6 ms·

>and for selling a crappy (at the time at least) desktop OS. The GUI of their OS at that time is still superior to what linux desktop provides us with today.

coldtea 8y ago
I wont disagree. But the OS was also full of holes (pre-XP: 95, 98, ME), programs would take down the whole system, updates required tons of restarts, and several other issues (BSOD, etc). People use to make memes against Windows, without even being Linux users: regular Windows users were frustrated. Linux desktop efforts never managed to get a coherent vision, as every 3-4 years somebody had the idea to remake everything and screw compatibility (Gnome 1 to 2, 2 to 3, KDE 1 to 2 to 3 to 4, etc, lots of critical desktop apps changing for no reason, others abandoned, etc. And don't get me started on the audio drivers situation back then, or how it took until 2019 and we still don't have a solid X replacement thats adopted by everybody).
- emilsedgh 8y ago
  > Linux desktop efforts never managed to get a coherent vision, as every 3-4 years somebody had the idea to remake everything and screw compatibility That's not why Linux Desktop never got traction. Linux on Server got traction because thousands of companies all around the world managed to profit from it. A whole ecosystem was created. When Linux on Desktop was born, Microsoft's platform was already an ecosystem all around the world. Hundreds of thousands of companies had developed applications for MS-DOS and were invested in Microsoft's ecosystem and users had already learnt the paradigms. Clients were already locked-in on Windows. Also, the situation regarding compatibility on Linux is not that different on Windows. KDE changed API 4 times in 25 years. Windows also changed a lot. Visual Basic, WinForms, SilverLight, etc. Actually windows abandoned more API's than KDE and Gnome did. And you can still build a KDE 1 and statically build and ship it (just like apps in Windows) and it will still run fine. [0] KDE and Gnome have always been largely volunteered projects. Of course ~500 volunteered developers who develop something on their free time cannot compete with a worldwide ecosystem. [0] https://www.heliocastro.info/?p=291 https://www.heliocastro.info/?p=291
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >That's not why Linux Desktop never got traction. When Linux on Desktop was born, Microsoft's platform was already an ecosystem all around the world. Hundreds of thousands of companies had developed applications for MS-DOS and were invested in Microsoft's ecosystem and users had already learnt the paradigms. Clients were already locked-in on Windows. That didn't prevent OS X, from a near bankrupt company in 1998-99 with ~2% of PCs in the US, to get to ~10-15% in the same timespan. And that while still introducing a whole new OS in 2000, and changing CPU architecture in 2005. Plus, what I described has been described as the reason Linux didn't get traction by both Linus and Eric Raymond, for what's worth. >Also, the situation regarding compatibility on Linux is not that different on Windows. KDE changed API 4 times in 25 years. Windows also changed a lot. Visual Basic, WinForms, SilverLight, etc. Actually windows abandoned more API's than KDE and Gnome did. It's not even close. MS still supports running even Win95 apps to this day, whatever they used an "abandoned API", so that's a moot point though. Old VB apps still run fine, etc. KDE and Gnome on the other hand had large incompatible changes that frustrated devs, community, and general public. Lots of devs in disfavor of the old design/techs just left the community, and those are harder to replace without a salary.
    - emilsedgh 8y ago
      > That didn't prevent OS X, from a near bankrupt company in 1998-99 with ~2% of PCs in the US, to get to ~10-15% in the same timespan. And that while still introducing a whole new OS in 2000, and changing CPU architecture in 2005. Oh my friend you're under-selling Apple. Apple, the most profitable company in the world, didn't get more than 10-15% of the market share. They didn't break any API's either. And they created their own hardware. > It's not even close. MS still supports running even Win95 apps to this day, whatever they used an "abandoned API", so that's a moot point though. Old VB apps still run fine, etc. Linux supports that too. You can still have a KDE1 app running on your Desktop. Nobody has the incentive to do that. But it's pretty doable technically. Just like it's possible to run a Visual Basic app on Windows.
      - throwaway2048 8y ago
noir_lord 8y ago
I’m sorry but I disagree, Cinnamon on Fedora is as good a desktop GUI in its day as win2k was in its and imo considerably better than win10 and I started on DOS3.22 so I’ve used them all even ME. It’s fast, stable, well laid out and very easy to configure. It also plays well with both gtk and qt apps. It took a long time but Linux did catch up it’s just by the time it did desktops are less relevant to average people.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Average people use laptops as desktops. Gtk and Qt still don't offer a full UI stack with all the Win32 features, guaranteed to be available in all customer desktops. Basic stuff comparable to DirectDraw, DirectText or a audio stack that doesn't get rebooted every now and then.
  - throwaway2048 8y ago
    nobody uses DirectDraw anymore, its a completely antiquated technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectDraw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectDraw
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Yeah, right.
      - throwaway2048 8y ago
        Considering it was last updated in the 1990s and only supports 256 colors and fullscreen, and conflicts in very annoying ways with post Vista+ desktop composition, I think its safe to declare it dead for anything except some old games. SDL is perfectly comparable, except vastly less of a clunky ancient pain in the ass. That is why almost every 2d indie game uses it and not DirectDraw, so to say linux has nothing comparable to DirectDraw is stupid.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
kelnos 8y ago
I guess that depends on what you mean by "at that time". My current Linux desktop (Xfce) is way better than Win95 or Win2k. I stopped using Windows around then, so I can't comment on WinXP or newer. I think arguably a current Linux distro/desktop designed for non-technical users is better for them than Win95 or Win2k was.
- chii 8y ago
  I (a laymen) buy a random tablet pen, and it works immediately on windows. To get it to work on linux, may be there's already a driver, may be it's not supported. Either way, it's a gamble if it works on linux. Tell me that windows isn't still better for the laymen?
  - neltnerb 8y ago
    The sheer number of times I've had issues with Windows drivers is anecdotal, but consider carefully. I've had impossible to boot systems because the network driver isn't included in the core installation media. I've had video cards not work out of the box and require me to install massively bloated control centers to use. And the number of complaints from unexpected reboots? And that's in a pretty standardized computer lab, trying to make my Grandma's computer use the correct resolution on her monitor was literally impossible. I guess it depends on how you define laymen? I think Ubuntu worked out of the box with everything I've thrown at it in years.
  - kelnos 8y ago
    Did you even read what I wrote? I literally did not say what you're asking me to defend.
sfifs 8y ago
Not at all. I very much prefer vanilla Ubuntu front end of my personal laptop to MS Windows. I am still on Win 7 on my work laptop so it is tolerable but I'm definitely going Mac instead of Win 10 abomination next upgrade.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Don't forget to get a keyboard and screen insurance on top of the premium price.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    I will, for one. I thought you were OK with paying for good stuff, like Lisp compilers/IDEs or other tooling. Suddenly it's bad to charge a premium?
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      I am quite confortable paying for stuff, do it all the time. What I don't do is to pay premium for the previlege to use keyboards that break down with a single dust particle and screens that get scratched with the laptop's own keyboard, that might not be replaced without the additional Apple Care package.

