11 ms·

Desktop Linux is an Untapped Gold Mine

93 points by skilled 2y ago

zubairq 2y ago
Good article. To the author, why don't you do this yourself, I think it is a brilliant idea?
- progx 2y ago
  The problem is not only to make a desktop, nobody would implement it (NIH-Syndrom, thats why we have 12 karillion Linux Distributions), you have to ship your own distro.
RajT88 2y ago
2024 is the year of Linux on the Desktop!
55555 2y ago
tl;dr: Linux on Desktop could happen but isn't currently happening. The author recommends that you work to make it happen.
cranberryturkey 2y ago
I'm building a desktop app for mac/win/nix in tauri. Its pretty sweet although I'm not a big fan of rust so far. It's just weird.
chucke1992 2y ago
I have never used ChromeOS but isn't it basically a remote desktop?
- shubb 2y ago
  Originally you say it was a kind of kiosk operating system that ran a Web browser with Google apps deeply integrated to enable things like a little local file storage. Some years ago, they enabled you to access a real local Linux operating system, and install and run arbitrary things. I think but don't know that local Linux gives me a container or windows subsystem for Linux vibe. It's sufficient to use a chrome book as a local dev machine, and I think googlers do that daily.
- reportgunner 2y ago
  It was a weird kinda locked down linux with some google proprietary stuff last time I touched it, about 3 years ago.
mike_hock 2y ago
1. Dear author, I think Linux probably just isn't for you. 2. We probably don't want the author's concept of "Linux winning" to come true.
- rigelbm 2y ago
  Sincerely, The Gatekeeper.
  - mike_hock 2y ago
    It's one of a billion of "Here's my proposal for improving Linux: Make it like Windows!" articles that keep getting written, and have been written for 20+ years now.
    - card_zero 2y ago
      > All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win. This is what you're against, right?
      - mike_hock 2y ago
        and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft What's funny about this is that Google used to be supposedly the new, friendly company that wasn't as scummy as Microsoft and Apple, and look where we are now.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      I picture Mark Shuttleworth furiously writing notes after reading this article.
  - everdrive 2y ago
    Do you believe this is "gate-keeping?" If so, is gate-keeping universally bad?
donmcronald 2y ago
Microsoft is doing a good job of leveraging MS365 to make sure Linux isn’t an option for business users. Besides that, desktop Linux frustrates me in some way every time I try it and I’ve been trying since you could get it on floppy disks. The last few years it’s been display scaling. I swear every Linux developer on the planet must be using 1080p screens because the display scaling sucks. Maybe I’m just unlucky, but the settings panel (in Debian and Ubuntu) is always flaky and the fractional scaling might as well not exist.
- tomaytotomato 2y ago
  Yea I know your pain when it comes to display scaling on a 3840x2160 monitor. I use Kubuntu and found that if you set display scaling you need to restart to properly have the settings take effect. I normally have it at 150% scaling
- bmitc 2y ago
  Agreed. 100% or 200% scaling only is unusable for almost all modern monitors at their top resolution.
- ur-whale 2y ago
  > desktop Linux frustrates me Yes, there are unresolved issues, and that's not going away But consider the alternatives: 1) ads in your menu bar an a pc that calls home to Redmond every 10s 2) a pretty candy-themed adventure in la-la land that you pay through the nose for and where, like in the fabled Hotel California [1], you can never leave. I'll take the minor annoyances every day of the week. [1] https://genius.com/Eagles-hotel-california-lyrics https://genius.com/Eagles-hotel-california-lyrics
  - lukan 2y ago
    "Yes, there are unresolved issues, and that's not going away" Why?!? It is totally possible to get rid of those "minor annoyances". Some obscure driver bug, yeah, those are hard as there are millions of different devices and combinations. But UI scaling and other pain points like consistent UI and UX? That can be solved and it would make life on linux easier for everyone who is not comfortable with the terminal - which is the vast majority of humanity.
1GZ0 2y ago
I think the quote from Linus is spot on. "Linux fanboys have ruined it’s (Linux's) image. Most of them take pride in doing simple things in an over complicated manner and wonder why people won’t switch." (Couldn't find the source, Linus might not have said this)
- alurm 2y ago
  Pretty sure it's fake.
akdor1154 2y ago
Canonical could literally have made it happen if they had kept their great product focus on desktop users.. Don't know how much of their failure to do so is the need for a business model, vs. just crap decisions.
- qp11 2y ago
  Its not their fault. They are competing against large roving armies of pure scum at Microsoft, who land up at the door of whichever large corp or govt org that decide to switch, with unmatchable discounts, freebies, bribes, lies and threats to ensure their rent collecting empire is defended at all cost. The reason Microsoft wins much more than tech is related to tactics used in sales, financial engineering, demand engineering(PR/marketing/advertising) etc. The EU looked like it was going to do something about the Desktop Market by targeting Microsoft Desktop domination specifically with the Digital Markets Act but what they ended up with some weakass shit about allowing people to uninstall some of the preinstalled apps Microsoft ships. If Big Tech has to be disintermediated the first step is to understand there is lot more going on outside the realm of Tech that needs to be disintermediated. And a pure one dimensional technology based approach has no chance of making a dent.
  - everdrive 2y ago
    >Microsoft, who land up at the door of whichever large corp or govt org that decide to switch, with unmatchable discounts, freebies, bribes, lies and threats to ensure their rent collecting empire is defended at all cost. I'm relatively new to the industry, but we just saw the exact pattern in our switch from Splunk to Sentinel. A massive discount, and a severely inferior product.
gotbeans 2y ago
IMHO having a good desktop linux distro (or a proper desktop linux experience) doesn't have to correlate to a gold mine, and I'm not sure why the author conflates the two. If the linux desktop space is advancing so slowly is precisely and because of the opposite: because desktop linux is made and maintained by a bunch of people who do it for free. Alas, valve has done a pretty good job with proton and steamdeck which is helping the ecosystem. here's to hoping wayland and nvidia drivers 555 with explicit sync[1] we might get something decent next few months. https://zamundaaa.github.io/wayland/2024/04/05/explicit-sync.html https://zamundaaa.github.io/wayland/2024/04/05/explicit-sync...
- rigelbm 2y ago
  You answered your own question. I don't want my great-grand-children to be the first to have a great Linux Desktop. Ideally, I would like to have it now. Unfortunately, as things go in capitalism, the easiest way to accelerate development of something is with money.
  - gotbeans 2y ago
    Where's the incentive in any of that? Pour money in linux desktop development for what? (So we can have linux desktop... sooner?) If there were any money to be made in linux desktop, it would have already happened imo, or otherwise the cost-opportunity is still to high. If anything, more than a gold mine, looks like a gold sink to me And don't get me wrong, been on arch for 7 years and i've long since ditched win. But I still don't think there's any meaningful incentives for companies to push for linux desktop.
DavidPiper 2y ago
I like a lot of this article, and broadly agree that Linux Desktop _could_ take off in a bigger way if people like me and you started putting open source developer time into making good apps for it. However, I think the author vastly overestimates the current state of the art by conflating Andriod and ChromeOS with Linux. Yes these are technically Linux distros, but their entire environment is build on a stack (JVM or Web) whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible. A world where JVM GUI apps or Web apps rule the desktop market is not quite the same thing as "Desktop Linux" taking off. However, web apps ruling the desktop market does have the interesting side-effect that it makes the barrier to using Linux a lot lower than it was in the past, so there's that. The fact that it implies "Desktop" is dying doesn't help, though.
- Barrin92 2y ago
  >whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible That's exactly how it should be. To most users noticing what operating system they're on means something has gone wrong, because what they care about is run software, they don't care what OS they're on, and they shouldn't. I want Linux to win because it's open source, not because so enthusiasts with penguin t-shirts can declare a sort of Sid Meier's Civilization's cultural victory. Android and ChromeOS to that end have done a fantastic job, as has the SteamDeck, because it simply works.
- scheeseman486 2y ago
  ChromeOS is clearly making moves to being more than just a frontend for Chrome with PWAs and an Android subsystem people only use under duress. Google wouldn't have added support for Linux applications and Steam if they wanted to keep it like it was.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >However, I think the author vastly overestimates the current state of the art by conflating Andriod and ChromeOS with Linux. >Yes these are technically Linux distros, but their entire environment is build on a stack (JVM or Web) whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible. When the most successful consumer Linux distros are the ones that try to be as not-Linux as humanely possible, maybe the problem lies somewhere that many do not want to admit?
tomaytotomato 2y ago
Until you get some sort of grass roots movement or large shift from Windows or MacOS, Linux desktop shells will always be niche for the foreseeable future.
- ur-whale 2y ago
  > Linux desktop shells will always be niche for the foreseeable future. Which is not necessarily a bad thing: like every social escape hatch on the planet, the moment it becomes mainstream, it'll likely cease t be an escape hatch and start to become bastardized and unusable for users that don't fit the lowest common denominator profile.
- adamomada 2y ago
  I keep thinking the Windows 10 EOL in 2025 is it. Some sort of large ad buy by IBM promoting Fedora as an alternative to your computer going to the garbage.
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
The two are in conflict: > This one really annoyed me. I mean. Canonical knows for a fact that everyone is going to install these codecs anyway. Why not include them to save the end user some trouble ? > not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft People want the easiest possible thing, but Evil Corp wants the easiest possible thing to be the thing that screws you. The reason those codecs aren't installed by default is because of legal restrictions. "Just STFU and make it work" often involves requiring the user to agree to something which is bad for them, and putting at least a minimum amount of friction in the way of that is a good thing. And it also puts the friction on other people. If the codec isn't installed by default and then someone else is using it, you will notice this instead of seamlessly using the proprietary one, and possibly complain to them and try to get them to use a free codec like AV1. The cost, of course, is that it's a minor deterrent to adoption. But the endgame of valuing market share over principles is Microsoft.
- donogh 2y ago
  This minor deterrant to adoption scales up with lots of other minor deterrents. Users want "it just works" and that's the experience they get with Microsoft and Apple (however bad it is in other ways). Desktop Linux must match or exceed that base level of experience if it wants to drive meaningful adoption. Let's be practical: give users a brief explanation of the downsides before they make choices like installing proprietary codecs. Treat them like adults. Let them have an easier life in favor of getting them on board.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    > Users want "it just works" and that's the experience they get with Microsoft and Apple (however bad it is in other ways). It isn't. With Apple they get "it works or it doesn't" which is crap when it doesn't, because you can't fix it and Apple won't. With Microsoft things are commonly broken, often by accident, and no easier to fix than installing codecs on Linux. But worse, with both of them, is when things are broken on purpose. Almost like Linux. Only not for your benefit, but for theirs, at your expense. Which puts some lie to the notion that easier always wins. It isn't easier to use Windows, it's a mess of bad code and half of it is out to get you. People use Windows because they have to, or because it came on their computer when they bought it. If you want adoption you need to address that -- do something about the Windows-only apps. Get more Linux PCs into the stores. Which are the things that are happening. Things that used to need Windows are now websites or mobile apps. Google's money got Chromebooks onto the store shelves. And if you include ChromeOS, Linux has gone from <1% market share in 2010 to now having as much desktop market share as Mac did back then. All of which at the expense of Microsoft, because now Mac has twice that much. Being opinionated isn't the problem, it's a feature. The competition is opinionated too, but its opinion is that you're cattle to be milked.
