5 ms·

> and it will probably take a big company to actually do it The lack of a company controlling Linux is exactly why it's Linux. I am surprised that someone who

> and it will probably take a big company to actually do it The lack of a company controlling Linux is exactly why it's Linux. I am surprised that someone who is mid-career, has money, and little time doesn't know that.

sho 8y ago
Of course I know that. I'm explaining why the lack of somebody capable taking responsibility for providing a "curated" linux with a world-class UI and backing it up with deep and broad app and services ecosystem means that it won't ever be acceptable to the vast majority of desktop users, including me. Canonical has totally failed to deliver this. Maybe someone else could, maybe not. We're just speculating here.
zapzupnz 8y ago
I always saw Canonical as trying to do this, considering what pains they used to go through to not use the term 'Linux' in their marketing. They were playing things as though Ubuntu was their own platform (and in many ways, given the different ways that Ubuntu used to break compatibility with plain Debian, it was) — their own software centre, their own desktop, their own services. Many of those seem to have gone by the wayside: Unity deprecated in favour of GNOME 3, Ubuntu One dead. It makes me wonder if Canonical found out that it just can't be done, that pissing off the people involved in the projects upon which Ubuntu depends by sacrificing some of the sense of community in exchange the It Just Works™ magic towards which they have been working is ultimately a fool's game in the current ecosystem. I find that a shame. I thought Ubuntu had the potential to be a sort of macOS for Linux: built upon a free base, contributing heavily to other projects from which it takes, but also adding Ubuntu-specific stuff (still open source, of course) that disrupts the Linux desktop ecosystem to make the current other players (KDE, GNOME, Xfce, etc.) feel like amateur hour. At one time, it felt like Unity could've been Ubuntu's macOS desktop and I could swear they were heavily promoting some Python API for desktop apps that might've been to Ubuntu as Cocoa is to macOS. That also seems to have changed.
- Zardoz84 8y ago
  you know that everything that unity was doing, can be donde indica KDE if you take 20 minutes to configure it? Try to not call it "amateur"
  - zapzupnz 8y ago
    > you know that everything that unity was doing can be done in KDE […] Please re-read what I said. I said that I was hopeful that Ubuntu would create something that would make KDE and GNOME seem like amateur hour. I never said Unity was the thing for which I was hoping, merely that it was Ubuntu's attempt (which, to my mind, was a failure), and I never said KDE or GNOME __are__ amateur — although, you forced my hand with the next bit. > […] if you take 20 minutes to configure it This is exactly what I'm talking about as "amateur", though. Try thinking like a regular user, who just wants everything to work properly out of the box, rather than a technical user who might be happy wasting 20 minutes on the fruitless endeavour of getting KDE to work Just Right This Time And I Swear I Won't Spend Another Couple of Hours Reconfiguring It Again Later When I'm Bored™, because that very way of thinking is exactly why the Year of Linux Desktop will never come.
    - halbritt 8y ago
      I totally agree with your point. At some point, my threshold for irritation to run a Linux desktop dropped low enough that I was willing to make the jump. My threshold for irritation for Mac also went up. I was only willing to do so if I could install a stock standard distro and get to work without having deal with a bunch of configuration hassle. That's pretty much true for Ubuntu. However, there are a couple of issues that one may need to address that I didn't mind so much, but I readily admit, I'm not an average user. I switched when Unity was still a thing and was surprised to learn that it was pretty good with only a little refinement needed. I was pretty disappointed when Canonical dropped Unity settled on Gnome and here we are two years later at precisely the same place, with the aforementioned refinements still needed. Like you, I was hopeful that Canonical would produce a generally usable Linux desktop, but that still remains to be seen.
    - 8y ago

sho 8y ago

Of course I know that. I'm explaining why the lack of somebody capable taking responsibility for providing a "curated" linux with a world-class UI and backing it up with deep and broad app and services ecosystem means that it won't ever be acceptable to the vast majority of desktop users, including me. Canonical has totally failed to deliver this. Maybe someone else could, maybe not. We're just speculating here.

zapzupnz 8y ago

I always saw Canonical as trying to do this, considering what pains they used to go through to not use the term 'Linux' in their marketing. They were playing things as though Ubuntu was their own platform (and in many ways, given the different ways that Ubuntu used to break compatibility with plain Debian, it was) — their own software centre, their own desktop, their own services. Many of those seem to have gone by the wayside: Unity deprecated in favour of GNOME 3, Ubuntu One dead. It makes me wonder if Canonical found out that it just can't be done, that pissing off the people involved in the projects upon which Ubuntu depends by sacrificing some of the sense of community in exchange the It Just Works™ magic towards which they have been working is ultimately a fool's game in the current ecosystem. I find that a shame. I thought Ubuntu had the potential to be a sort of macOS for Linux: built upon a free base, contributing heavily to other projects from which it takes, but also adding Ubuntu-specific stuff (still open source, of course) that disrupts the Linux desktop ecosystem to make the current other players (KDE, GNOME, Xfce, etc.) feel like amateur hour. At one time, it felt like Unity could've been Ubuntu's macOS desktop and I could swear they were heavily promoting some Python API for desktop apps that might've been to Ubuntu as Cocoa is to macOS. That also seems to have changed.

Zardoz84 8y ago
you know that everything that unity was doing, can be donde indica KDE if you take 20 minutes to configure it? Try to not call it "amateur"
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  > you know that everything that unity was doing can be done in KDE […] Please re-read what I said. I said that I was hopeful that Ubuntu would create something that would make KDE and GNOME seem like amateur hour. I never said Unity was the thing for which I was hoping, merely that it was Ubuntu's attempt (which, to my mind, was a failure), and I never said KDE or GNOME __are__ amateur — although, you forced my hand with the next bit. > […] if you take 20 minutes to configure it This is exactly what I'm talking about as "amateur", though. Try thinking like a regular user, who just wants everything to work properly out of the box, rather than a technical user who might be happy wasting 20 minutes on the fruitless endeavour of getting KDE to work Just Right This Time And I Swear I Won't Spend Another Couple of Hours Reconfiguring It Again Later When I'm Bored™, because that very way of thinking is exactly why the Year of Linux Desktop will never come.
  - halbritt 8y ago
    I totally agree with your point. At some point, my threshold for irritation to run a Linux desktop dropped low enough that I was willing to make the jump. My threshold for irritation for Mac also went up. I was only willing to do so if I could install a stock standard distro and get to work without having deal with a bunch of configuration hassle. That's pretty much true for Ubuntu. However, there are a couple of issues that one may need to address that I didn't mind so much, but I readily admit, I'm not an average user. I switched when Unity was still a thing and was surprised to learn that it was pretty good with only a little refinement needed. I was pretty disappointed when Canonical dropped Unity settled on Gnome and here we are two years later at precisely the same place, with the aforementioned refinements still needed. Like you, I was hopeful that Canonical would produce a generally usable Linux desktop, but that still remains to be seen.
  - 8y ago