coldtea 8y ago

I wont disagree. But the OS was also full of holes (pre-XP: 95, 98, ME), programs would take down the whole system, updates required tons of restarts, and several other issues (BSOD, etc). People use to make memes against Windows, without even being Linux users: regular Windows users were frustrated. Linux desktop efforts never managed to get a coherent vision, as every 3-4 years somebody had the idea to remake everything and screw compatibility (Gnome 1 to 2, 2 to 3, KDE 1 to 2 to 3 to 4, etc, lots of critical desktop apps changing for no reason, others abandoned, etc. And don't get me started on the audio drivers situation back then, or how it took until 2019 and we still don't have a solid X replacement thats adopted by everybody).

emilsedgh 8y ago
> Linux desktop efforts never managed to get a coherent vision, as every 3-4 years somebody had the idea to remake everything and screw compatibility That's not why Linux Desktop never got traction. Linux on Server got traction because thousands of companies all around the world managed to profit from it. A whole ecosystem was created. When Linux on Desktop was born, Microsoft's platform was already an ecosystem all around the world. Hundreds of thousands of companies had developed applications for MS-DOS and were invested in Microsoft's ecosystem and users had already learnt the paradigms. Clients were already locked-in on Windows. Also, the situation regarding compatibility on Linux is not that different on Windows. KDE changed API 4 times in 25 years. Windows also changed a lot. Visual Basic, WinForms, SilverLight, etc. Actually windows abandoned more API's than KDE and Gnome did. And you can still build a KDE 1 and statically build and ship it (just like apps in Windows) and it will still run fine. [0] KDE and Gnome have always been largely volunteered projects. Of course ~500 volunteered developers who develop something on their free time cannot compete with a worldwide ecosystem. [0] https://www.heliocastro.info/?p=291 https://www.heliocastro.info/?p=291
- coldtea 8y ago
  >That's not why Linux Desktop never got traction. When Linux on Desktop was born, Microsoft's platform was already an ecosystem all around the world. Hundreds of thousands of companies had developed applications for MS-DOS and were invested in Microsoft's ecosystem and users had already learnt the paradigms. Clients were already locked-in on Windows. That didn't prevent OS X, from a near bankrupt company in 1998-99 with ~2% of PCs in the US, to get to ~10-15% in the same timespan. And that while still introducing a whole new OS in 2000, and changing CPU architecture in 2005. Plus, what I described has been described as the reason Linux didn't get traction by both Linus and Eric Raymond, for what's worth. >Also, the situation regarding compatibility on Linux is not that different on Windows. KDE changed API 4 times in 25 years. Windows also changed a lot. Visual Basic, WinForms, SilverLight, etc. Actually windows abandoned more API's than KDE and Gnome did. It's not even close. MS still supports running even Win95 apps to this day, whatever they used an "abandoned API", so that's a moot point though. Old VB apps still run fine, etc. KDE and Gnome on the other hand had large incompatible changes that frustrated devs, community, and general public. Lots of devs in disfavor of the old design/techs just left the community, and those are harder to replace without a salary.
  - emilsedgh 8y ago
    > That didn't prevent OS X, from a near bankrupt company in 1998-99 with ~2% of PCs in the US, to get to ~10-15% in the same timespan. And that while still introducing a whole new OS in 2000, and changing CPU architecture in 2005. Oh my friend you're under-selling Apple. Apple, the most profitable company in the world, didn't get more than 10-15% of the market share. They didn't break any API's either. And they created their own hardware. > It's not even close. MS still supports running even Win95 apps to this day, whatever they used an "abandoned API", so that's a moot point though. Old VB apps still run fine, etc. Linux supports that too. You can still have a KDE1 app running on your Desktop. Nobody has the incentive to do that. But it's pretty doable technically. Just like it's possible to run a Visual Basic app on Windows.
    - throwaway2048 8y ago