barrotes 2y ago
My parents (both over 80) daily use Linux Mint for a decade now. They don't know it, simply last time we bought them a PC I put it there, explained how to open the web browser, play solitaire/FreeCell/whatever other game they like, how to shut it down etc. I live in another city and I almost never had to adjust anything there in all these years, differently on what happened when they had windows (they unknowingly installed a lot of spyware and bloatware, I had to clean it up periodically). Still, for me this is one of the few experiments that went well, probably because the only "complex" need they have is a web browser. Now if a friend (not a technical one) needs a new computer advice I tell him to buy a second-hand MacBook and enjoy. No one ever complained (in fact all compliment me for the choice). The vast majority of users is not like my parents, has some specific needs, like they need Microsoft Office, or Photoshop, or they play on PC and still don't want to face the challenges you need to overcome if you want to do everything with Linux. I would never use MacOS on my PC (not because it's not good, just because I'm a FOSS maniac), but it's the perfect operating system for casual users and even for many power users. The only rule I adopt for OS advice is "avoid Windows unless you are actually forced to use it (gaming, specific legacy programs etc)".
- bmitc 2y ago
  > The only rule I adopt for OS advices is "avoid Windows Why?
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    VFAT patent enforcement was sufficient to declare a permanent personal vendetta against MS. Needless to say MS did half dozen such things during the 00s.
    - bmitc 2y ago
      So basically irrelevant reasons in 2024.
      - the_third_wave 2y ago
        Yes, that dog there did bite your brother and sister and cousin and neighbour but that is months ago so basically irrelevant reasons in 2024. Go on, give it a hug.
aa-jv 2y ago
The thing about Linux is that it is such a delightful, vibrant and flourishing development environment. There are so many great ways to get an application built for that environment, packaged up, and in the hands of masses of users. Its not just about the Desktop. There are plenty of window managers with the requisite desktop functionality. Its also about having the applications users need. Personally, I'd love to spend the next 10 years building on Linux apps. Its an opportunity for some great advances to be made. I'd focus on multimedia and audio apps, personally. The environment is so conducive to creativity.
ur-whale 2y ago
>" I don’t want the future of the Linux desktop to be some locked down spyware-ridden bastardized version of Linux like Chrome OS." Hear hear. As a matter of fact, this is a pretty accurate description of every major OS in 2024 except Linux.
dcminter 2y ago
The author declares that... "All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win." ... but as far as I can see that's Canonical and they're a long way from owning the desktop. Snaps, which the author lauds, are their thing! The author laments that Ubuntu didn't install the media codecs, but they have a panel during install asking if you want to install commercial stuff including such things. That could be more prominent, admittedly. The real problem is that there's just so much commercial software out there and most of it runs on Windows or (often rather grudgingly) on Mac. It's been an issue for decades. Back in the mid 90s I was working with "Windows for Workgroups" at the same time as messing with Linux. Linux was enormously superior at that point; pre-emptive multi-tasking, memory protection, high quality scheduling, and an excellent networking stack versus a very clunky OS balanced precariously on top of DOS. But Linux didn't have Microsoft Word, it didn't have Excel, it didn't come pre-installed if you bought a PC, and it couldn't run MS DOS software. Windows won, and once Windows NT was out it was a much more even race even on the technical qualities. The best thing that ever happened to desktop Linux was the commercialisation of the web, because it effectively made a huge swathe of important software usable on Linux. This is sufficiently the case that I've been able to use Linux (usually Ubuntu) at work for several of my recent gigs, but I still can't use it at my current day job (for example) because the miscellany of Data Loss Prevention software doesn't run on it but does run on Windows or MacOS. I'm not sure Linux will ever "win" the desktop, though the share of desktop might increase in proportion to the dwindling of that market versus mobile devices.
- rurban 2y ago
  > ... but as far as I can see that's Canonical and they're a long way from owning the desktop So far I see Redhat owns GNOME and all the base systems, and they already do own the linux desktop. Good so.
- linguae 2y ago
  Yup. I recently read a fascinating article about Apple selling a Mac emulator (similar in usage to the open source Basilisk and SheepShaver emulators) for Solaris back in the mid-1990s. There actually was a market for Unix workstation users who needed access to proprietary software packages that only ran on Windows or Mac OS. Even though Unix ran circles around DOS-based Windows and the classic Mac in terms of stability and power, Unix users still needed to be able to collaborate with their Windows- and Mac-using colleagues. Come to think of it, this also reminds me of why certain Lisp machine vendors such as Texas Instruments and Symbolics made Lisp machine expansion cards for Macs: this provided Lisp machine users the opportunity to use desktop software tools without having to buy two physically separate computers, a very expensive purchase in the early 1990s. (While I’m on the topic, even Apple shipped some Mac models with expansion cards that had x86 chips for the purpose of running DOS and Windows).
solarized 2y ago
The hardest thing to solve here is standardizing the ecosystem of freedom. What's "lovely" about this ecosystem is that nobody cares and nobody tells you how to run your desktops. Want something lightweight? Go with TinyCore or Puppy. Into gaming? Check out SteamOS. Home theater? Use Kodi. Focused on security? Kali is the way to go. I even built my own distros for my product to automate endoscopy machine interfaces. You can build whatever you want to solve whatever problems you have. Trying to solve this problem is like merging all the transcontinental countries into one union called USSR. I really admire any billionaire or community that continues Mark Shuttleworth's effort to raise awareness about Linux desktops.
vegabook 2y ago
> "To fix this fragmentation of package formats, two new formats have been introduced...Snap and Flatpak" The Nix package manager trounces these two options utterly and completely for anything that's not GUI-based, and even for desktop software if you're prepared to go all-in with NixOS.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  Yeah and if you're prepared to spend a serious amount of time learning Nix. Which kind of counts it out from "the year of the Linux desktop".
frithsun 2y ago
I got a Windows computer for my six year old because we have to have Roblox and Roblox Studio. I was stunned by how much clutter, hassle, and adware I had to fight through just to achieve a simplisticity I take for granted with a standard Linux install. With the tsunami of AI clutter coming for Windows, I suspect desktop linux will finally, after all these decades, have its day.
sthuck 2y ago
Linux desktop efforts need a BDFL. Too many duplicated efforts, the wayland migration while needed was a complete mess, and actually the worst time I had using Linux since like 2005. This kind of complete breakage of user experience is unimaginable even in MacOS and it's hostile approach to power users. I think otherwise it's going to continue being a frustrating two steps forward one step back.
talhah 2y ago
I can see the guys at System76 filling in this gap. They have excellent hardware and their own PopOS is really user friendly for newcomers. Gaming support is also pretty decent paired with Steams Proton. The problem with onboarding people to use Linux is like trying to convince an iPhone user to use an Android device. Many people are stuck in their respective ecosystem and are used to familiarity, they're not going to switch to linux unless you can get over the burden of switching. In my anecdotal experience, I installed Linux for a teacher of mine and he had some issues with getting used to it but his kids quickly figured it out and weren't used to Windows or MacOS which made it significantly easier. Putting Linux computers in students hands is honestly the best way to increase adoption and Chromebooks are a perfect example of this.
- thepuppet33r 2y ago
  Has System76's hardware improved in the last few years? I bought a Gazelle 15 during the pandemic, and it has been the worst computer I've ever had. Display issues, overheating, keyboard dies at random, monitor has an increasing number of dead pixels (had several on arrival from manufacturer), had to have an entire motherboard replacement because the power port stopped being able to hold the power cable after just a couple of months and it refused to fully boot without being plugged in (despite having a battery), the battery life is a joke (less than two hours even on low performance mode), the whole case is cheap plastic, the video card will occasionally just not be recognized by the firmware and will only allow me to use the integrated graphics, and so on. I spent weeks working with System76 support and they tried their best, but the laptop is just a piece of junk, especially for the two grand price point. My next purchase will probably be an ASUS laptop that I'll load either Popos or Linux Mint on.
  - benrutter 2y ago
    I have a Lemur and it's the best laptop I've had- great battery life, everything feels snappy and I haven't had a single issue. Bought it during lockdown as well though, so not much of an argument for their hardware improving.
enasterosophes 2y ago
> Desktop Linux is an untapped gold mine! All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win. Ah, yes. Everything must be monetized. Very well then, let us ask what is the business model for this monetized desktop Linux? * People who already use Linux won't suddenly decide to start paying money for support that they never relied on before. * People who were never into Linux before aren't going to suddenly start jumping ship just because they can choose to pay for a supported distro. Let's face it, most people don't like spending their time thinking about what OS to run, and maybe that's even healthier, since the more I learn about computing, the more I realize it all kind of sucks in one way or another. * If the idea is sell proprietary software to people on Linux desktops, it's not impossible (as shown by success stories like Steam and Matlab.) However, it also needs to compete with the ecosystem of free software, as well as web-based apps which are inherently OS-agnostic, along with the pre-existing markets like Steam. * Before our glasses get too rose-tinted, let's remember that although Linux works fine on desktop, it's not easy. You either need to go the Ubuntu route of being opinionated and one-size-fits-all, or you need to accept that the flexibility of Linux makes support difficult. I've been using Linux exclusively for 15 years, so I'm used to fiddling with all the knobs required to keep it ticking over smoothly. I would thoroughly resent any pressure anyone would put on me to change the way I do things. On the other hand, I would never suggest to a newbie that they should try doing things the same way as me. In fact, I advise against it. "Kids, just try ubuntu first. If you like it, great. Come and talk to me again when you're sure you really want to be a weirdo."
- sspiff 2y ago
  Agreed. One of the reasons I use Linux and other open source software, is not to be dependent or beholden to a single company. I can't count the amount of times I experienced or read about others experiencing a company doing a rug pull on users of their software by either changing direction, abandoning the product, or changing licensing terms. I do donate monthly to a number of open source projects because I like their work, and want them to stick around. But even if they don't, as long as the software is there and the user base is there, someone will pick up the baton and move it forward, even if it is at a slow pace.
benreesman 2y ago
I’m a long-time advocate of using the best appliance (a Mac) to connect to a “real computer” (a linux-x86_64 build with an NVIDIA card in it). But the times are changing and paradoxically I have almost the opposite view in 2024 vs 2021. Desktop Linux can render fonts really well now, you can generally play audio now, ditto 802.11 and BlueTooth and damn the drivers are just good now. Conversely Apple gear is becoming a pretty credible threat as an on-tile HBM accelerator platform, and while I’m sick unto the death of getting my damned window border radius to me by people other than Steve Jobs himself, I want a Studio on my desk or a Pro sled in the closet, the Sillicon is just too good to ignore now, and the MLX people aren’t sleeping. I care a lot about darwin-aarch64 now, and could give a fuck less about a windowing system worse than Windows.
jillesvangurp 2y ago
