6 ms·

I keep seeing this angst over whether Linux will ever be ready on the desktop. Well, I've been using it exclusively for something like 15 years.

toong 7y ago
Me too, since 2004 with Fedora 3 back then. And I'm growing more and more frustrated with it the last few years. Maybe I just have less time and patience nowadays :-)
- cookiecaper 7y ago
  I was on Linux desktop 99% of the time between 2006 and 2014 (I now use a Windows workspace with GPU passthrough on my main system), and just today my frustration with Windows was piquing to the extent that I'm ready to go back to a nix desktop. Maybe people just get fed up with the same grating pain points and need to spread the frustration around. Periodic changes in scenery are healthy. :)
- cmiles74 7y ago
  Windows and MacOS have their frustrating points as well, I don't think any of these systems are perfect. I suspect the vast majority of computer using people could get by with a Linux desktop with about the same amount of frustration they suffer already. At least on Linux I can fix the things that are really making me nuts.
gorio 7y ago
So your opinion is that it's ready?
- goodcanadian 7y ago
  For most purposes, it has been ready for years. There are a handful of proprietary programs that individual people may need for work that aren't available, and you aren't going to be able to play the latest games on Linux. Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso.
  - gorio 7y ago
    Then we disagree. Linux works until is doesn't, which is the problem. It isn't a handful of programs so much as a wide range of capabilities. We can all speculate the taste of the average user, but do you think companies wouldn't love running desktop Linux instead of paying millions to Microsoft? That is what everyone did when Linux actually became good enough as a server OS.
    - goodcanadian 7y ago
      I guess we do, as I've said elsewhere, it has literally been years since I've encountered anything I couldn't do on Linux just the same as on Windows. I firmly believe the reason more organisations haven't changed is inertia. To paraphrase a cliché, no one was ever fired for choosing Microsoft.
      - gorio 7y ago
        I don't see how inertia would be the reason if you also believe that it has been good enough for 15 years. I would say desktop Linux simply doesn't offer enough unique value for the effort involved in large scale deployments, unless you are someone like Google. Most things that have improved for users in recent years, like web application, actually favours Windows. Because the primary use case for desktop operating systems are becoming what is beyond that of web or smart phone applications. Leaving desktop Linux with the lowest common denominator.
        goodcanadian 7y ago
        I said I've used it for 15 years not that it would've necessarily been a good choice for a non-technical user that long ago. On the other hand, non-technical users usually require significant IT support on Windows as well. That's where inertia comes in. Linux may not offer a significant value proposition over Windows, so Windows stays. That doesn't necessarily mean Windows offers a significant value proposition over Linux either. Inertia.
        7y ago
jasode 7y ago
>I keep seeing this angst over whether Linux will ever be ready on the desktop. Well, I've been using it exclusively for something like 15 years. >For most purposes, it has been ready for years.[...] Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso. If "most people" includes non-technical users, I doubt they could switch to Linux without difficulties. E.g. a typical non-geek user might be my friend that runs Windows. Some examples of showstoppers that makes Linux totally a non-option: - Intuit Quicken which she's been using for 20 years. Yes Linux Mint was a possible alternative but its early releases (inside of your 15-year time period) didn't have reliable online downloads from financial institutions. Mint's later partnership with Yodlee api for transaction downloads still didn't make it equal to Quicken. Yes, Quicken is terrible and buggy software but early Mint was even worse for online banking scenarios. - Netflix streaming was not easy to run on Linux until recently[0] - AAA games (including recent ones like Fortnite) don't run easily on Linux. Valve Steam Proton is a recent effort. - iPhone sync with Apple iTunes - running on Linux requires googling for articles of running a Windows vm or Rhythmbox on Ubuntu which may not work with certain iOS updates - sewing machine embroidery software all runs on Windows and not Linux or even MacOS. The software also requires a dongle for copy-protection and the hardware drivers for the dongles only exist for Windows. Running Windows as a vm inside of a Linux Desktop and exposing the host USB port to the client vm won't fool the dongle software. If the ultimate solution to "Windows in a virtual machine" shortfalls is to dual-boot Windows and Linux, that advanced configuration adds more complexity and it contradicts the ideal of "run Linux desktop exclusively". For people to run Linux without issue, the person would need to possess technical skills equivalent to you (e.g. a HN poster) -- or the person has a "guardian angel" as on-call tech support (e.g. a son/daughter/friend) to get them over technical issues (like Netflix) with workarounds. I don't doubt you've been able to run Linux exclusively and there are more examples like you. Nevertheless, it still required a very atypical usage profile to run a Linux desktop exclusively for the last 15 years. Even today in 2019, I would not recommend the Linux desktop to any of my non-programmer and non-sysadmin type of friends & family unless I was willing to be their on-call tech support to handle their inevitable Windows compatibility issues. For Linux to work in a mass-consumer-facing situation, it has to be an "appliance" type of installation and "invisible" such that the user doesn't realize they're running Linux. E.g. as the underlying os in Android smartphones, or the os in smart TVs, or the os in Tesla cars. [0] https://itsfoss.com/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-linux/ https://itsfoss.com/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-linux/
imetatroll 7y ago
I too have been using it as my primary OS even when gaming for years now too. No issues. In fact I would recommend it for anyone who only uses their computer for general, basic use.
- xnyan 7y ago
  When people on hacker news say "no problems" what I have found is they generally mean "no problems I don't consider trivial or easy to handle." We are far, far past the point where the general population is going to spend effort to learn about something as simple as using apt-update or even a GUI application update manager, ever. Phone operating systems give the user everything they care about (mostly content consumption, a little creation) without having to read or learn anything. If you ask that of people (to read and learn about an operating system) it's a non-starter for >80% of users. For general, basic use I would recommend a chromebook or ipad. That's what most people are looking for - something that lets them do the handful of things they want to do with as little overhead as possible.

