6 ms·

Without improving Linux on the desktop[1], implementations like Limux are bound to take this route. [1] http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.f

by arunc 9y ago

Without improving Linux on the desktop[1], implementations like Limux are bound to take this route. [1] http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.th...

e1ven 9y ago
There is a LOT that can be done to improve desktop linux, but I think in this case, at least according to the article, the difficulties were largely political, not technical.
- soulbadguy 9y ago
  That wasn't my read of the situation. Bottom line is, the administration realize that the cost savings promised might not materialized, and that most of IT problems could be resolved more cheaply by just moving to better version of windows
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
  In the general case, though, I think the biggest problem is that the community that uses and works on the Linux Desktop doesn't actually want it to improve. If you're an open source developer, for instance, why would you work to improve or maintain software X when you can create an alternative that does things slightly differently? That looks a lot more impressive on a resume. And I'd swear many Linux Desktop users wish it was even more complicated and fragile either because they love troubleshooting or just so they can virtue signal that they're leet. I mean, why else would /r/unixporn exist?
  - amcca029 9y ago
    I think this is largely an issue with X rather than users wanting to show off, I think wayland (while not perfect) can really help with developing easy to use desktop enviroments. Also not everybody who uses "complicated" setups care about "leetness", personally I use i3 (and alot of mods, customizations) because nothing compares to the ease of use + functionality for me. I personally want more linux desktop adoption, Ive switched my parents over, trying to convert my brother.
    - vidarh 9y ago
      One of the things that has struck me with getting used to i3, even after a decade and a half "faking it" by mostly running apps maximized anyway, is that it is changing my thinking, not least due to the API. E.g. I recently started writing a text editor (because, why not), and it struck me that I really don't have a reason to support multiple windows. I added "splitting buffers" today by having it exec i3-msg to start another copy of itself. I think what is really hampering Linux on the desktop is trying to play catch-up with Windows and OS X instead of rethinking the processes.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
      I suspect you'd have been better off switching them to ChromeOS. Most people do not need a desktop in 2017. There was only a brief window in the late 90s and early aughties when "most" people did, but that was only because of the internet. We have better consumer-oriented devices for that now. Desktops are for people who do work, hobbyists, developers, and the kind of gamer who is basically the hotrod-guy of the computing world. If someone actually wants to make the Linux Desktop a good desktop OS, they'll have to stop trying to make things "easy" for the strawman of the "average" user and instead make something for those people.
      - danieldk 9y ago
        While I largely agree with your observation, the problem with ChromeOS is that not everybody wants to ship their behavioral data in real-time to Google. So, there is is still a place for a basic Linux-based family desktop that just runs a privacy-friendly browser.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
        That's not a desktop, it's a kiosk. Linux is actually fine for these kinds of single-tasking embedded use-cases. But seriously, who does that? I don't know anyone who primarily uses a desktop computer just to browse the web. That's what tablets and phones are for. ChromeOS is just one of those with a bigger screen and a keyboard, which is why it is perfect for them. "Family desktop" was only a thing in the brief period between the internet becoming popular with consumers and the first iPhone. Outside of that period, multi-user desktops (or microcomputers, if you recall the 80s) are an extreme edge case.
  - snerbles 9y ago
    > If you're an open source developer, for instance, why would you work to improve or maintain software X when you can create an alternative that does things slightly differently? That looks a lot more impressive on a resume. One could argue that this is one of the driving causes behind the current JavaScript churn madness.
- ThrowawayR2 9y ago
  > the difficulties were largely political, not technical Not all of the difficulties were political. Quoting from the article: "... Along the way, it was reported that 20% of the users of Limux were not happy or satisfied with it; other reports had the number at 40%. ..."
pjmlp 9y ago
Quite true. Slackware 2.0 was my first distribution, and after a decade of FOSS zealotry, I just gave up and went back to Windows. Linux on laptops is still an hit and miss, specially in what concerns graphic, hybrid GPUs and power savings.
- nextos 9y ago
  I think you need to cherry pick hardware. My last two laptops have given me the best software/hardware experience ever, even better than Tiger/Leopard days on MacBooks, and they run Linux. Three tricks: i) cherry pick hardware (all Intel); ii) minimal userspace (tiled wm + firefox + emacs + terminal); iii) distros you build & customize from the ground up (arch/slack/nix/guix). All those together remove a lot of complexity vs a regular desktop setup, so few moving parts that can break. Furthermore, the ability nix gives to set up the system / configure packages declaratively and have the possibility to rollback is a total killer feature. Moving to MacOS or Windows would feel like a huge step backwards due to this feature alone. The absence of decent tiling window managers on those platforms is also a dealbreaker for me.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Not even that helps. Netbooks were released each with its own Linux flavour, thanks to lack of driver ABI, it was almost impossible to replace them with more common distributions. I have an Asus 1516B, sold with Ubuntu, that I had to fight with Firefox for proper hardware acceleration and being able to wake after hibernation. A Dell developer laptop could have been another option, but they are always unavailable in European shops. Intel GPUs are no match for good 3D acceleration, case in point, what they just announced with AMD. Windows can also rollback without issues, just keep the snapshots and shadow file system configured. OS X can easily rollback with Time Machine.
    - nextos 9y ago
      > Intel GPUs are no match for good 3D acceleration, case in point, what they just announced with AMD. For regular tasks I find Intel GPUs great. Plus they consume little power. NVIDIA is also OK on the open Nouveau driver. And when I do deep learning on a workstation, NVIDIA's closed drivers are good. > Windows can also rollback without issues, just keep the snapshots and shadow file system configured. Nix rollbacks have absolutely nothing to do with filesystem-level rollbacks.
komali2 9y ago
The thing is I love linux on a desktop (if by desktop we mean not-a-server and thus laptops are in context as well), in fact I prefer it over OSX... right up until I plug in an external monitor, or try to do a video chat only to realize a driver literally does not exist for my MBP camera, or my IDE just kinda flickers randomly for no discernible reason, ec. Walled-garden hardware like Apple has set up certainly has advantages, but given that windows is installed on a far greater variety of hardware than linux distros, I'm kinda surprised its more stable. I guess other than the obvious fact that everybody working on a given linux distro is doing it for free (right? that's my impression). Most of my troubles vanished when I switched from Ubuntu to Debian. Only been about two weeks but loving it so far. Might finally be able to abandon OSX! (note: I'm a total noob when it comes to OSs and whatnot - not that kind of programmer!)
- porfirium 9y ago
  >I guess other than the obvious fact that everybody working on a given linux distro is doing it for free (right? that's my impression). People working on most components of the desktop Linux stack are being paid for it. Think kernel -> video drivers -> systemd -> wayland -> GNOME. All of those groups have paid employees. They are evidently understaffed.
  - komali2 9y ago
    Wait, really? By who? For what reason?
    - ivanbakel 9y ago
      >For what reason? If your programmers can make your project their job, you don't have to worry about the amount of time they have to contribute.
    - watwut 9y ago
      RedHat would be one company that pays for that. FOSS has yearly report on such things, if you want to google it. (I am too lazy now)
ams6110 9y ago
Government users do not generally need sophisticated desktops. Most of them probably handle the same documents and work with the same systems all day, every day with few deviations.