I've had a slowish laptop (intel gpu) with Manjaro (Arch derivative) and Steam for a few years now. It's not my main laptop but I fire it up once or twice a week for some light gaming (I have some indie games that I like). It works great for that despite Intel performance not being great, obviously. Every few weeks I use the Manjaro settings tool to update the kernel to the latest and greatest. And of course I update packages regularly with a command line tool called yay. I can't say it has been completely without issues. But so far I've been able to solve these issues. And this doesn't happen a lot. But probably not a great distribution for beginners as you are expected to solve problems on the command line. But if you know what you are doing, this is pretty nice and stable. I like having rolling updates and not missing out on all the latest stuff. Having Steam means that Windows is now optional for gaming. You don't need it for most games. They'll work fine on Linux. There are exceptions of course but mostly everything I have just works fine. And between Mac and Linux, I just have no patience for the dreary experience that is Windows. Most other work stuff you can get via snap/flatpak (I use both). IMHO both need work but software availability is pretty good. But for things I care about, I tend to install them manually anyway so I don't have any middlemen to deal with between me and the software project. E.g. Firefox can update itself if you just install the tar ball from them. Works great. With most linux distributions, the main differentiators seem to be the amount of effort they do to have users needing to use a terminal window with various degrees of success. With most Linux distributions, you'll find yourself needing a terminal window sooner or later.
fr4nkr 2y ago
> While there are technical differences between Snap and Flatpak, the gist is the same. Offer a sandboxed, isolated, and universal package format for Linux. Universal package formats are an overall win in my opinion. And make Linux feel a little bit more like one operating system. Still, they are now yet another choice that the developer needs to make when distributing their software on Linux. Someone has yet to explain to me how the Linux desktop is supposed to just agree on a universal standard for everything without a proprietary ecosystem, at which point it would just be a shittier Windows. And that's not even touching on the fact that alternatives often exist for valid reasons, i.e. Pipewire being obviously better than Pulse, which used to be a de facto standard. Or the fact that some companies like Bitwig have already demonstrated that commercial Linux software via Flatpak is viable - Adobe simply does not care, and they never will. The irony of Windows users sharing their opinions on the Linux desktop is that they often sound how they picture existing Linux desktop users: people who treat their computers as toys. We're fully aware that using Linux has major caveats. It's okay to just not like Linux, man. Nobody is forcing you to.
cauch 2y ago
The same article was written billions of time in the past 20 years (at least). Few thoughts: - Popularity may imply things that are fundamentally incompatible with the way Linux works. Imagine Windows or Mac giving the possibility of fork, and of course, you will have seen plenty of "distributions" where people tried to fix all of these things that don't suit them, with a lot of hardware problems and software incompatibilities. The author says it himself: Windows 8 was the worst OS they used. So, if Windows 8 would have been forkable, of course plenty of parallel version trying to fix the problems would have appeared. Additionally, not sure forkability is compatible with some economic model such as "getting popular by doing a lot of adverts and costly initiative to win market share, paid by revenue we got by doing user-unfriendly-things (ads everywhere in the interface, capturing users, ...)" - There are more brands of car or of dish-washing liquid than obviously-not-anecdotical Linux distributions. I'm still not sure why people are so confused about the number of distributions. Just do what you do when you buy a car or a dish-washing liquid bottle. - Popularity does not really matter. As soon as there are incentives to not be ignored by hardware or software makers (and there is now for Linux, the amount of "compatible with Linux" is impressive when you think of the market share. Probably due to the fact that it is an important systems for some sectors and that Linux users are building bridges), then it does not matter at all to me if my neighbor is using Linux or not, it does not affect me in any way. I'm not sure I understand what is the point of being popular.
mrfinn 2y ago
I agree with his description of the Arch forums, I've been using them for years as a source of info for solving problems along those provided by Gentoo, and never felt in the mood to write anything there because the community seems pretty hostile towards any kind of ignorance while asking for help or even worst, in the very strongly enforced forum rules. Pity because Arch is really a great distro and provides a solid base for other distros as well. Maybe is not always like that but... Arch forums feel to me like highly elitist and unwelcoming with newcomers. Not even bugzilla.kernel.org feels like that.
andrewstuart 2y ago
Desktop operating systems take vast resource to be consistently behaved and presented. And the strength of Linux is that it is the inverse of consistent…… it’s a bunch of stuff that works well together. Function over form. I’d never use a Google desktop os but I might use steam. Steam seems like the most likely desktop os contender, and they have the designers and the developers and the money to make it consistent. The problem is there’s no reason why they’d make a desktop Linux.
dash2 2y ago
This is all, and will forever be, a fantasy. You cannot make a product without profit. Linux wins in the data centre because the corporations who make money off selling compute have commoditized their complement. "Linux" wins when it's Android because Google used Linux as a kernel for their offering - which IMHO is still worse than Apple but fine if you prefer Android. It's not open source, though, none of the apps people use on Android are open source, it's just a cheap software component. The Steam Deck, again, exists to sell closed source games. I used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years. I left it and never looked back. I have a residual affection for the people who actually write open source. But the zealots, with their rants about evil corporations, their Boy Scout fantasies about running the digital economy on volunteer effort, their response to any criticism with "it works for me, you must be stupid/lying", their poor sod grandparents for whom they've kindly installed Arch ... those people are toxic and deserve to be laughed at.
- any1 2y ago
  Zealotry/enthusiasm tends to float to the top and is, perhaps, what you see on the surface when you look at any community. However, I think that most users of open source software prefer it, not because of their political beliefs, but because of their curiosity. Open source software is made by the community for the community; not to entice outsiders or sell to any would-be customers. The main draw of open source software for a curious person is that they can look inside and tinker with it and they can modify it to conform to their needs. Saying things like "I tried your software and it doesn't work for me" or "I left it and never looked back" (usually phrased in a less polite manner) doesn't really achieve anything constructive. An open source software developer isn't interested in that kind of "feedback". After all, they're not selling anything. They're just making software for their own needs and/or to satisfy their thirst for knowledge and understanding. If you are not curious about the inner workings of software, then open source is not for you, and that's fine.
- surgical_fire 2y ago
  > I used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years. I left it and never looked back. I have a residual affection for the people who actually write open source. But the zealots, with their rants about evil corporations, their Boy Scout fantasies about running the digital economy on volunteer effort, their response to any criticism with "it works for me, you must be stupid/lying", their poor sod grandparents for whom they've kindly installed Arch ... those people are toxic and deserve to be laughed at. Despite a lot of words written there, you don't mention which issues you had with Linux that made you switch away from it after 10 years. I made the opposite route. Two years ago I switched to Linux (Linux Mint, to be more specific), and I couldn't be happier. Everything has been working like a charm, and I honestly have to do less tinkering around to keep things working than I used to on Windows (which I had basically to do a yearly fresh install). Maybe it was your distro of choice?
scheeseman486 2y ago
I think Valve's combination of KDE, Flatpak and an immutable rootfs is the right combination (Kinoite also does this, but it plays second fiddle to the Silverblue which uses Gnome). ChromeOS has also been making moves towards becoming a proper Linux distro with their adoption of Wayland, separation of Chrome from the underlying OS, support for running native Linux applications and even Windows applications through Steam. A lot of people scoff at getting Google involved, but if they put their weight behind Linux applications (or even Wine) then that could mean filling some of the gaps in software support. Adobe might not care about desktop Linux, but ChromeOS? It has widespread adoption in business and particularly education and given a native port, that means every Linux distribution could get access to it too. Windows has stalled, they're throwing all their effort into AI features that customers don't want. It's a perfect time to make a move.
masfoobar 2y ago
I am very happy on my GNU/Linux Debian distro. Of course, at work, I use Windows. It is bloated. That is not an attack on the OS in general but the added fluff on top of it. I dont want it.. yet on next bootup I see co-pilot at the bottom right of my screen. Eff-off! Remember -- software piracy is wrong... but I don't actually own it, either! I remember the old license agreements on Windows 95, etc.. I would not be surprised if Windows today is still based on "rights to use it" or similar. I am not here saying distros like debian could replace windows. A lot of users comftable on Windows will struggle to change. A number of alternative software is a learning curve.. even if it is just as good (or better) than what is used on Windows. We also have IT departments who have to relearn... login system, security, etc, especially if their world is windows-focused. My wife uses Linux. My eldest child uses Linux. They have no issue. Of course, there may come a time when my eldest needs a peice of software that is Windows only.. but will get to that when I have to (and possible alternatives) -- but I am also a realist... if a child has a specific need (especially a career-based one) then I will install Windows if there really is nothing else. I would like to properly see the "year of gnu/linux" but despite Microsoft making poor decision with Windows, it will still have things a Linux distro wont... with added budgets at the forefront with PR, legal, marketing.. and all the other departments it has! Big Companies will also "buy microsoft" for the support whether they think it is good or not.. it is a safety net for job security.
- tasuki 2y ago
  > Of course, at work, I use Windows. That's not "of course" at all! I've used Linux on my laptop in all of my last four jobs. Five jobs ago I had two computers and one of them was mandated to have Windows...
  - masfoobar 2y ago
    It is for me -- all companies I work for (except one) during my career has been Windows.
red_admiral 2y ago
I have a Surface Pro that's just been telling me Win10 is soon coming to its end, and Win11 won't run on this device. I'm considering Linux Mint which is just fine for what I use that device for (mainly web browsing). I guess part of the problem is if you commit to building a bazaar instead of a cathedral, there's some things (like majestic roofs that don't leak) which are harder to realize. And then there's the bit where I'll be choosing Mint/MATE (if I don't go full XFCE) because something something GTK3 mumble Adwaita.
briffid 2y ago
I've been on and off Linux desktop for more than 25 years. I always gave it a chance, for home use and work use as well. And it always failed to prove it worth the effort. For home use it failed most miserably when it booted up with a black screen after a version update due to an already reported bug with the Nvidia driver, which no one cared to fix before release. Then struggled again for years with finding useful applications, even games, without success, so I gave up. For work use (as a software engineer) I tried to make myself productive on Linux, and yes I liked the terminal, and that was it. Everything else just sucked. Coming back from suspend e.g. was gambling. Multi-monitor usage sucked. PDF editor? Forget it. Productivity suite on desktop, OneDrive synchronization, DTP, Music - all half-baked, full of bugs and incompatibilities. Thank you, not any more. For a server, of course I'd use Linux. For a phone, of course. But for desktop, if 30 years was not enough to mature to something usable, I would stop hoping for seeing it as a gold mine. Always promised, always failed.
- HeckFeck 2y ago
