present) and constant inner arguing has scared me off from the linux crowd. That’s not to say I hate linux, I love the kernel itself and I applaud all the hard-working developers who get paid little or nothing at all to provide software for all of us to use. These past few years I’ve been using Slackware because it suited MY needs (for servers and desktops). However, recently I’ve just switched almost all my servers to freebsd with two boxes reserved for openbsd and netbsd respectively.
The beauty of the times we live in is that their is choice! If windows works for you and you are happy, by all means use it! If linux/bsd/any “alternative OS” (i hate the term) does it for you, than use it! I frankly do not like windows because I find it too complicated and not powerful enough for MY needs, thus the reason for my use of BSD servers and workstations and along with my new powerbook that I’m writing this on (Great Job Apple! OS X won me over!)
So please linux users, let windows users be if they are content. Same goes for windows users to linux users. Healthy competition is a great thing, but please try and put the “Distro Jihad” aside for two minutes.
The only people I’m holding responsible are those people who cannot stand critique, who cannot stand someone saying something they might just not in some way agree with.
Critique of course should be funded, not just some irrelevant rant of an avid computer user that has played with pretty much every OS out there, who knows obviously nothing about the purpose and the principles free software gained its success with. The last two OSNEWS articles, on the topic what linux should do, were both either totally ignorant, or intentionally “provocative” (popular euphemism for trolling), and with both possibilities theres is nothing one could seriously give an answer to.
I know a lot of Linux users who are perfectly sane and who can stand critique, whether the critique is viable or not. They just reply with sane comments instead rambling on about the virtues of OSS.
In my eyes it perfectly reasonable that many get frustrated when a major news site they read daily gives such an author a place to troll its regular readers, when it should be obvious that it would leave many of them disgruntled.
Again, even this could be tolerated when both of the authors would start something as a fork tomorrow, and correct anything they think is broken, or, if they are no developers, pay something to do it. Or do anything more than just gripe and expect to be served at no cost. Instead, we got somebody who feels he had the right to request something, features and services, as he were a paying customer. As I said, it is more his arrogant attitude which draws so many comments to this article, and his usage of the word “we” (although it is obvoius he has no inclination to the community at all) than his arguments.
When it can encompass the features of a real OS – XP – like these:
– When running a hidden taskbar, force it over top of program windows with every change in 802.11 signal strength. Don’t provide a quick timeout (such as Mozilla’s mail notice), force the user to click in a 3/16″ square box to close the dialogue, one surrounded by a 3″ square dialogue which brings up another unwanted window if you miss the first
– When running a hidden taskbar, force it over top of running programs when clicking on an e-mail saved to the local drive and force the user to click on the parent Outlook interface before re-hiding.
– Don’t provide a time setting for the hidden taskbar, unhide it over working windows at the slightest hint of the cursor touching the screen edge. Make sure it block program windows for far longer than the cursor touched that edge.
– When running a hidden taskbar on a roaming profile, pop it over top running programs during periods of high network latencies. Ignore the auto-hide settings, force the user to stop what they’re doing and toggle the ‘autohide option’ on and off in properties before hiding again.
– Use a ‘wizard’ for printing graphics, one that walks the user through six or eight unwanted dialogues, asks them if they want to print every other graphic they didn’t select in the same directory, and doesn’t provide a ‘print selected page’ option, forcing them to manually count to page 53 of an 87 page .tif of a phone bill. Unlike Infraview.
There are plenty Linux shortcomings, but IMHO this is more than enough to keep the developers busy advancing the LDT in the right direction towards an enriching and efficient ‘professional’ user experience. And it’s a HO based on daily use of the discussed desktop, unlike the parent article’s info apparently culled from Slashdot trolls.
“The beauty of the times we live in is that their is choice! If windows works for you and you are happy, by all means use it! If linux/bsd/any “alternative OS” (i hate the term) does it for you, than use it! I frankly do not like windows because I find it too complicated and not powerful enough for MY needs, thus the reason for my use of BSD servers and workstations and along with my new powerbook that I’m writing this on (Great Job Apple! OS X won me over!)”