by arunc 9y ago

e1ven 9y ago

There is a LOT that can be done to improve desktop linux, but I think in this case, at least according to the article, the difficulties were largely political, not technical.

soulbadguy 9y ago
That wasn't my read of the situation. Bottom line is, the administration realize that the cost savings promised might not materialized, and that most of IT problems could be resolved more cheaply by just moving to better version of windows
AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
In the general case, though, I think the biggest problem is that the community that uses and works on the Linux Desktop doesn't actually want it to improve. If you're an open source developer, for instance, why would you work to improve or maintain software X when you can create an alternative that does things slightly differently? That looks a lot more impressive on a resume. And I'd swear many Linux Desktop users wish it was even more complicated and fragile either because they love troubleshooting or just so they can virtue signal that they're leet. I mean, why else would /r/unixporn exist?
- amcca029 9y ago
  I think this is largely an issue with X rather than users wanting to show off, I think wayland (while not perfect) can really help with developing easy to use desktop enviroments. Also not everybody who uses "complicated" setups care about "leetness", personally I use i3 (and alot of mods, customizations) because nothing compares to the ease of use + functionality for me. I personally want more linux desktop adoption, Ive switched my parents over, trying to convert my brother.
  - vidarh 9y ago
    One of the things that has struck me with getting used to i3, even after a decade and a half "faking it" by mostly running apps maximized anyway, is that it is changing my thinking, not least due to the API. E.g. I recently started writing a text editor (because, why not), and it struck me that I really don't have a reason to support multiple windows. I added "splitting buffers" today by having it exec i3-msg to start another copy of itself. I think what is really hampering Linux on the desktop is trying to play catch-up with Windows and OS X instead of rethinking the processes.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
    I suspect you'd have been better off switching them to ChromeOS. Most people do not need a desktop in 2017. There was only a brief window in the late 90s and early aughties when "most" people did, but that was only because of the internet. We have better consumer-oriented devices for that now. Desktops are for people who do work, hobbyists, developers, and the kind of gamer who is basically the hotrod-guy of the computing world. If someone actually wants to make the Linux Desktop a good desktop OS, they'll have to stop trying to make things "easy" for the strawman of the "average" user and instead make something for those people.
    - danieldk 9y ago
      While I largely agree with your observation, the problem with ChromeOS is that not everybody wants to ship their behavioral data in real-time to Google. So, there is is still a place for a basic Linux-based family desktop that just runs a privacy-friendly browser.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
        That's not a desktop, it's a kiosk. Linux is actually fine for these kinds of single-tasking embedded use-cases. But seriously, who does that? I don't know anyone who primarily uses a desktop computer just to browse the web. That's what tablets and phones are for. ChromeOS is just one of those with a bigger screen and a keyboard, which is why it is perfect for them. "Family desktop" was only a thing in the brief period between the internet becoming popular with consumers and the first iPhone. Outside of that period, multi-user desktops (or microcomputers, if you recall the 80s) are an extreme edge case.
- snerbles 9y ago
  > If you're an open source developer, for instance, why would you work to improve or maintain software X when you can create an alternative that does things slightly differently? That looks a lot more impressive on a resume. One could argue that this is one of the driving causes behind the current JavaScript churn madness.
ThrowawayR2 9y ago
> the difficulties were largely political, not technical Not all of the difficulties were political. Quoting from the article: "... Along the way, it was reported that 20% of the users of Limux were not happy or satisfied with it; other reports had the number at 40%. ..."