  I agree. Certain DEs and WMs are fun to play with, Void Linux is a fun minimal system to tinker with, Debian is perfect for a fire up and forget server but ultimately commercial software always has the polish and edge I need to get things done at home or for work. I.e. Affinity vs GIMP, or MS Office vs LibreOffice, Sony Vegas vs whatever crashfest NLE I install on Linux. So my current pattern is a neutered W10 LTSC for gaming and video editing complimented by a Macbook for work/coding/internet. I will say that for my parents who just want a desktop with a web browser and basic word processing, Linux Mint + MATE is fine and much more predictable than Windows. I don't have to teach them everything from scratch every few months, as would be the case if they were on Windows and some PM rules that everything must be revolutionised again.
- RevMen 2y ago
  I've been giving Linux a chance every few years since the 90s. Last year I got a new Framework and decided to try again. I tried Fedora and Pop and I can say I'm here to stay. It's Pop's version of Gnome with the tiling manager that I love. Windows has nothing close to it. I do a decent amount of work in pdfs and I'm surprised that's not good for you. If you're willing to pay for some software there are some really good options. I was using Acrobat before and I am more than happy now, not just because I'm no longer paying $15/mo. I haven't had a hardware problem on Linux in a while. When was the last time you tried to install it? If you have modern hardware you might be pleased with that part of the experience now.
amelius 2y ago
A few days ago I had a bad experience installing sshfs on MacOS. On desktop Linux, this was so simple. I really don't understand how people can think that Linux is somehow less user friendly.
TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
Desktop Linux can not be a goldmine from its nature and its userbase. People using Linux does not want to pay for anything and first thing which they will do is to fork your code and "release it" for free because of GPL. When you have no chance to monetize it, how it can turn into a goldmine?
- jrepinc 2y ago
  Fun fact, I spent more money on GNU/Linux and donations to FOSS projects then I ever have for Windows and its software. Why because it is just better more user respecting and is constantly improving, and the opposite is true for Microsoft and their malicious business practices and bad products that are getting worse by each release.
- gebna 2y ago
  Google made money on Android. As long as you're not making direct changes to Kernel code, you're free to close source anything you add. The existence of AOSP didn't prevent the Playstore or google play service from making Google the sole controller of Android. That's how it turns into a goldmine.
  - TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
    Android is kind of pointless without phones it is running on, so having a code does not mean you have any use for it. Same for routers using Linux. Kind of pointless to have source code when you don't have the hardware.
rjakobsson 2y ago
elementaryOS seems to fit the feature description. Can anyone share their experience with it?
- reportgunner 2y ago
  It's ok if you don't know how to install debian and pick a desktop environment or can't install mint mate for some reason.
- gebna 2y ago
  I daily drove it. Mint + Cinnamon is more stable.
poulpy123 2y ago
There are actually several problems for desktop linux, or more exactly, for linux on the home computer. Some are independent of linux itself: the lack of drivers, the lack of some very common software is external to whatever the linux devs (both linux the OS and linux the distributions). I would even say there are very good at compensating it, even if it is not sufficient. Then there are the things that are linux dependant, such as the publication of software, the updates, the choice paralysis etc
- kuschkufan 2y ago
  lack of drivers, for what exactly? linux actually has tons of drivers for old like for new stuff. on the other hand, i recently bought a new windows laptop and tried putting in a new bigger ssd and guess what; when trying to reinstall windows on that the setup program didn't even find that ssd. no, you had to get an extra driver from intel.com - embarrassing. linux comes with all drivers included.
  - poulpy123 2y ago
    Last time I installed linux on a personal PC was several years ago but it was a nightmare to install the wifi. I just checked a film scanner on my desk and it is impossible to be ran on linux without paying a 100€ third party software. On windows you may have to download the driver yourself, but at least you have one
notorandit 2y ago
Running Linux on my main productivity PC since 2003 Mainly laptops, but also a couple of desktops. It's not always been easy, especially before 2015-2016. I tried Slackware, Gentoo, SuSE, Ubuntu and, finally, Arch Linux. It is still not easy, but at least quite well documented. To me everything works pretty well. Everything but a single thing. Hw-accelerated WebRTC. Almost all browsers are chromium-based. And Google supports hw-accelerated WebRTC only on Android and ChromeOS. I can imagine the latter (which is a browser centric OS), but why Android? Firefox hw-accelerated seems not to work too. My Linux box gets on its knees when doing Zoom/Teams/Meet/Slack with video on. I think this is either intentional or simply stupid.
- cess11 2y ago
  I do a couple of hours in video conferencing a day on Linux and don't consider it particularly resource intensive. It's another service than those you mention plus one way video on Teams because they don't allow video in Firefox because they hate us all, but still, I think it's a WebRTC thing. People on Windows seems to have more issues with performance than me.
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
"The first obstacle you run into as a newcomer, is the ridiculous number of different operating systems that exist under the Linux umbrella. The Linux community loves to call them "distros" as a way to express that there are not many differences between them." I have been trying various distributions over the years. Being someone who likes to compile software, and coming from BSD, I am still not into package managers. (Yes, I tried Gentoo.) I have arrived at Frankenstein Linux. It's a hybrid of glibc/musl, various portable BSD stuff and custom text-processing utilities. Linux distributions contain multitudes of software I never use; I removed all of it. Every program is statically-linked, even GCC; I keep no libraries other than what comes with the compiler. There is also an area for running dynamically-linked binaries using a musl or glibc dynamic linker, when that need occasionally arises. I am not a graphics person so Frankenstein Linux is command-line only, textmode. It's smaller than LFS but larger than Tinycore. In the process of creating and using it, I have discovered many interesting compilation-time and run-time facts about various software I use, stuff I see written about nowhere. Linux overall seems generally hyperfocused on binary packages. When in a rush, these can be convenient but I do not think I will ever prefer binary packages over software I compile myself. I am not a fan "package maintainers". I learn nothing about the software I use by choosing binary packages and these maintainers too often make compile-time choices I would never make myself.
- supriyo-biswas 2y ago
  > In the process of creating and using it, I have discovered many interesting compilation-time and run-time facts about various software I use, stuff I see written about nowhere. Doesn't the LFS documentation serve as an entry point for most of this stuff?
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
    For some people it might. But the problems I encounter when compiling software are not addressed in LFS. These problems are usually solved through reading the documentation from the software authors, if any, reading the source code and through experimentation, trial and error. There is no single project that includes everything I need/want nor that excludes everything I don't want. Also LFS recommends only GNU software; I use some BSD versions of common utilities and other stuff. To me, LFS was one person's project to construct a userland for the Linux kernel according to his own preferences. In that tradition I am doing the same. His choices might seem "conventional" but they are choices and in fact can be varied considerably. The interesting thing to me about LFS is that it predates all the projects people recommend today as "source-based" distributions or projects for building "embedded" systems. There are so many different choices and variations, enough for endless online debates over what some project "is" or "isn't" and which is better or worse. To me this simply represents the freedom that Linux, as a kernel-only alternative to BSD, allows to construct a userland any way one wants. Not according to some pre-ordained rules. Compiling each item of userland software oneself, without using a third party's shell scripts and/or makefiles, leads to discoveries of all the author idiosyncracies and quirks that come with it. Some folks might not want to know. Others might discover some useful knowledge. Truthfully, I prefer to spend time learning about the compilation of the individual software rather than spend it learning how to use someone's automated system used to compile all of it in one go. With BSD, it is easy to trim the userland down to only what one needs. Most of it is in one place, a single source tree. With Linux, I am doing the opposite, building the userland up from nothing. The resources are in various places, spread across the internet. In both cases, I am seeking to understand how the ssytem works.
tmtvl 2y ago
I've been using GNU/Linux as my daily driver full time since 2012. It does everything I need: I can send and receive e-mails, LibreOffice works well enough for my needs, I can listen to music, watch videos, and play video games (I have an embarrassing total of over 1,000 hours in Fallout New Vegas and Dragon's Dogma combined). But I recognise that my experience isn't universal and people who have specific needs should use the system that meets those needs.
benrutter 2y ago
I think this line is really compelling: > Chrome OS is Linux based. Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux said that Chromebooks might be the way Linux finally wins on Desktop. I'd love it, but I don't see most non-techie people consciously adopting free software out principle. On the other hand, I reallh can't see how new platform developers like the people behind Android, Chrome OS and the Steam Deck wouldn't choose linux. It's there, customizable and works great. From that angle, it seems like unless Windows or Apple continue to be the desktop platform of choice indefinitely, (i.e. there won't be any new desktop platforms) something linux based taking market share of the desktop at some point becomes inevitable.
subjectsigma 2y ago
I really wish there was a filter for HN articles. These threads are so useless, boring, and stupid. I feel like I could recite all the fanboy cliche from every major OS by heart at this point.
samyar 2y ago
Every post i read with the title "My first experience with Linux" starts with a breaking and an unpleasant experience. because nothing works/worked? I guess Linux distros should prove they work seamlessly. cause the Fedora i installed 1 year ago could not detect my monitor resolution. and i have to write a custom script to fix it. a very hard challenge event for me which is a programmer. i don't think normal users have the tolerance to bother stuff like this. a lot of other stuff did not work too. and i don't think 1 year is enough time to fix them
- tmtvl 2y ago
  My first experience with GNU/Linux was back in 2012. I had just accidentally borked my Windows 7 install on my desktop PC by mucking with the registry and needed to reinstall. Of course I had data on the machine which I wanted to keep, so I needed a way to get it off my desktop PC and onto my laptop. A quick internet search pointed me to using a Ubuntu live USB. Using it my desktop booted fine and I was able to back my data up with no problems. Afterwards I reinstalled Windows 7 and tried to go on the internet. Which failed because I hadn't installed the ethernet driver yet. Remembering that the internet worked just fine under that Ubuntu thing I decided to install that instead. It worked fine, and I've been using GNU/Linux ever since. I, however, haven't used Ubuntu since the whole fracas around the Amazon lenses got me distro hopping until I landed on my current mainstays of OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Arch.
- account42 2y ago
  > Every post i read with the title "My first experience with Linux" starts with a breaking and an unpleasant experience. That's just selection bias - the 99.9% of people without issues don't have any reason to publish a rant.
simonblack 2y ago
I really love Linux Mint. I actually loved it so much that I kept using it for years. Yeah, me too. I discovered recently that I had been using Linux Mint for 10-12 years. In 99.99* percent of cases, it just works out of the box. And it has all those proprietary codecs and other things that are a pain to add with many other distros. As far as I'm concerned, Mint just works so don't try to fix it. * I neglected to add a WiFi card to my desktop when I was customising the order from the Lenovo factory. I just threw a USB WiFi dongle into it without investigating what sort of weird chip it used. That means I just run a script to install a driver for it during installation of a fresh system. No biggie.
prakashn27 2y ago
I use popos based on Ubuntu. Pros: - tiling support - workspaces - all Ubuntu apps