Brilliant. Give this poster a medal for “getting it”. It _doesn’t_ matter if Linux has 1% or 25% worldwide market share as long it meets the needs of people like you and me. Linux happens to meet my needs admirably on my desktop (I use BSD for my servers as well, FreeBSD for web/email and OpenBSD for my NAT/firewall/DNS) but that doesn’t mean that it will meet the needs of my mom and dad. While I do try and show people what linux is about, the only ones that are remotely interested are people who are interested in learning UNIX, usually because they want to make more money with that skillset.
While I do happen to like the idea behind free software, I realize not everyone agrees. I wish more people could cling to the ethical benefits of sharing information, but what are you going to do? The thing I find truly irritating are people who want to kill the variety in the open source ecosystem in the name of market share. Leave the zillion open source projects alone, they make linux a fresh, exciting and diverse place to be, a real tinkerer’s paradise.
I’d love to play around with OS X, especially now that Gentoo has released portage for it. Sadly the only realy barrier there is the price of Apple hardware. If it ever comes down however, look out!
“Did the author expect the Linux desktop to be as good as a commercial desktop – with development being salaried work during working hours as opposed to voluntary work outside working hours? I think the current state is remarkable considering those odds.”
This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model.
I found this article very non-tecnical for this site. It didn’t go into detail at any point, and while basically, opinion articles are not a bad thing, if they are that short it is just the language which makes a difference to comments or mails from the one kind of user we hate so much (your OS sucks….).
But he is right about Y-Windows. it would be good from a techical point of view (i.e. libraries directly in the window management system, no more GTK or QT) as well as from a community point of view (no more possibilities for GNOME vs. KDE flamewars).
This also shows a very difficult point for Y: Apart from having to do all the work to program the system, they will also have to be careful to be the most customizable Desktop on the market, otherwise the users won’t be happy with it.
For the moment i wish people would stop ranting that “linux is not ready for the desktop” and about package management (which IS user-friendly because you always have to take the same steps, it is nonsense if every application has its own installer like it is handled on certain other operating systems. Have you ever tried to completely remove an Application from Windows? See, it’s not possible without expert knowledge – just say registry… Or try to remove many applications – you know how much time that takes? Oh, and long live Gentoo MacOS!) and just use it. Sure they will need to adapt their habits, but maybe that’s just because they’ve already totally adapted their habits to Microsoft?
In the long run, i wish Linux stays as a Server OS (hey, it is a monolithic kernel) and Haiku obeys world domination on the Desktop.
This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model.
You obviously fail to see that Free Software, aka OSS, was in the first place meant to be free, and not to “measure up”. I dont even see that the community wants to “measure up” (in winning Joe User’s favor), besides of some Joe Users themselves (neither paying, no contributing otherwise), who think it should.
Free Software and Linux arose from the community, and currently, there is just no incentive to develop for someone (like a non paying Joe Schmock) outside of the community. This wont bring Linux on the mass desktop, but I think the only ones who will whine about it, are not the part of the community, because in it, Linux has been on the desktop for years! (You remember, the last 5 years for example, every on of them the famous “year of the linux desktop”?)
Bill Skyes wrote: “This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model.” Precisely, and that’s why it’s failing in the file and web serving arenas too. It’s humbling to be in the presence of so much insight.
“3. dependency hell should be cleaned up. no not everyone has uber fast 1MBPS connections to use emerge/apt-get”
The thing is, you have to download those dependencies some time. They are either packaged with the app, or downloaded separately. So, the speed of your connection is irrelevant.
If the dependencies are packaged with the apps, you have to download the same ones again and again with each new app, even if you already have them on your computer. Also, you if dependencies are kept seperate rather than shared, security holes cannot be fixed for all the apps that use the same libs at once.
If for example, an app needed QT+, would you advocate including the whole of QT+ (it’s big) with the app in the same package? No, as it would make the packages massive and be pointless as you would already it installed after installing only one app that needed it.
This is why emerge and apt-get are so good. It’s not dependency ‘hell’ if it works automaticly, only downloads what you need, and saves you bandwidth in the long run.
After reading the Opinion piece (yes it was an opinion mind you) and the subsequent responses, I feel there’s something I must contribute to this discussion.
The community seems to be experiencing a bit of schizophrenia when it comes to Linux.