pjmlp 9y ago

Quite true. Slackware 2.0 was my first distribution, and after a decade of FOSS zealotry, I just gave up and went back to Windows. Linux on laptops is still an hit and miss, specially in what concerns graphic, hybrid GPUs and power savings.

nextos 9y ago
I think you need to cherry pick hardware. My last two laptops have given me the best software/hardware experience ever, even better than Tiger/Leopard days on MacBooks, and they run Linux. Three tricks: i) cherry pick hardware (all Intel); ii) minimal userspace (tiled wm + firefox + emacs + terminal); iii) distros you build & customize from the ground up (arch/slack/nix/guix). All those together remove a lot of complexity vs a regular desktop setup, so few moving parts that can break. Furthermore, the ability nix gives to set up the system / configure packages declaratively and have the possibility to rollback is a total killer feature. Moving to MacOS or Windows would feel like a huge step backwards due to this feature alone. The absence of decent tiling window managers on those platforms is also a dealbreaker for me.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Not even that helps. Netbooks were released each with its own Linux flavour, thanks to lack of driver ABI, it was almost impossible to replace them with more common distributions. I have an Asus 1516B, sold with Ubuntu, that I had to fight with Firefox for proper hardware acceleration and being able to wake after hibernation. A Dell developer laptop could have been another option, but they are always unavailable in European shops. Intel GPUs are no match for good 3D acceleration, case in point, what they just announced with AMD. Windows can also rollback without issues, just keep the snapshots and shadow file system configured. OS X can easily rollback with Time Machine.
  - nextos 9y ago
    > Intel GPUs are no match for good 3D acceleration, case in point, what they just announced with AMD. For regular tasks I find Intel GPUs great. Plus they consume little power. NVIDIA is also OK on the open Nouveau driver. And when I do deep learning on a workstation, NVIDIA's closed drivers are good. > Windows can also rollback without issues, just keep the snapshots and shadow file system configured. Nix rollbacks have absolutely nothing to do with filesystem-level rollbacks.

komali2 9y ago

The thing is I love linux on a desktop (if by desktop we mean not-a-server and thus laptops are in context as well), in fact I prefer it over OSX... right up until I plug in an external monitor, or try to do a video chat only to realize a driver literally does not exist for my MBP camera, or my IDE just kinda flickers randomly for no discernible reason, ec. Walled-garden hardware like Apple has set up certainly has advantages, but given that windows is installed on a far greater variety of hardware than linux distros, I'm kinda surprised its more stable. I guess other than the obvious fact that everybody working on a given linux distro is doing it for free (right? that's my impression). Most of my troubles vanished when I switched from Ubuntu to Debian. Only been about two weeks but loving it so far. Might finally be able to abandon OSX! (note: I'm a total noob when it comes to OSs and whatnot - not that kind of programmer!)

porfirium 9y ago
>I guess other than the obvious fact that everybody working on a given linux distro is doing it for free (right? that's my impression). People working on most components of the desktop Linux stack are being paid for it. Think kernel -> video drivers -> systemd -> wayland -> GNOME. All of those groups have paid employees. They are evidently understaffed.
- komali2 9y ago
  Wait, really? By who? For what reason?
  - ivanbakel 9y ago
    >For what reason? If your programmers can make your project their job, you don't have to worry about the amount of time they have to contribute.
  - watwut 9y ago
    RedHat would be one company that pays for that. FOSS has yearly report on such things, if you want to google it. (I am too lazy now)

ams6110 9y ago

Government users do not generally need sophisticated desktops. Most of them probably handle the same documents and work with the same systems all day, every day with few deviations.