8 ms·

I think the "Year of Linux on the desktop" thing is BS and needs to stop. It's been the year of Linux on the desktop for 15 years now. Can't GNU/Linux just be

I think the "Year of Linux on the desktop" thing is BS and needs to stop. It's been the year of Linux on the desktop for 15 years now. Can't GNU/Linux just be a solid server platform? Not trying to be a troll, but if someone says "the year of Linux on the desktop" one more time...

enedil 11y ago
Linux is important on dekstops to thrive. I've successfully transitioned my parents to Linux. What I got? Deser maintainance, more reliability, everything just works for them. And of course, sticking to proprietary solutions in a long run would be rather a sick idea.
- bhouston 11y ago
  Linux derivatives rule the mobile space spo in essence it won really big. The desktop is not that impoortant. And so many of its paradigms are quite dated compared to the mobile experience.
  - michaelmrose 11y ago
    The mobile experience is in a lot of ways absolute garbage designed by incompetents. That the dominate platforms have any customers at all just illustrates how mediocre the entire software industry is. If software were medicine we would still be leeching people and learning about the miasma theory of germs.
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    Android/Linux could become tomorrow Android/BSD or Android/QNX, Android/Almost POSIX Kernel and only OEMs and people using undocumented APIs would notice.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  > Linux is important on dekstops to thrive. That's what distros are for. The "Linux" family of operating systems are used for a very wide variety of uses, some of which are orthogonal (and sometimes incompatible) with "desktop" features. Something like "Year of the KDE desktop" or "Year of the Linux Mint desktop" would make much more sense than trying to shove all of Linux into one pigeon hole. In fact, even within "desktop" there is variation. While an easy to use, mostly automagic desktop is a good idea, that's not the only definition of "desktop". Ultimately, this is the the biggest problem with the idea of "THE Linux desktop"[1]: one size never fits all. Fortunately, Linux distributions exist[2] allowing for great variety - including "everything just works" desktop distributions. Just remember that the Linux ecosystem is larger than one type of distro. [1] and systemd, and 15+ years ago the "desktop environments" that insisted there should be only one GUI toolkit, etc [2] This assumes distros decide to keep their own identity instead of continuing on the homogeneity bandwagon that many joined when they converted to systemd. Turning into a clone of Red Hat is the path to obsolescence.
- threatofrain 11y ago
  I think that pretty soon features backed by machine learning and mass data collection, features like intention comprehension and prediction or voice command/search, will be commonplace and hotly desired by users. When that happens, I don't think the Canonical or Redhat will be able to compete, and only Google will be able to create an OS on top of Linux, and open-sourcing won't do any good because the most important services will be behind Google servers.
chrisper 11y ago
Linux on the desktop is now a lot easier than it was 10 years ago. I just recently switched to Linux Desktop after having it used on servers for a lot longer.
unethical_ban 11y ago
I believe that broad games support and GPU driver support in the past two years has made Linux more viable for a lot of the kind of people who might not install it. I have been running a linux-only household for a year now. Offices most certainly could run linux only if they weren't chickenshit (I mostly kid, but after seeing how broken the desktop management model is now anyway, I don't see why Linux can't be used more in Corporate.)
threatofrain 11y ago
I also think that desktop vs server are two different domains. The desktop / personal user domain is looking like it's in the early stages of transformation, with mass data collection to support voice search and user intent prediction. While there's something to be said for privacy, I don't think consumers will care enough, and I don't think desktop linux systems outside of whatever Google may make is going to be adequately competitive. This will likely not be a server concern. Engineers probably won't be interested in a service that opaquely collects data and sends it off to remote locations just so that they can say, "Cortana, run the Ansible script to redeploy my API server." But desktop users would find value in saying, "Cortana, move all email from unknown entities to my todo list."
- uxcn 11y ago
  Linux is just source for a kernel that the userland for the various distributions are built on though. It's already largely on people's phones with Android. In fact, Chrome OS is based on Linux.
  - threatofrain 11y ago
    That appears to validate my belief that only Google can competitively take the Linux kernel and build atop it a software stack known as a desktop/mobile/user operating system. And if my assertion that intention prediction and voice search will be competitive features for users, features that rely on mass data collection and expensive top talent, then I think organizations like Canonical or RedHat will fall behind in the desktop/mobile/user os space.
    - tdy721 11y ago
      I tend to mix up Linux and Unix and that might be the issue here... But isn't the `Apple Garden` (OSX and iOS) an example of a desktop/mobile/user operating system built on Linux? Apple's no M$, but they are certainly competitive.
      - threatofrain 11y ago
ossreality 11y ago
Man you people drive me nuts. Here I've been using Linux on the desktop for 6 years. Y'all spend more time being blowhards about Linux on the desktop than I've ever spent "fighting" anything in Linux.