93 points by skilled 2y ago

zubairq 2y ago

Good article. To the author, why don't you do this yourself, I think it is a brilliant idea?

progx 2y ago
The problem is not only to make a desktop, nobody would implement it (NIH-Syndrom, thats why we have 12 karillion Linux Distributions), you have to ship your own distro.

RajT88 2y ago

2024 is the year of Linux on the Desktop!

55555 2y ago

tl;dr: Linux on Desktop could happen but isn't currently happening. The author recommends that you work to make it happen.

cranberryturkey 2y ago

I'm building a desktop app for mac/win/nix in tauri. Its pretty sweet although I'm not a big fan of rust so far. It's just weird.

chucke1992 2y ago

I have never used ChromeOS but isn't it basically a remote desktop?

shubb 2y ago
Originally you say it was a kind of kiosk operating system that ran a Web browser with Google apps deeply integrated to enable things like a little local file storage. Some years ago, they enabled you to access a real local Linux operating system, and install and run arbitrary things. I think but don't know that local Linux gives me a container or windows subsystem for Linux vibe. It's sufficient to use a chrome book as a local dev machine, and I think googlers do that daily.
reportgunner 2y ago
It was a weird kinda locked down linux with some google proprietary stuff last time I touched it, about 3 years ago.

mike_hock 2y ago

1. Dear author, I think Linux probably just isn't for you. 2. We probably don't want the author's concept of "Linux winning" to come true.

rigelbm 2y ago
Sincerely, The Gatekeeper.
- mike_hock 2y ago
  It's one of a billion of "Here's my proposal for improving Linux: Make it like Windows!" articles that keep getting written, and have been written for 20+ years now.
  - card_zero 2y ago
    > All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win. This is what you're against, right?
    - mike_hock 2y ago
      and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft What's funny about this is that Google used to be supposedly the new, friendly company that wasn't as scummy as Microsoft and Apple, and look where we are now.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    I picture Mark Shuttleworth furiously writing notes after reading this article.
- everdrive 2y ago
  Do you believe this is "gate-keeping?" If so, is gate-keeping universally bad?

donmcronald 2y ago

Microsoft is doing a good job of leveraging MS365 to make sure Linux isn’t an option for business users. Besides that, desktop Linux frustrates me in some way every time I try it and I’ve been trying since you could get it on floppy disks. The last few years it’s been display scaling. I swear every Linux developer on the planet must be using 1080p screens because the display scaling sucks. Maybe I’m just unlucky, but the settings panel (in Debian and Ubuntu) is always flaky and the fractional scaling might as well not exist.

tomaytotomato 2y ago
Yea I know your pain when it comes to display scaling on a 3840x2160 monitor. I use Kubuntu and found that if you set display scaling you need to restart to properly have the settings take effect. I normally have it at 150% scaling
bmitc 2y ago
Agreed. 100% or 200% scaling only is unusable for almost all modern monitors at their top resolution.
ur-whale 2y ago
> desktop Linux frustrates me Yes, there are unresolved issues, and that's not going away But consider the alternatives: 1) ads in your menu bar an a pc that calls home to Redmond every 10s 2) a pretty candy-themed adventure in la-la land that you pay through the nose for and where, like in the fabled Hotel California [1], you can never leave. I'll take the minor annoyances every day of the week. [1] https://genius.com/Eagles-hotel-california-lyrics https://genius.com/Eagles-hotel-california-lyrics
- lukan 2y ago
  "Yes, there are unresolved issues, and that's not going away" Why?!? It is totally possible to get rid of those "minor annoyances". Some obscure driver bug, yeah, those are hard as there are millions of different devices and combinations. But UI scaling and other pain points like consistent UI and UX? That can be solved and it would make life on linux easier for everyone who is not comfortable with the terminal - which is the vast majority of humanity.

1GZ0 2y ago

I think the quote from Linus is spot on. "Linux fanboys have ruined it’s (Linux's) image. Most of them take pride in doing simple things in an over complicated manner and wonder why people won’t switch." (Couldn't find the source, Linus might not have said this)

alurm 2y ago
Pretty sure it's fake.

akdor1154 2y ago

Canonical could literally have made it happen if they had kept their great product focus on desktop users.. Don't know how much of their failure to do so is the need for a business model, vs. just crap decisions.

qp11 2y ago
Its not their fault. They are competing against large roving armies of pure scum at Microsoft, who land up at the door of whichever large corp or govt org that decide to switch, with unmatchable discounts, freebies, bribes, lies and threats to ensure their rent collecting empire is defended at all cost. The reason Microsoft wins much more than tech is related to tactics used in sales, financial engineering, demand engineering(PR/marketing/advertising) etc. The EU looked like it was going to do something about the Desktop Market by targeting Microsoft Desktop domination specifically with the Digital Markets Act but what they ended up with some weakass shit about allowing people to uninstall some of the preinstalled apps Microsoft ships. If Big Tech has to be disintermediated the first step is to understand there is lot more going on outside the realm of Tech that needs to be disintermediated. And a pure one dimensional technology based approach has no chance of making a dent.
- everdrive 2y ago
  >Microsoft, who land up at the door of whichever large corp or govt org that decide to switch, with unmatchable discounts, freebies, bribes, lies and threats to ensure their rent collecting empire is defended at all cost. I'm relatively new to the industry, but we just saw the exact pattern in our switch from Splunk to Sentinel. A massive discount, and a severely inferior product.

gotbeans 2y ago

IMHO having a good desktop linux distro (or a proper desktop linux experience) doesn't have to correlate to a gold mine, and I'm not sure why the author conflates the two. If the linux desktop space is advancing so slowly is precisely and because of the opposite: because desktop linux is made and maintained by a bunch of people who do it for free. Alas, valve has done a pretty good job with proton and steamdeck which is helping the ecosystem. here's to hoping wayland and nvidia drivers 555 with explicit sync[1] we might get something decent next few months. https://zamundaaa.github.io/wayland/2024/04/05/explicit-sync.html https://zamundaaa.github.io/wayland/2024/04/05/explicit-sync...

rigelbm 2y ago
You answered your own question. I don't want my great-grand-children to be the first to have a great Linux Desktop. Ideally, I would like to have it now. Unfortunately, as things go in capitalism, the easiest way to accelerate development of something is with money.
- gotbeans 2y ago
  Where's the incentive in any of that? Pour money in linux desktop development for what? (So we can have linux desktop... sooner?) If there were any money to be made in linux desktop, it would have already happened imo, or otherwise the cost-opportunity is still to high. If anything, more than a gold mine, looks like a gold sink to me And don't get me wrong, been on arch for 7 years and i've long since ditched win. But I still don't think there's any meaningful incentives for companies to push for linux desktop.

