Comments on: Desktop Linux: You've got a long way to go, baby

The Linux desktop still has a lot of rough edges, but it just may not matter much anymore.

[rapier1]

There are two major issues facing linux as a desktop system.
1) You shouldn't have to be a sysadmin to use linux. You shouldn't need to know anything about package systems, config files, dependencies, jvms, boot loaders, libraries, or anything along those lines. A desktop OS has to be able to compete in terms of maintainability, compatibility, and functionality. If it can't compete in any one of those areas it won't break out of the geek ghetto.
2) Application developers need to adhere to a standard set of UI design principles. These principles exist under both OS X and Windows but are often an afterthought in unix application development. Developers have to adapt to the user. More are doing it but there are still a lot of conflicting workflow and usage patterns out there.

Personally, I'd love to see a viable, functional, usable linux desktop offering. They're making progress but its slow and inconsistent.

[odubtaig]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: one of the major reasons for MS taking over the desktop is because they made it easy (and continue to make it easy) for developers which in turn means they attract a lot more developers who only want to deal with the specific things they programs are doing. I don't know about anyone else around here but when I want to write a graphical program I don't also want to be learning a complex IDE centred on key-commands I have to read a manual to learn and scripting languages to get any remote sense of automation in my debugging and I certainly don't want to have to write in all the parameters for every graphical element in my program.

Fortunately, this is less and less that case with IDEs such as Code::Blocks, Eclipse, Anjunta and KDevelop (even if Anjunta and KDevelop and only any good for GTK+ and QT applications). There are even people making plugins to generate your makefiles and autoconf scripts for you which would be a godsend and with GUI designers like wxAnvil it's nice to be able to drag->drop the interface again.

For there to be decent graphical applications there first need to be the tools that take the drudgery out of creating these applications instead of the "emacs is the only IDE you ever need" and "real programmers don't need their hand held" attitude that's all too often seen. Fortunately there are also hardcore programming experts that recognise that just because someone only programs at the high levels doesn't mean they're not any good, it just means they don't have infinite time on their hands, and they're working to make it easier for those who only want to concentrate on the code they need to do and want a reasonably intuitive IDE so they don't have to be learning the IDE as well as working out what the biggins is making it crash this time. The end result of this should be that more developers who appreciate good UI design are putting out programs on Linux (or even just improving existing ones) because someone who likes to use a good UI rather than scoring point by using the most 'efficient' interface is more likely to be proud of their program if they give it a good UI and if it's easier for them to create that UI then even better.

[mattquinlan]

Can I get an AMEN?!?! Hallelujah!

[modplanman]

You seemed to miss a large part of the article, where they pointed out the numbers are iffy at best - especially Asus.

The idea that you need the GUI to be so overly glossy and shiny to get people to even go near it is a bit much. The Netbook Remix of Ubuntu especially gets it beyond good enough, and there's plenty of reviews around to back that up.

Then the idea the the desktop is the only chance ever, forgetting the fact that the entire article is more about netbooks, and as shown by said article, there's little genuinely standing in the way.

[sourceview]

I think the presuppositions behind a "linux desktop" contain fatal flaws. And despite Linux Standard Base's arrogant and paranoid need to shove all expressions of Linux into a single standard container we don't talk about a Linux server this way, as if it were some monolithic thing. No, we talk of a list of middleware, security and applications running under the Linux kernel 2.6.29, etc. And we sure as hell don't try and copy Microsoft's idea of a server. I occasionally even detect independent thought going on in the server world. A good example of anti-purposeful efforts is the so-called ubuntu server, which is a pile of sh..

Why does it have to be so different when discussion switches over to non-servers?

First, the so-called LInux desktop distros are copycatting XP/Vista, and yet another copy cat is not where businesses want to go. They want to have the same control over any system, regardless of function. And distros like ubuntu don't accomplish that. (disclaimer - I have loaded ubuntu and I just don't like it, and that starts from login on.)

Second, the presumption is that "the desktop" should be some monolithic "be all to please all" system, and that the creators of "the desktop" i.e. distributions, should be the determiners of how things work, behave and show up. And that has led us to hundreds of silly distros, the silliest being the kitchen sink distros.

Third, yes, I can take ubuntu and load it on an old optiplex using cheap airlink wireless and joila "everything works!" So what! It still doesn't do things to please me, it is still not business friendly, and to get it to where I want it, which means starting with the beginning and continuing splash graphics, the obnoxious login method, and the silly preset application order would take weeks and months. I don't want to spend months reconfiguring everything, rewriting code, disagreeing with a bunch of nerd freeks who couldn't even care less about how common folk want things, let alone businesspersons, or to try to give any customer what they want.

I have more, but why waste it on this audience.

So you are right, there is a long way to go. And by the time you get there, Google will have eaten you for lunch.

[odubtaig]

So, you think having a common standards base so there doesn't have to be continuous tweaking between distros to get software recompiled and working specifically on those distros or recompiling of non-standard kernel modules every single time the kernel updates a patch revision number is 'arrogant and paranoid'?

Funnily enough I continue to recommend Ubuntu to people wanting to try out Linux because it's guaranteed to need the least hand-holding and digging around in config files to get it working and they don't give a toss about application order so long as the applications work without problems. I'm honestly not sure you've actually met any of these 'common people' because I never hear any complaints about splash-screens, login screens (it's GDM, what's the problem with that?) or menus, I hear complaints about sound not working, XCB locking errors, 'I resized my partitions with Partition Magic' errors and 'shared folders don't work in VirtualBox' errors (yes, that's Ubuntu specific).

It's attitudes like yours that would kill any chance of Linux making it on the desktop if they had their way because the first thing any 'common' (what is this, an Orwellian novel?) or business person wants from any desktop O/S is <u>never having to deal with the O/S</u> which, with LSB and the efforts of the Ubuntu team might actually happen one day.

[Falling-Inferno]

I am 14, I learned Windows systems at a young age (9) But people now can't figure out how to use windows yet how to learn a Harder OS(Linux Distros) I mean I got confused when I started Compiling and Packaging they need to make it simpler