On one hand, many of the responses on this article (and on linux topics on OSNews in general seem to be focusing on Linux becoming a more dominant technology, thereby promoting it’s growth.
On the other hand, many of the responses on this article and the aforementioned topics also have a preconception of how Linux should become more dominant. Some want to craft it in the mold of Windows; others are staunch in their support of more organic distros (Gentoo, Debian and etc), and many are distro centric in their beliefs (Fedora vs SuSe vs Mandrake, Slackware vs Xandros; you get the idea).
I guess the biggest question in my mind when I read these responses and articles is: What does the community really want?
Here’s the logic I keep coming to on this:
-The market has been well defined. Unfortunately, Microsoft and Apple were here as a dominant force for users first. They helped define how Grandma, Dad and your sister uses their computer, and how PC based servers are set up for individuals, or business users.
-Users have been given a level of expectations on how a computer works (whether or not you believe that’s how it’s supposed to be done, that expectation is there)
-If Linux is to grow and become stronger than it is, Linux has to penetrate 2 markets that up until this point have been largely untapped : Enterprise Business/Government and the Individual Home User.
-In order to tap both of those markets, some changes have to be made to compete with existing products in that market space. A distro may have to come out that is more Individual User Friendly than robust in advanced features for acceptance in that user market.
-Following this logic, changes to how Linux and the DE’s are done would have to be made so that the Individual User is comfortable enough using it to continue to use it. GUI interface windows that are intuitive (a GUI that understands the user doesn’t know what all of this is for, and explains it in a way that a user can grasp the basic idea), and functions that don’t require the use of a command line.
(yes, I said it…no CLI) Remember, the standard by which Linux is judged for home users is Windows and Mac, which do not use CLI’s for functions anymore.
-The logic of “But Linux is completely different, and should be treated as such” isn’t going to work with 15-20 years of Microsoft entrenchment for the Individual User or Business User. The basic functions of a Windows machine have to be fused with the stability, security and interoperability of Linux in order for home users to take advantage of it.
The community seems to have knocked this article, because one person made the comment about things he though should be improved. While the information he supplied may or may not be entirely factually correct, the message is: Make distro’s more user friendly, and linux will begin to make inroads on the desktop.
Do you want Linux adoption to grow, or would you like to see it die like BeOS and OS/2 did?
As far as no CLI is concerned, the user should not have to access a CLI for most if not all of the configuration that needs to be done by Joe User. Giving a user options is the key.
However, I am quite a fan of having a powerful CLI alongside a GUI (for a desktop, not a server of course) and thats why I think Apple got it right with OS X. An amazing GUI which is responsive and user-friendly, but underneath it all the “power user” has the power of a unix-like system. Something for everyone would be the best bet i suppose, but to refer to my previous post just use what works best for you, thats the beauty of having a choice.
>> KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway.
I prefer using a toolkit comming from a “proprietary company” from Norway, that practices intelligent policy toward software : ie, GPL for GLP-Systems and non GPL for Non-GPL-System, it’s honnest and correct, than a whole non-free system like MS Windows.
But, what did you call “a proprietary company in Norway” exactly ?
All companies are proprietaries, Free Software doesn’t mean that companies should be under GPL too 🙂
An earlier poster asked:
“Do you want Linux adoption to grow, or would you like to see it die like BeOS and OS/2 did?”
Ironically enough, the usability of Linux is not what will drive its survival. Draconian intellectual property laws are what will decide whether or not Linux survives or thrives. Linux is built on the premise that information is to be shared and that collaboration is a good thing, wheras filthy corporate thugs only like collaboration that benefits them under their terms.
In a perfect world, there would be many competing platforms and operating systems, some open, others proprietary, it wouldn’t matter, as long as all of them spoke the same standard protocols and could interact with one another. The monolithic software entity that Microsoft has built with Windows is the worst case scenario. Why would anyone want to turn Linux into a grotesque copy of that? It benefits nobody. All you do is make it easy for virus and spyware authors.
Just imagine if everyone was forced by market forces to drive a Dodge Neon, or a clone of a Dodge Neon. “Hey bud, that Nissan X-Tera has a stickshift, that isn’t user friendly, it has to go. No, I don’t care if it gives you more control of your vehicle… it is too complicated for my grandma to use, so you cannot have it!”
