8 ms·

The Linux world generally seems devoid of product-thinking people, and that is probably the main reason it hasn't taken over the desktop space IMO. Plenty of fo

The Linux world generally seems devoid of product-thinking people, and that is probably the main reason it hasn't taken over the desktop space IMO. Plenty of focus on technical matters, but not much thought given to whole user stories or holistic coordination happening.

29athrowaway 5y ago
Sounds like someone who does not use Linux. Installing Linux is the easiest experience among operating systems on supported hardware. Updating Linux software is the easiest as well. Using a desktop environment like Gnome is straightforward too.
- ironmagma 5y ago
  Nice attempt there. However, I've been a user of Linux since circa 2004. (I think it'd be hard to exist here on HN long without doing so.) No, using Linux is not straightforward. Nearly every user-facing element has something broken about it.
  - 0des 5y ago
    You sound like someone who hasn't used Linux in a capacity with any permanence, your remarks are off base with reality.
    - ironmagma 5y ago
      And you sound like someone who has used Linux far too much and lost touch with what most people's experience with it is. Your remarks are similarly off base with reality.
      - 0des 5y ago
        You got me, sport
  - 29athrowaway 5y ago
    You mean like the Metro UI, the frakenstein on DMT that's impossible to understand?
    - ironmagma 5y ago
      Yes, like that. Note that two wrongs don’t make a right.
- Jorge1o1 5y ago
  Clearly you’ve never tried to update nvidia graphics card drivers, add a webcam, a printer, or run a 32-bit application on linux. Compared to Windows/Mac these simple tasks are hellish — and for nontechnical users, nearly impossible.
  - JasonFruit 5y ago
    I have done all those things. On Linux, Nvidia drivers are a royal pain, webcam and printer both worked without any effort other than hooking it up, and running a 32-bit application was not too difficult with instructions. On Windows, I've never messed with video drivers, but have had problems with the same webcam and printer requiring me to locate and install drivers, which were bundled with software I didn't want. 32-bit applications on Windows were of course a breeze. So anecdotally, it's a mixed bag. Maybe if I had less Linux experience and more Windows, the story would be different.
    - jrapdx3 5y ago
      I've had long experience with Linux, FreeBSD, and in the last 9 years with Windows too. On the whole I think you're right, it's always been a "mixed bag" when it comes to the gamut of installing, use, and upgrading an OS. Don't know the vintage of Windows you referenced, but in recent experience (Win 10/11) installing a webcam was dead simple, just plug it into a USB port. Printers used to be a gigantic hassle, but at least for the 4 printers available to my Windows laptop little configuration and no added drivers were necessary. (No doubt certain webcams or printers out there could be a pain to install in Windows.) One example: getting OBS Studio to work on Windows was pretty much a no brainer vs. Ubuntu which needed to have additional library support. While OBS works under Ubuntu using it is still a bit more of a hassle. In any case Windows seems to have more bugs now than a few years back. I figure added "features" contribute to complexity. Who knows how many more LOC have been committed. I'd be a lot happier with simpler but more reliable systems. It's not the tradeoff Microsoft, and probably various Linux distributions, will be likely to accept.
      - 29athrowaway 5y ago
- rascul 5y ago
  > Installing Linux is the easiest experience among operating systems on supported hardware. > Updating Linux software is the easiest as well. The ease of this stuff varies widely from one distro to another.
akselmo 5y ago
I think the problem is just that almost all prebuilt machines come with Windows and nobody ever gets exposed to alternatives. And most people just dont care.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  A lot of people are fine with Windows. When you ask people to change something that they are fine with and used to, * they think you’re making them do more work by relearning everything * they’re quick to notice faults, and they’ll jump ship just as quickly as well
  - akselmo 5y ago
    If the machine had linux with windows skin on, most people wouldnt notice since everything is done through web browser nowadays
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      Then Desktop Linux is a useless concept anyways, KDE and GNOME devs can all go home because Chromebooks are already everything 'most people' need or want, right? Perhaps attitudes like this towards potential users are another reason Linux Desktop still doesn't have much buy in.
      - akselmo 5y ago
        What attitude am i conveying? I really dont know, english is not my first language. I just dont think that most people just care what the thing is running as long as it does the job. Computers are an appliance to many, just like a toaster. If the functionality is close to what theyre used to (windows or mac) then there shouldnt be big adaptility problems until they want to go deeper into the device than web browsing.
        bobthepanda 5y ago
        no, people care about having to change things. the average person on HN is not representative of the general population. The keyword in your statement is "close" but normal people who use the computer as an appliance have extremely low tolerance for "close."
Beltalowda 5y ago
The thing is, who exactly in the "Linux world" should be doing this thinking? Unlike Microsoft or Apple it's not a single organisation with a single leadership, but a whole bunch of small projects and individuals with different goals, preferences, styles, etc. Quite a lot of people doing open source stuff aren't really in the business of "building a product" in the first place. That said, at least both KDE and Gnome have offered fairly comprehensive and complete desktop environment about on-par with a standard Windows or macOS installation for many years now. There's also things like XFCE, LDE, Cinnamon, and probably others – but I don't really keep up. There are plenty of issues with "Linux on the desktop", but I don't think this is one of them.
- ironmagma 5y ago
  Even the well-thought-out desktop environments, however, have massive glaring holes in them, e.g. the wifi utility on Ubuntu and Mint is totally broken, almost all the time, occasionally even lending itself to stroboscopic behavior, and I've never found a distro where the wifi utility actually did everything it was supposed to. Yes, it's distributed ownership, and while that explains why the problem exists, I don't feel it's an excuse. There is definitely room for someone to come in with good product sense plus technical excellence and work to make a really great desktop OS on Linux, it just hasn't happened yet.
  - dangus 5y ago
    That last sentence is a multiple 6 figure salary's worth of job description. The reason why the "year of the Linux desktop" has never happened is because nobody wants to work for free. As soon as you say the word "product" the word "salary" has to follow.
    - ironmagma 5y ago
      Most of the programming that happens in the Linux world would be compensated along those lines as well. The trick is that developers tend to be deeply aware of the value of contributing to open source and, well, product managers less so.