DavidPiper 2y ago

I like a lot of this article, and broadly agree that Linux Desktop _could_ take off in a bigger way if people like me and you started putting open source developer time into making good apps for it. However, I think the author vastly overestimates the current state of the art by conflating Andriod and ChromeOS with Linux. Yes these are technically Linux distros, but their entire environment is build on a stack (JVM or Web) whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible. A world where JVM GUI apps or Web apps rule the desktop market is not quite the same thing as "Desktop Linux" taking off. However, web apps ruling the desktop market does have the interesting side-effect that it makes the barrier to using Linux a lot lower than it was in the past, so there's that. The fact that it implies "Desktop" is dying doesn't help, though.

Barrin92 2y ago
>whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible That's exactly how it should be. To most users noticing what operating system they're on means something has gone wrong, because what they care about is run software, they don't care what OS they're on, and they shouldn't. I want Linux to win because it's open source, not because so enthusiasts with penguin t-shirts can declare a sort of Sid Meier's Civilization's cultural victory. Android and ChromeOS to that end have done a fantastic job, as has the SteamDeck, because it simply works.
scheeseman486 2y ago
ChromeOS is clearly making moves to being more than just a frontend for Chrome with PWAs and an Android subsystem people only use under duress. Google wouldn't have added support for Linux applications and Steam if they wanted to keep it like it was.
Dalewyn 2y ago
>However, I think the author vastly overestimates the current state of the art by conflating Andriod and ChromeOS with Linux. >Yes these are technically Linux distros, but their entire environment is build on a stack (JVM or Web) whose purpose is to make the fact that it's a Linux distro as irrelevant as possible. When the most successful consumer Linux distros are the ones that try to be as not-Linux as humanely possible, maybe the problem lies somewhere that many do not want to admit?

tomaytotomato 2y ago

Until you get some sort of grass roots movement or large shift from Windows or MacOS, Linux desktop shells will always be niche for the foreseeable future.

ur-whale 2y ago
> Linux desktop shells will always be niche for the foreseeable future. Which is not necessarily a bad thing: like every social escape hatch on the planet, the moment it becomes mainstream, it'll likely cease t be an escape hatch and start to become bastardized and unusable for users that don't fit the lowest common denominator profile.
adamomada 2y ago
I keep thinking the Windows 10 EOL in 2025 is it. Some sort of large ad buy by IBM promoting Fedora as an alternative to your computer going to the garbage.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

The two are in conflict: > This one really annoyed me. I mean. Canonical knows for a fact that everyone is going to install these codecs anyway. Why not include them to save the end user some trouble ? > not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft People want the easiest possible thing, but Evil Corp wants the easiest possible thing to be the thing that screws you. The reason those codecs aren't installed by default is because of legal restrictions. "Just STFU and make it work" often involves requiring the user to agree to something which is bad for them, and putting at least a minimum amount of friction in the way of that is a good thing. And it also puts the friction on other people. If the codec isn't installed by default and then someone else is using it, you will notice this instead of seamlessly using the proprietary one, and possibly complain to them and try to get them to use a free codec like AV1. The cost, of course, is that it's a minor deterrent to adoption. But the endgame of valuing market share over principles is Microsoft.

donogh 2y ago
This minor deterrant to adoption scales up with lots of other minor deterrents. Users want "it just works" and that's the experience they get with Microsoft and Apple (however bad it is in other ways). Desktop Linux must match or exceed that base level of experience if it wants to drive meaningful adoption. Let's be practical: give users a brief explanation of the downsides before they make choices like installing proprietary codecs. Treat them like adults. Let them have an easier life in favor of getting them on board.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  > Users want "it just works" and that's the experience they get with Microsoft and Apple (however bad it is in other ways). It isn't. With Apple they get "it works or it doesn't" which is crap when it doesn't, because you can't fix it and Apple won't. With Microsoft things are commonly broken, often by accident, and no easier to fix than installing codecs on Linux. But worse, with both of them, is when things are broken on purpose. Almost like Linux. Only not for your benefit, but for theirs, at your expense. Which puts some lie to the notion that easier always wins. It isn't easier to use Windows, it's a mess of bad code and half of it is out to get you. People use Windows because they have to, or because it came on their computer when they bought it. If you want adoption you need to address that -- do something about the Windows-only apps. Get more Linux PCs into the stores. Which are the things that are happening. Things that used to need Windows are now websites or mobile apps. Google's money got Chromebooks onto the store shelves. And if you include ChromeOS, Linux has gone from <1% market share in 2010 to now having as much desktop market share as Mac did back then. All of which at the expense of Microsoft, because now Mac has twice that much. Being opinionated isn't the problem, it's a feature. The competition is opinionated too, but its opinion is that you're cattle to be milked.

barrotes 2y ago

My parents (both over 80) daily use Linux Mint for a decade now. They don't know it, simply last time we bought them a PC I put it there, explained how to open the web browser, play solitaire/FreeCell/whatever other game they like, how to shut it down etc. I live in another city and I almost never had to adjust anything there in all these years, differently on what happened when they had windows (they unknowingly installed a lot of spyware and bloatware, I had to clean it up periodically). Still, for me this is one of the few experiments that went well, probably because the only "complex" need they have is a web browser. Now if a friend (not a technical one) needs a new computer advice I tell him to buy a second-hand MacBook and enjoy. No one ever complained (in fact all compliment me for the choice). The vast majority of users is not like my parents, has some specific needs, like they need Microsoft Office, or Photoshop, or they play on PC and still don't want to face the challenges you need to overcome if you want to do everything with Linux. I would never use MacOS on my PC (not because it's not good, just because I'm a FOSS maniac), but it's the perfect operating system for casual users and even for many power users. The only rule I adopt for OS advice is "avoid Windows unless you are actually forced to use it (gaming, specific legacy programs etc)".

bmitc 2y ago
> The only rule I adopt for OS advices is "avoid Windows Why?
- thriftwy 2y ago
  VFAT patent enforcement was sufficient to declare a permanent personal vendetta against MS. Needless to say MS did half dozen such things during the 00s.
  - bmitc 2y ago
    So basically irrelevant reasons in 2024.
    - the_third_wave 2y ago
      Yes, that dog there did bite your brother and sister and cousin and neighbour but that is months ago so basically irrelevant reasons in 2024. Go on, give it a hug.

aa-jv 2y ago

The thing about Linux is that it is such a delightful, vibrant and flourishing development environment. There are so many great ways to get an application built for that environment, packaged up, and in the hands of masses of users. Its not just about the Desktop. There are plenty of window managers with the requisite desktop functionality. Its also about having the applications users need. Personally, I'd love to spend the next 10 years building on Linux apps. Its an opportunity for some great advances to be made. I'd focus on multimedia and audio apps, personally. The environment is so conducive to creativity.

ur-whale 2y ago

>" I don’t want the future of the Linux desktop to be some locked down spyware-ridden bastardized version of Linux like Chrome OS." Hear hear. As a matter of fact, this is a pretty accurate description of every major OS in 2024 except Linux.

dcminter 2y ago

The author declares that... "All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win." ... but as far as I can see that's Canonical and they're a long way from owning the desktop. Snaps, which the author lauds, are their thing! The author laments that Ubuntu didn't install the media codecs, but they have a panel during install asking if you want to install commercial stuff including such things. That could be more prominent, admittedly. The real problem is that there's just so much commercial software out there and most of it runs on Windows or (often rather grudgingly) on Mac. It's been an issue for decades. Back in the mid 90s I was working with "Windows for Workgroups" at the same time as messing with Linux. Linux was enormously superior at that point; pre-emptive multi-tasking, memory protection, high quality scheduling, and an excellent networking stack versus a very clunky OS balanced precariously on top of DOS. But Linux didn't have Microsoft Word, it didn't have Excel, it didn't come pre-installed if you bought a PC, and it couldn't run MS DOS software. Windows won, and once Windows NT was out it was a much more even race even on the technical qualities. The best thing that ever happened to desktop Linux was the commercialisation of the web, because it effectively made a huge swathe of important software usable on Linux. This is sufficiently the case that I've been able to use Linux (usually Ubuntu) at work for several of my recent gigs, but I still can't use it at my current day job (for example) because the miscellany of Data Loss Prevention software doesn't run on it but does run on Windows or MacOS. I'm not sure Linux will ever "win" the desktop, though the share of desktop might increase in proportion to the dwindling of that market versus mobile devices.

rurban 2y ago
> ... but as far as I can see that's Canonical and they're a long way from owning the desktop So far I see Redhat owns GNOME and all the base systems, and they already do own the linux desktop. Good so.
linguae 2y ago
Yup. I recently read a fascinating article about Apple selling a Mac emulator (similar in usage to the open source Basilisk and SheepShaver emulators) for Solaris back in the mid-1990s. There actually was a market for Unix workstation users who needed access to proprietary software packages that only ran on Windows or Mac OS. Even though Unix ran circles around DOS-based Windows and the classic Mac in terms of stability and power, Unix users still needed to be able to collaborate with their Windows- and Mac-using colleagues. Come to think of it, this also reminds me of why certain Lisp machine vendors such as Texas Instruments and Symbolics made Lisp machine expansion cards for Macs: this provided Lisp machine users the opportunity to use desktop software tools without having to buy two physically separate computers, a very expensive purchase in the early 1990s. (While I’m on the topic, even Apple shipped some Mac models with expansion cards that had x86 chips for the purpose of running DOS and Windows).

solarized 2y ago

The hardest thing to solve here is standardizing the ecosystem of freedom. What's "lovely" about this ecosystem is that nobody cares and nobody tells you how to run your desktops. Want something lightweight? Go with TinyCore or Puppy. Into gaming? Check out SteamOS. Home theater? Use Kodi. Focused on security? Kali is the way to go. I even built my own distros for my product to automate endoscopy machine interfaces. You can build whatever you want to solve whatever problems you have. Trying to solve this problem is like merging all the transcontinental countries into one union called USSR. I really admire any billionaire or community that continues Mark Shuttleworth's effort to raise awareness about Linux desktops.

vegabook 2y ago

> "To fix this fragmentation of package formats, two new formats have been introduced...Snap and Flatpak" The Nix package manager trounces these two options utterly and completely for anything that's not GUI-based, and even for desktop software if you're prepared to go all-in with NixOS.