The Way of the Penguin:
1. Find your niche, beacuse you can’t please everyone and it is stupid to try.
2. Execute really really well within that defined niche and make all of the penguinistas gloriously happy.
3. Profit!!!!
I tried it. It was way, way more trouble than it was worth. Software installation was a PITA! I don’t want to hear anything about “command line” this, edit this cryptic file that. Compile it, for Pete’s sake this is 2004 no desktop OS should need to have software compliled on it for it to work. Software should just install and work. I should not need to know the differnece between rpm and pkg. I should not have to care. If a package says it is for RH then installing it should not bring up an enless amount of dependences that take forever to resolve. The problem with DL linux startes with the Zelots. Everyone wants it there way and anyone who disagreess is torn apart by the community. It wasn’t just using Linux that drove me from using Linux it was the community. There are way too many “hands in the soup” and it will never come together in a unified way.
Just comment on an article that is full of factual errors, point these errors out and voila, inevitably people will come out of the bushes and complain about all these bad bad zealots that can’t take critique. Makes you wonder who the zealots really are.
And of course these people will tell us that though they are sympathetic to linux in general all those bad bad zealots are the reasons why they can’t and don’t use linux. Wow, how incredibly intelligent to base the decision on what OS to use on some perceived zealots in the user base.
To sum it up, this article is full of factual errors so if people complain about this article it doesn’t mean they are zealots or that there is nothing to criticize about linux, it is simply a very bad article that shouldn’t have been published on any site least of all osnews.
First, let me say that I don’t think Linux distributions should become exactly like Windows. The fact that they aren’t is one reason I switched two years ago. (Quite frankly, I get lost whenever I have to use my wife’s XP machine.)
However, I think it is important for at least some developers to think about “Joe User” (who is this guy anyway?) when developing applications. Arcane commands are fine for those who know them or have time to learn them. Others should have an simpler option. Options and alternatives are what I am suggesting. After all, the idea of choice is what many Linux advocates scream it’s all about.
I am glad to see that some developers take this idea seriously. I have not tried Xandros, Lycoris, or Linspire, but by many accounts they are working to provide a somewhat affordable (so don’t suggest switching to Mac – can’t afford the necessary hardware) alternative to people (much like I was) looking to break away from Windows.
I am not a Joe User, but I am not that far removed from him. I don’t know how to code (other than basic HTML); I’m still uncomfortable with CLI (but getting better); I don’t know a lot about the inner workings of my laptop (and don’t care that much). However, I have used Linux exclusively on my desktop for two years (Mandrake, Libranet, Vector SOHO, ELX, Libranet again, Feather, Puppy, DSL, OneBase Go) and hope to do so for a long time. However, I have found that some distros work better than others, which may be why some have argued for some level of standardization.
For instance, Libranet works with all my hardware (printer, scanner, zip drive, PCMCIA modem). ELX and Vector could never get the Zip drive working. Feather and DSL both worked with my modem (DSL also worked with my printer – didn’t try setting up Zip or scanner), but neither Puppy or OneBase could find my modem.
While I don’t care whether Linux one day dominates Windows, I do care that it become a viable alternative for Joe User, even if he or Jane User does not choose to use it. It should become a choice based on the fact that they don’t want to use it rather than the fact that they can’t use it.
“Stick with Windows” isn’t to me a worthwhile suggestion. It seems to me to be on the same heartless level as someone who tells a sick person, “Since you can’t get the medicine, you’ll just have to die” rather than looking for ways to make the medication more available and more affordable.
When I first switched to Linux, I read the words “just stick with Windows” or some such more times than I could count. I chose to ignore them, and I’m glad I did. If anything else, articles like this serve to show just how far some in the community have to go in order for the community to really become a community and not a country club. Thankfully, there are many more who want to open the doors to others. Unfortunately, they don’t talk as loud.
now i see that advantage is a chimera, because of the “community” being shredded in competing development parties who work on their own little field and hordes of supporters who accuse others of not being able to “bend” to the philosophy of the tools
I disagree. To me, the spirit of cooperation is much stronger than the spirit of competition. Even the KDE/Gnome developers communicate and cooperate a lot…you don’t see the kind of flamewars that pops up between users of the DEs among the two projects’ developers, on the contrary.