29athrowaway 5y ago

Sounds like someone who does not use Linux. Installing Linux is the easiest experience among operating systems on supported hardware. Updating Linux software is the easiest as well. Using a desktop environment like Gnome is straightforward too.

ironmagma 5y ago
Nice attempt there. However, I've been a user of Linux since circa 2004. (I think it'd be hard to exist here on HN long without doing so.) No, using Linux is not straightforward. Nearly every user-facing element has something broken about it.
- 0des 5y ago
  You sound like someone who hasn't used Linux in a capacity with any permanence, your remarks are off base with reality.
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    And you sound like someone who has used Linux far too much and lost touch with what most people's experience with it is. Your remarks are similarly off base with reality.
    - 0des 5y ago
      You got me, sport
- 29athrowaway 5y ago
  You mean like the Metro UI, the frakenstein on DMT that's impossible to understand?
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    Yes, like that. Note that two wrongs don’t make a right.
Jorge1o1 5y ago
Clearly you’ve never tried to update nvidia graphics card drivers, add a webcam, a printer, or run a 32-bit application on linux. Compared to Windows/Mac these simple tasks are hellish — and for nontechnical users, nearly impossible.
- JasonFruit 5y ago
  I have done all those things. On Linux, Nvidia drivers are a royal pain, webcam and printer both worked without any effort other than hooking it up, and running a 32-bit application was not too difficult with instructions. On Windows, I've never messed with video drivers, but have had problems with the same webcam and printer requiring me to locate and install drivers, which were bundled with software I didn't want. 32-bit applications on Windows were of course a breeze. So anecdotally, it's a mixed bag. Maybe if I had less Linux experience and more Windows, the story would be different.
  - jrapdx3 5y ago
    I've had long experience with Linux, FreeBSD, and in the last 9 years with Windows too. On the whole I think you're right, it's always been a "mixed bag" when it comes to the gamut of installing, use, and upgrading an OS. Don't know the vintage of Windows you referenced, but in recent experience (Win 10/11) installing a webcam was dead simple, just plug it into a USB port. Printers used to be a gigantic hassle, but at least for the 4 printers available to my Windows laptop little configuration and no added drivers were necessary. (No doubt certain webcams or printers out there could be a pain to install in Windows.) One example: getting OBS Studio to work on Windows was pretty much a no brainer vs. Ubuntu which needed to have additional library support. While OBS works under Ubuntu using it is still a bit more of a hassle. In any case Windows seems to have more bugs now than a few years back. I figure added "features" contribute to complexity. Who knows how many more LOC have been committed. I'd be a lot happier with simpler but more reliable systems. It's not the tradeoff Microsoft, and probably various Linux distributions, will be likely to accept.
    - 29athrowaway 5y ago
rascul 5y ago
> Installing Linux is the easiest experience among operating systems on supported hardware. > Updating Linux software is the easiest as well. The ease of this stuff varies widely from one distro to another.