enedil 11y ago

Linux is important on dekstops to thrive. I've successfully transitioned my parents to Linux. What I got? Deser maintainance, more reliability, everything just works for them. And of course, sticking to proprietary solutions in a long run would be rather a sick idea.

bhouston 11y ago
Linux derivatives rule the mobile space spo in essence it won really big. The desktop is not that impoortant. And so many of its paradigms are quite dated compared to the mobile experience.
- michaelmrose 11y ago
  The mobile experience is in a lot of ways absolute garbage designed by incompetents. That the dominate platforms have any customers at all just illustrates how mediocre the entire software industry is. If software were medicine we would still be leeching people and learning about the miasma theory of germs.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Android/Linux could become tomorrow Android/BSD or Android/QNX, Android/Almost POSIX Kernel and only OEMs and people using undocumented APIs would notice.
pdkl95 11y ago
> Linux is important on dekstops to thrive. That's what distros are for. The "Linux" family of operating systems are used for a very wide variety of uses, some of which are orthogonal (and sometimes incompatible) with "desktop" features. Something like "Year of the KDE desktop" or "Year of the Linux Mint desktop" would make much more sense than trying to shove all of Linux into one pigeon hole. In fact, even within "desktop" there is variation. While an easy to use, mostly automagic desktop is a good idea, that's not the only definition of "desktop". Ultimately, this is the the biggest problem with the idea of "THE Linux desktop"[1]: one size never fits all. Fortunately, Linux distributions exist[2] allowing for great variety - including "everything just works" desktop distributions. Just remember that the Linux ecosystem is larger than one type of distro. [1] and systemd, and 15+ years ago the "desktop environments" that insisted there should be only one GUI toolkit, etc [2] This assumes distros decide to keep their own identity instead of continuing on the homogeneity bandwagon that many joined when they converted to systemd. Turning into a clone of Red Hat is the path to obsolescence.
threatofrain 11y ago
I think that pretty soon features backed by machine learning and mass data collection, features like intention comprehension and prediction or voice command/search, will be commonplace and hotly desired by users. When that happens, I don't think the Canonical or Redhat will be able to compete, and only Google will be able to create an OS on top of Linux, and open-sourcing won't do any good because the most important services will be behind Google servers.

chrisper 11y ago

Linux on the desktop is now a lot easier than it was 10 years ago. I just recently switched to Linux Desktop after having it used on servers for a lot longer.

unethical_ban 11y ago

I believe that broad games support and GPU driver support in the past two years has made Linux more viable for a lot of the kind of people who might not install it. I have been running a linux-only household for a year now. Offices most certainly could run linux only if they weren't chickenshit (I mostly kid, but after seeing how broken the desktop management model is now anyway, I don't see why Linux can't be used more in Corporate.)

threatofrain 11y ago

I also think that desktop vs server are two different domains. The desktop / personal user domain is looking like it's in the early stages of transformation, with mass data collection to support voice search and user intent prediction. While there's something to be said for privacy, I don't think consumers will care enough, and I don't think desktop linux systems outside of whatever Google may make is going to be adequately competitive. This will likely not be a server concern. Engineers probably won't be interested in a service that opaquely collects data and sends it off to remote locations just so that they can say, "Cortana, run the Ansible script to redeploy my API server." But desktop users would find value in saying, "Cortana, move all email from unknown entities to my todo list."

uxcn 11y ago
Linux is just source for a kernel that the userland for the various distributions are built on though. It's already largely on people's phones with Android. In fact, Chrome OS is based on Linux.
- threatofrain 11y ago
  That appears to validate my belief that only Google can competitively take the Linux kernel and build atop it a software stack known as a desktop/mobile/user operating system. And if my assertion that intention prediction and voice search will be competitive features for users, features that rely on mass data collection and expensive top talent, then I think organizations like Canonical or RedHat will fall behind in the desktop/mobile/user os space.
  - tdy721 11y ago
    I tend to mix up Linux and Unix and that might be the issue here... But isn't the `Apple Garden` (OSX and iOS) an example of a desktop/mobile/user operating system built on Linux? Apple's no M$, but they are certainly competitive.
    - threatofrain 11y ago

ossreality 11y ago

Man you people drive me nuts. Here I've been using Linux on the desktop for 6 years. Y'all spend more time being blowhards about Linux on the desktop than I've ever spent "fighting" anything in Linux.