Now, if you’re going to let a handful of Internet Trolls negatively influence your choice of hardware, that’s your own problem. If I had the same attitude, I’d stop using Windows products altogether, since anti-Linux, pro-Microsoft trolls are more numerous on OSNews than pro-Linux ones (not to mention more arrogant and quicker to insult people who disagree with them).
if one replis to this post “you’re not accepted here” or “nobody will miss you” the snobbish attitude it would would confirm my perception that linux or other OSS are seen not as mere democratic (in the sense of accessible by everyone) informatc tools, but as a mean for personal gratification, or to prove one’s superiority
I don’t think anyone will say “good riddance” or that you don’t belong…but even if they did, it would be unfair to characterize the entire community based on a troll, and unwise to change one’s computing habits accordingly. I mean, that would put you at the mercy of anti-Linux advocate who pose as rude Linux advocates to push people away (what we’d call an agent provocateur.
It does seem you’ve chosen to exclude yourself from OSS based on a few trolls’ attitude. Again, this seems a rather immature position: software should be based on its own merits, not on the behavior of some of its advocates.
PPS: X IS SLOW, that’s true
Let me respectfully disagree again. X is not slow, but it does give the impression of slower redraws because desktop double-buffering isn’t officially included yet. However it’s just a matter of weeks before it will be. Even then, redraw speed is comparable to that of Windows on identical hardware, and on my system (an Athlon 900 with 1GB of RAM), X flies. So my personal experience contradicts your assertion.
X has got new momentum since the X.org fork of XFree86. Expect some really exciting stuff over the next year. I do believe we’ll get hardware acceleration and other nifty eye candy before Longhorn comes out…
I don’t have time to read all the comments; however, I wanted to point a few things out:
1) There is a configuration app for FSAA and similar setting for NVidia cards. It’s called nvidia-settings and it comes with the newest drivers. It uses GTK and uses your current GNOME icon theme, etc.
2) With the newer extensions recently added to X.org and the possibility of OpenGL acceleration through Glitz – what exactly is outdated about X? The work at Xorg to make a completely modular X server – known as Debris – should speed things up; Glitz should speed render acceleration dramatically. X can do anything that other graphical systems can.
3) There is a lot of work on interoperability between GNOME and KDE. However, they are separate environments. Ideally, you won’t need to use apps from KDE when using GNOME. This may not currently be possible, but in my experience minor discrepensies like button order and widget theme aren’t that important to those I set up with Linux. Think about Windows apps – they’re not exactly consistent on this level either. The only KDE app I typically set up on a GNOME-based system is K3B. Not that big of a deal. And OO.org is going to rather seamlessly blend in with all major environments in 2.0. Even using the right file and print dialogs.
4) Glacial pace? Bullshit. I started using Linux two years ago and GNOME was unbearable at that point. I had to drop to the commandline to play a movie – using a command like mplayer /home/brad/Movies/Filename.avi; now I use Totem for all movie playing (a situation that is much nicer than Windows or Mac OSX because of Totem’s simple interface and ability to play absolutely everything I throw at it). I had to use XMMS to play music; now I have muine, which is really slick and easier than any other music library manager out there. The amount of polish put into GNOME in the past two years is astounding. It’s surely developing faster than Windows (and GNOME has an increasing rate of development not a level/slowing one) and I think has kept up well with Mac OS X.
The term Linux Desktop makes no sense. Hackers use the Linux kernel and the GNU toolkit for their projects. It isn’t a single company with a strategy for domination. It’s a bunch of different people with different ideas about how this all should work – and they use the Gnu/Linux tools to get it all done. Yeah, it’s kind of imtimidating if someone sets you up with a hodge-podge of multiple environments. That’s one of the trade-offs we make: we are willing to have excessive options so that we can have excessive development. Have a small project team is generally considered a good thing in software engineering. But in the FLOSS model of development we overcome that general rule with other benefits. “Desktop Linux” is the same way. If you’re worried about the intimidation of multiple environments, use one – this is an especially critical idea to keep in mind for corporate deployments (the current target of development firms like Ximian/Novell). You criticisms don’t apply much at all in a corportate environment.