akselmo 5y ago

I think the problem is just that almost all prebuilt machines come with Windows and nobody ever gets exposed to alternatives. And most people just dont care.

bobthepanda 5y ago
A lot of people are fine with Windows. When you ask people to change something that they are fine with and used to, * they think you’re making them do more work by relearning everything * they’re quick to notice faults, and they’ll jump ship just as quickly as well
- akselmo 5y ago
  If the machine had linux with windows skin on, most people wouldnt notice since everything is done through web browser nowadays
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    Then Desktop Linux is a useless concept anyways, KDE and GNOME devs can all go home because Chromebooks are already everything 'most people' need or want, right? Perhaps attitudes like this towards potential users are another reason Linux Desktop still doesn't have much buy in.
    - akselmo 5y ago
      What attitude am i conveying? I really dont know, english is not my first language. I just dont think that most people just care what the thing is running as long as it does the job. Computers are an appliance to many, just like a toaster. If the functionality is close to what theyre used to (windows or mac) then there shouldnt be big adaptility problems until they want to go deeper into the device than web browsing.
      - bobthepanda 5y ago
        no, people care about having to change things. the average person on HN is not representative of the general population. The keyword in your statement is "close" but normal people who use the computer as an appliance have extremely low tolerance for "close."

Beltalowda 5y ago

The thing is, who exactly in the "Linux world" should be doing this thinking? Unlike Microsoft or Apple it's not a single organisation with a single leadership, but a whole bunch of small projects and individuals with different goals, preferences, styles, etc. Quite a lot of people doing open source stuff aren't really in the business of "building a product" in the first place. That said, at least both KDE and Gnome have offered fairly comprehensive and complete desktop environment about on-par with a standard Windows or macOS installation for many years now. There's also things like XFCE, LDE, Cinnamon, and probably others – but I don't really keep up. There are plenty of issues with "Linux on the desktop", but I don't think this is one of them.

ironmagma 5y ago
Even the well-thought-out desktop environments, however, have massive glaring holes in them, e.g. the wifi utility on Ubuntu and Mint is totally broken, almost all the time, occasionally even lending itself to stroboscopic behavior, and I've never found a distro where the wifi utility actually did everything it was supposed to. Yes, it's distributed ownership, and while that explains why the problem exists, I don't feel it's an excuse. There is definitely room for someone to come in with good product sense plus technical excellence and work to make a really great desktop OS on Linux, it just hasn't happened yet.
- dangus 5y ago
  That last sentence is a multiple 6 figure salary's worth of job description. The reason why the "year of the Linux desktop" has never happened is because nobody wants to work for free. As soon as you say the word "product" the word "salary" has to follow.
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    Most of the programming that happens in the Linux world would be compensated along those lines as well. The trick is that developers tend to be deeply aware of the value of contributing to open source and, well, product managers less so.