toong 7y ago

Me too, since 2004 with Fedora 3 back then. And I'm growing more and more frustrated with it the last few years. Maybe I just have less time and patience nowadays :-)

cookiecaper 7y ago
I was on Linux desktop 99% of the time between 2006 and 2014 (I now use a Windows workspace with GPU passthrough on my main system), and just today my frustration with Windows was piquing to the extent that I'm ready to go back to a nix desktop. Maybe people just get fed up with the same grating pain points and need to spread the frustration around. Periodic changes in scenery are healthy. :)
cmiles74 7y ago
Windows and MacOS have their frustrating points as well, I don't think any of these systems are perfect. I suspect the vast majority of computer using people could get by with a Linux desktop with about the same amount of frustration they suffer already. At least on Linux I can fix the things that are really making me nuts.

gorio 7y ago

So your opinion is that it's ready?

goodcanadian 7y ago
For most purposes, it has been ready for years. There are a handful of proprietary programs that individual people may need for work that aren't available, and you aren't going to be able to play the latest games on Linux. Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso.
- gorio 7y ago
  Then we disagree. Linux works until is doesn't, which is the problem. It isn't a handful of programs so much as a wide range of capabilities. We can all speculate the taste of the average user, but do you think companies wouldn't love running desktop Linux instead of paying millions to Microsoft? That is what everyone did when Linux actually became good enough as a server OS.
  - goodcanadian 7y ago
    I guess we do, as I've said elsewhere, it has literally been years since I've encountered anything I couldn't do on Linux just the same as on Windows. I firmly believe the reason more organisations haven't changed is inertia. To paraphrase a cliché, no one was ever fired for choosing Microsoft.
    - gorio 7y ago
      I don't see how inertia would be the reason if you also believe that it has been good enough for 15 years. I would say desktop Linux simply doesn't offer enough unique value for the effort involved in large scale deployments, unless you are someone like Google. Most things that have improved for users in recent years, like web application, actually favours Windows. Because the primary use case for desktop operating systems are becoming what is beyond that of web or smart phone applications. Leaving desktop Linux with the lowest common denominator.
      - goodcanadian 7y ago
        I said I've used it for 15 years not that it would've necessarily been a good choice for a non-technical user that long ago. On the other hand, non-technical users usually require significant IT support on Windows as well. That's where inertia comes in. Linux may not offer a significant value proposition over Windows, so Windows stays. That doesn't necessarily mean Windows offers a significant value proposition over Linux either. Inertia.
        7y ago

jasode 7y ago

>I keep seeing this angst over whether Linux will ever be ready on the desktop. Well, I've been using it exclusively for something like 15 years. >For most purposes, it has been ready for years.[...] Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso. If "most people" includes non-technical users, I doubt they could switch to Linux without difficulties. E.g. a typical non-geek user might be my friend that runs Windows. Some examples of showstoppers that makes Linux totally a non-option: - Intuit Quicken which she's been using for 20 years. Yes Linux Mint was a possible alternative but its early releases (inside of your 15-year time period) didn't have reliable online downloads from financial institutions. Mint's later partnership with Yodlee api for transaction downloads still didn't make it equal to Quicken. Yes, Quicken is terrible and buggy software but early Mint was even worse for online banking scenarios. - Netflix streaming was not easy to run on Linux until recently[0] - AAA games (including recent ones like Fortnite) don't run easily on Linux. Valve Steam Proton is a recent effort. - iPhone sync with Apple iTunes - running on Linux requires googling for articles of running a Windows vm or Rhythmbox on Ubuntu which may not work with certain iOS updates - sewing machine embroidery software all runs on Windows and not Linux or even MacOS. The software also requires a dongle for copy-protection and the hardware drivers for the dongles only exist for Windows. Running Windows as a vm inside of a Linux Desktop and exposing the host USB port to the client vm won't fool the dongle software. If the ultimate solution to "Windows in a virtual machine" shortfalls is to dual-boot Windows and Linux, that advanced configuration adds more complexity and it contradicts the ideal of "run Linux desktop exclusively". For people to run Linux without issue, the person would need to possess technical skills equivalent to you (e.g. a HN poster) -- or the person has a "guardian angel" as on-call tech support (e.g. a son/daughter/friend) to get them over technical issues (like Netflix) with workarounds. I don't doubt you've been able to run Linux exclusively and there are more examples like you. Nevertheless, it still required a very atypical usage profile to run a Linux desktop exclusively for the last 15 years. Even today in 2019, I would not recommend the Linux desktop to any of my non-programmer and non-sysadmin type of friends & family unless I was willing to be their on-call tech support to handle their inevitable Windows compatibility issues. For Linux to work in a mass-consumer-facing situation, it has to be an "appliance" type of installation and "invisible" such that the user doesn't realize they're running Linux. E.g. as the underlying os in Android smartphones, or the os in smart TVs, or the os in Tesla cars. [0] https://itsfoss.com/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-linux/ https://itsfoss.com/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-linux/

imetatroll 7y ago

I too have been using it as my primary OS even when gaming for years now too. No issues. In fact I would recommend it for anyone who only uses their computer for general, basic use.

xnyan 7y ago
When people on hacker news say "no problems" what I have found is they generally mean "no problems I don't consider trivial or easy to handle." We are far, far past the point where the general population is going to spend effort to learn about something as simple as using apt-update or even a GUI application update manager, ever. Phone operating systems give the user everything they care about (mostly content consumption, a little creation) without having to read or learn anything. If you ask that of people (to read and learn about an operating system) it's a non-starter for >80% of users. For general, basic use I would recommend a chromebook or ipad. That's what most people are looking for - something that lets them do the handful of things they want to do with as little overhead as possible.