IshKebab 2y ago
Yeah and if you're prepared to spend a serious amount of time learning Nix. Which kind of counts it out from "the year of the Linux desktop".

frithsun 2y ago

I got a Windows computer for my six year old because we have to have Roblox and Roblox Studio. I was stunned by how much clutter, hassle, and adware I had to fight through just to achieve a simplisticity I take for granted with a standard Linux install. With the tsunami of AI clutter coming for Windows, I suspect desktop linux will finally, after all these decades, have its day.

sthuck 2y ago

Linux desktop efforts need a BDFL. Too many duplicated efforts, the wayland migration while needed was a complete mess, and actually the worst time I had using Linux since like 2005. This kind of complete breakage of user experience is unimaginable even in MacOS and it's hostile approach to power users. I think otherwise it's going to continue being a frustrating two steps forward one step back.

talhah 2y ago

I can see the guys at System76 filling in this gap. They have excellent hardware and their own PopOS is really user friendly for newcomers. Gaming support is also pretty decent paired with Steams Proton. The problem with onboarding people to use Linux is like trying to convince an iPhone user to use an Android device. Many people are stuck in their respective ecosystem and are used to familiarity, they're not going to switch to linux unless you can get over the burden of switching. In my anecdotal experience, I installed Linux for a teacher of mine and he had some issues with getting used to it but his kids quickly figured it out and weren't used to Windows or MacOS which made it significantly easier. Putting Linux computers in students hands is honestly the best way to increase adoption and Chromebooks are a perfect example of this.

thepuppet33r 2y ago
Has System76's hardware improved in the last few years? I bought a Gazelle 15 during the pandemic, and it has been the worst computer I've ever had. Display issues, overheating, keyboard dies at random, monitor has an increasing number of dead pixels (had several on arrival from manufacturer), had to have an entire motherboard replacement because the power port stopped being able to hold the power cable after just a couple of months and it refused to fully boot without being plugged in (despite having a battery), the battery life is a joke (less than two hours even on low performance mode), the whole case is cheap plastic, the video card will occasionally just not be recognized by the firmware and will only allow me to use the integrated graphics, and so on. I spent weeks working with System76 support and they tried their best, but the laptop is just a piece of junk, especially for the two grand price point. My next purchase will probably be an ASUS laptop that I'll load either Popos or Linux Mint on.
- benrutter 2y ago
  I have a Lemur and it's the best laptop I've had- great battery life, everything feels snappy and I haven't had a single issue. Bought it during lockdown as well though, so not much of an argument for their hardware improving.

enasterosophes 2y ago

> Desktop Linux is an untapped gold mine! All a company needs to do is provide a homogenous/coherent user experience, smooth the rough edges, and not be as scummy as Google, Apple, or Microsoft and they will win. Ah, yes. Everything must be monetized. Very well then, let us ask what is the business model for this monetized desktop Linux? * People who already use Linux won't suddenly decide to start paying money for support that they never relied on before. * People who were never into Linux before aren't going to suddenly start jumping ship just because they can choose to pay for a supported distro. Let's face it, most people don't like spending their time thinking about what OS to run, and maybe that's even healthier, since the more I learn about computing, the more I realize it all kind of sucks in one way or another. * If the idea is sell proprietary software to people on Linux desktops, it's not impossible (as shown by success stories like Steam and Matlab.) However, it also needs to compete with the ecosystem of free software, as well as web-based apps which are inherently OS-agnostic, along with the pre-existing markets like Steam. * Before our glasses get too rose-tinted, let's remember that although Linux works fine on desktop, it's not easy. You either need to go the Ubuntu route of being opinionated and one-size-fits-all, or you need to accept that the flexibility of Linux makes support difficult. I've been using Linux exclusively for 15 years, so I'm used to fiddling with all the knobs required to keep it ticking over smoothly. I would thoroughly resent any pressure anyone would put on me to change the way I do things. On the other hand, I would never suggest to a newbie that they should try doing things the same way as me. In fact, I advise against it. "Kids, just try ubuntu first. If you like it, great. Come and talk to me again when you're sure you really want to be a weirdo."

sspiff 2y ago
Agreed. One of the reasons I use Linux and other open source software, is not to be dependent or beholden to a single company. I can't count the amount of times I experienced or read about others experiencing a company doing a rug pull on users of their software by either changing direction, abandoning the product, or changing licensing terms. I do donate monthly to a number of open source projects because I like their work, and want them to stick around. But even if they don't, as long as the software is there and the user base is there, someone will pick up the baton and move it forward, even if it is at a slow pace.

benreesman 2y ago

I’m a long-time advocate of using the best appliance (a Mac) to connect to a “real computer” (a linux-x86_64 build with an NVIDIA card in it). But the times are changing and paradoxically I have almost the opposite view in 2024 vs 2021. Desktop Linux can render fonts really well now, you can generally play audio now, ditto 802.11 and BlueTooth and damn the drivers are just good now. Conversely Apple gear is becoming a pretty credible threat as an on-tile HBM accelerator platform, and while I’m sick unto the death of getting my damned window border radius to me by people other than Steve Jobs himself, I want a Studio on my desk or a Pro sled in the closet, the Sillicon is just too good to ignore now, and the MLX people aren’t sleeping. I care a lot about darwin-aarch64 now, and could give a fuck less about a windowing system worse than Windows.

jillesvangurp 2y ago

I've had a slowish laptop (intel gpu) with Manjaro (Arch derivative) and Steam for a few years now. It's not my main laptop but I fire it up once or twice a week for some light gaming (I have some indie games that I like). It works great for that despite Intel performance not being great, obviously. Every few weeks I use the Manjaro settings tool to update the kernel to the latest and greatest. And of course I update packages regularly with a command line tool called yay. I can't say it has been completely without issues. But so far I've been able to solve these issues. And this doesn't happen a lot. But probably not a great distribution for beginners as you are expected to solve problems on the command line. But if you know what you are doing, this is pretty nice and stable. I like having rolling updates and not missing out on all the latest stuff. Having Steam means that Windows is now optional for gaming. You don't need it for most games. They'll work fine on Linux. There are exceptions of course but mostly everything I have just works fine. And between Mac and Linux, I just have no patience for the dreary experience that is Windows. Most other work stuff you can get via snap/flatpak (I use both). IMHO both need work but software availability is pretty good. But for things I care about, I tend to install them manually anyway so I don't have any middlemen to deal with between me and the software project. E.g. Firefox can update itself if you just install the tar ball from them. Works great. With most linux distributions, the main differentiators seem to be the amount of effort they do to have users needing to use a terminal window with various degrees of success. With most Linux distributions, you'll find yourself needing a terminal window sooner or later.

fr4nkr 2y ago

> While there are technical differences between Snap and Flatpak, the gist is the same. Offer a sandboxed, isolated, and universal package format for Linux. Universal package formats are an overall win in my opinion. And make Linux feel a little bit more like one operating system. Still, they are now yet another choice that the developer needs to make when distributing their software on Linux. Someone has yet to explain to me how the Linux desktop is supposed to just agree on a universal standard for everything without a proprietary ecosystem, at which point it would just be a shittier Windows. And that's not even touching on the fact that alternatives often exist for valid reasons, i.e. Pipewire being obviously better than Pulse, which used to be a de facto standard. Or the fact that some companies like Bitwig have already demonstrated that commercial Linux software via Flatpak is viable - Adobe simply does not care, and they never will. The irony of Windows users sharing their opinions on the Linux desktop is that they often sound how they picture existing Linux desktop users: people who treat their computers as toys. We're fully aware that using Linux has major caveats. It's okay to just not like Linux, man. Nobody is forcing you to.

cauch 2y ago

The same article was written billions of time in the past 20 years (at least). Few thoughts: - Popularity may imply things that are fundamentally incompatible with the way Linux works. Imagine Windows or Mac giving the possibility of fork, and of course, you will have seen plenty of "distributions" where people tried to fix all of these things that don't suit them, with a lot of hardware problems and software incompatibilities. The author says it himself: Windows 8 was the worst OS they used. So, if Windows 8 would have been forkable, of course plenty of parallel version trying to fix the problems would have appeared. Additionally, not sure forkability is compatible with some economic model such as "getting popular by doing a lot of adverts and costly initiative to win market share, paid by revenue we got by doing user-unfriendly-things (ads everywhere in the interface, capturing users, ...)" - There are more brands of car or of dish-washing liquid than obviously-not-anecdotical Linux distributions. I'm still not sure why people are so confused about the number of distributions. Just do what you do when you buy a car or a dish-washing liquid bottle. - Popularity does not really matter. As soon as there are incentives to not be ignored by hardware or software makers (and there is now for Linux, the amount of "compatible with Linux" is impressive when you think of the market share. Probably due to the fact that it is an important systems for some sectors and that Linux users are building bridges), then it does not matter at all to me if my neighbor is using Linux or not, it does not affect me in any way. I'm not sure I understand what is the point of being popular.

mrfinn 2y ago

I agree with his description of the Arch forums, I've been using them for years as a source of info for solving problems along those provided by Gentoo, and never felt in the mood to write anything there because the community seems pretty hostile towards any kind of ignorance while asking for help or even worst, in the very strongly enforced forum rules. Pity because Arch is really a great distro and provides a solid base for other distros as well. Maybe is not always like that but... Arch forums feel to me like highly elitist and unwelcoming with newcomers. Not even bugzilla.kernel.org feels like that.