noir_lord 8y ago

I’m sorry but I disagree, Cinnamon on Fedora is as good a desktop GUI in its day as win2k was in its and imo considerably better than win10 and I started on DOS3.22 so I’ve used them all even ME. It’s fast, stable, well laid out and very easy to configure. It also plays well with both gtk and qt apps. It took a long time but Linux did catch up it’s just by the time it did desktops are less relevant to average people.

pjmlp 8y ago
Average people use laptops as desktops. Gtk and Qt still don't offer a full UI stack with all the Win32 features, guaranteed to be available in all customer desktops. Basic stuff comparable to DirectDraw, DirectText or a audio stack that doesn't get rebooted every now and then.
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  nobody uses DirectDraw anymore, its a completely antiquated technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectDraw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectDraw
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Yeah, right.
    - throwaway2048 8y ago
      Considering it was last updated in the 1990s and only supports 256 colors and fullscreen, and conflicts in very annoying ways with post Vista+ desktop composition, I think its safe to declare it dead for anything except some old games. SDL is perfectly comparable, except vastly less of a clunky ancient pain in the ass. That is why almost every 2d indie game uses it and not DirectDraw, so to say linux has nothing comparable to DirectDraw is stupid.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]

kelnos 8y ago

I guess that depends on what you mean by "at that time". My current Linux desktop (Xfce) is way better than Win95 or Win2k. I stopped using Windows around then, so I can't comment on WinXP or newer. I think arguably a current Linux distro/desktop designed for non-technical users is better for them than Win95 or Win2k was.

chii 8y ago
I (a laymen) buy a random tablet pen, and it works immediately on windows. To get it to work on linux, may be there's already a driver, may be it's not supported. Either way, it's a gamble if it works on linux. Tell me that windows isn't still better for the laymen?
- neltnerb 8y ago
  The sheer number of times I've had issues with Windows drivers is anecdotal, but consider carefully. I've had impossible to boot systems because the network driver isn't included in the core installation media. I've had video cards not work out of the box and require me to install massively bloated control centers to use. And the number of complaints from unexpected reboots? And that's in a pretty standardized computer lab, trying to make my Grandma's computer use the correct resolution on her monitor was literally impossible. I guess it depends on how you define laymen? I think Ubuntu worked out of the box with everything I've thrown at it in years.
- kelnos 8y ago
  Did you even read what I wrote? I literally did not say what you're asking me to defend.

sfifs 8y ago

Not at all. I very much prefer vanilla Ubuntu front end of my personal laptop to MS Windows. I am still on Win 7 on my work laptop so it is tolerable but I'm definitely going Mac instead of Win 10 abomination next upgrade.

pjmlp 8y ago
Don't forget to get a keyboard and screen insurance on top of the premium price.
- coldtea 8y ago
  I will, for one. I thought you were OK with paying for good stuff, like Lisp compilers/IDEs or other tooling. Suddenly it's bad to charge a premium?
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    I am quite confortable paying for stuff, do it all the time. What I don't do is to pay premium for the previlege to use keyboards that break down with a single dust particle and screens that get scratched with the laptop's own keyboard, that might not be replaced without the additional Apple Care package.