andrewstuart 2y ago

Desktop operating systems take vast resource to be consistently behaved and presented. And the strength of Linux is that it is the inverse of consistent…… it’s a bunch of stuff that works well together. Function over form. I’d never use a Google desktop os but I might use steam. Steam seems like the most likely desktop os contender, and they have the designers and the developers and the money to make it consistent. The problem is there’s no reason why they’d make a desktop Linux.

dash2 2y ago

This is all, and will forever be, a fantasy. You cannot make a product without profit. Linux wins in the data centre because the corporations who make money off selling compute have commoditized their complement. "Linux" wins when it's Android because Google used Linux as a kernel for their offering - which IMHO is still worse than Apple but fine if you prefer Android. It's not open source, though, none of the apps people use on Android are open source, it's just a cheap software component. The Steam Deck, again, exists to sell closed source games. I used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years. I left it and never looked back. I have a residual affection for the people who actually write open source. But the zealots, with their rants about evil corporations, their Boy Scout fantasies about running the digital economy on volunteer effort, their response to any criticism with "it works for me, you must be stupid/lying", their poor sod grandparents for whom they've kindly installed Arch ... those people are toxic and deserve to be laughed at.

any1 2y ago
Zealotry/enthusiasm tends to float to the top and is, perhaps, what you see on the surface when you look at any community. However, I think that most users of open source software prefer it, not because of their political beliefs, but because of their curiosity. Open source software is made by the community for the community; not to entice outsiders or sell to any would-be customers. The main draw of open source software for a curious person is that they can look inside and tinker with it and they can modify it to conform to their needs. Saying things like "I tried your software and it doesn't work for me" or "I left it and never looked back" (usually phrased in a less polite manner) doesn't really achieve anything constructive. An open source software developer isn't interested in that kind of "feedback". After all, they're not selling anything. They're just making software for their own needs and/or to satisfy their thirst for knowledge and understanding. If you are not curious about the inner workings of software, then open source is not for you, and that's fine.
surgical_fire 2y ago
> I used Linux on the desktop for about 10 years. I left it and never looked back. I have a residual affection for the people who actually write open source. But the zealots, with their rants about evil corporations, their Boy Scout fantasies about running the digital economy on volunteer effort, their response to any criticism with "it works for me, you must be stupid/lying", their poor sod grandparents for whom they've kindly installed Arch ... those people are toxic and deserve to be laughed at. Despite a lot of words written there, you don't mention which issues you had with Linux that made you switch away from it after 10 years. I made the opposite route. Two years ago I switched to Linux (Linux Mint, to be more specific), and I couldn't be happier. Everything has been working like a charm, and I honestly have to do less tinkering around to keep things working than I used to on Windows (which I had basically to do a yearly fresh install). Maybe it was your distro of choice?

scheeseman486 2y ago

I think Valve's combination of KDE, Flatpak and an immutable rootfs is the right combination (Kinoite also does this, but it plays second fiddle to the Silverblue which uses Gnome). ChromeOS has also been making moves towards becoming a proper Linux distro with their adoption of Wayland, separation of Chrome from the underlying OS, support for running native Linux applications and even Windows applications through Steam. A lot of people scoff at getting Google involved, but if they put their weight behind Linux applications (or even Wine) then that could mean filling some of the gaps in software support. Adobe might not care about desktop Linux, but ChromeOS? It has widespread adoption in business and particularly education and given a native port, that means every Linux distribution could get access to it too. Windows has stalled, they're throwing all their effort into AI features that customers don't want. It's a perfect time to make a move.

masfoobar 2y ago

I am very happy on my GNU/Linux Debian distro. Of course, at work, I use Windows. It is bloated. That is not an attack on the OS in general but the added fluff on top of it. I dont want it.. yet on next bootup I see co-pilot at the bottom right of my screen. Eff-off! Remember -- software piracy is wrong... but I don't actually own it, either! I remember the old license agreements on Windows 95, etc.. I would not be surprised if Windows today is still based on "rights to use it" or similar. I am not here saying distros like debian could replace windows. A lot of users comftable on Windows will struggle to change. A number of alternative software is a learning curve.. even if it is just as good (or better) than what is used on Windows. We also have IT departments who have to relearn... login system, security, etc, especially if their world is windows-focused. My wife uses Linux. My eldest child uses Linux. They have no issue. Of course, there may come a time when my eldest needs a peice of software that is Windows only.. but will get to that when I have to (and possible alternatives) -- but I am also a realist... if a child has a specific need (especially a career-based one) then I will install Windows if there really is nothing else. I would like to properly see the "year of gnu/linux" but despite Microsoft making poor decision with Windows, it will still have things a Linux distro wont... with added budgets at the forefront with PR, legal, marketing.. and all the other departments it has! Big Companies will also "buy microsoft" for the support whether they think it is good or not.. it is a safety net for job security.

tasuki 2y ago
> Of course, at work, I use Windows. That's not "of course" at all! I've used Linux on my laptop in all of my last four jobs. Five jobs ago I had two computers and one of them was mandated to have Windows...
- masfoobar 2y ago
  It is for me -- all companies I work for (except one) during my career has been Windows.

red_admiral 2y ago

I have a Surface Pro that's just been telling me Win10 is soon coming to its end, and Win11 won't run on this device. I'm considering Linux Mint which is just fine for what I use that device for (mainly web browsing). I guess part of the problem is if you commit to building a bazaar instead of a cathedral, there's some things (like majestic roofs that don't leak) which are harder to realize. And then there's the bit where I'll be choosing Mint/MATE (if I don't go full XFCE) because something something GTK3 mumble Adwaita.

briffid 2y ago

I've been on and off Linux desktop for more than 25 years. I always gave it a chance, for home use and work use as well. And it always failed to prove it worth the effort. For home use it failed most miserably when it booted up with a black screen after a version update due to an already reported bug with the Nvidia driver, which no one cared to fix before release. Then struggled again for years with finding useful applications, even games, without success, so I gave up. For work use (as a software engineer) I tried to make myself productive on Linux, and yes I liked the terminal, and that was it. Everything else just sucked. Coming back from suspend e.g. was gambling. Multi-monitor usage sucked. PDF editor? Forget it. Productivity suite on desktop, OneDrive synchronization, DTP, Music - all half-baked, full of bugs and incompatibilities. Thank you, not any more. For a server, of course I'd use Linux. For a phone, of course. But for desktop, if 30 years was not enough to mature to something usable, I would stop hoping for seeing it as a gold mine. Always promised, always failed.

HeckFeck 2y ago
I agree. Certain DEs and WMs are fun to play with, Void Linux is a fun minimal system to tinker with, Debian is perfect for a fire up and forget server but ultimately commercial software always has the polish and edge I need to get things done at home or for work. I.e. Affinity vs GIMP, or MS Office vs LibreOffice, Sony Vegas vs whatever crashfest NLE I install on Linux. So my current pattern is a neutered W10 LTSC for gaming and video editing complimented by a Macbook for work/coding/internet. I will say that for my parents who just want a desktop with a web browser and basic word processing, Linux Mint + MATE is fine and much more predictable than Windows. I don't have to teach them everything from scratch every few months, as would be the case if they were on Windows and some PM rules that everything must be revolutionised again.
RevMen 2y ago
I've been giving Linux a chance every few years since the 90s. Last year I got a new Framework and decided to try again. I tried Fedora and Pop and I can say I'm here to stay. It's Pop's version of Gnome with the tiling manager that I love. Windows has nothing close to it. I do a decent amount of work in pdfs and I'm surprised that's not good for you. If you're willing to pay for some software there are some really good options. I was using Acrobat before and I am more than happy now, not just because I'm no longer paying $15/mo. I haven't had a hardware problem on Linux in a while. When was the last time you tried to install it? If you have modern hardware you might be pleased with that part of the experience now.

amelius 2y ago

A few days ago I had a bad experience installing sshfs on MacOS. On desktop Linux, this was so simple. I really don't understand how people can think that Linux is somehow less user friendly.

TheLoafOfBread 2y ago

Desktop Linux can not be a goldmine from its nature and its userbase. People using Linux does not want to pay for anything and first thing which they will do is to fork your code and "release it" for free because of GPL. When you have no chance to monetize it, how it can turn into a goldmine?

jrepinc 2y ago
Fun fact, I spent more money on GNU/Linux and donations to FOSS projects then I ever have for Windows and its software. Why because it is just better more user respecting and is constantly improving, and the opposite is true for Microsoft and their malicious business practices and bad products that are getting worse by each release.
gebna 2y ago
Google made money on Android. As long as you're not making direct changes to Kernel code, you're free to close source anything you add. The existence of AOSP didn't prevent the Playstore or google play service from making Google the sole controller of Android. That's how it turns into a goldmine.
- TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
  Android is kind of pointless without phones it is running on, so having a code does not mean you have any use for it. Same for routers using Linux. Kind of pointless to have source code when you don't have the hardware.

rjakobsson 2y ago

elementaryOS seems to fit the feature description. Can anyone share their experience with it?

reportgunner 2y ago
It's ok if you don't know how to install debian and pick a desktop environment or can't install mint mate for some reason.
gebna 2y ago
I daily drove it. Mint + Cinnamon is more stable.

poulpy123 2y ago

There are actually several problems for desktop linux, or more exactly, for linux on the home computer. Some are independent of linux itself: the lack of drivers, the lack of some very common software is external to whatever the linux devs (both linux the OS and linux the distributions). I would even say there are very good at compensating it, even if it is not sufficient. Then there are the things that are linux dependant, such as the publication of software, the updates, the choice paralysis etc

kuschkufan 2y ago
lack of drivers, for what exactly? linux actually has tons of drivers for old like for new stuff. on the other hand, i recently bought a new windows laptop and tried putting in a new bigger ssd and guess what; when trying to reinstall windows on that the setup program didn't even find that ssd. no, you had to get an extra driver from intel.com - embarrassing. linux comes with all drivers included.
- poulpy123 2y ago
  Last time I installed linux on a personal PC was several years ago but it was a nightmare to install the wifi. I just checked a film scanner on my desk and it is impossible to be ran on linux without paying a 100€ third party software. On windows you may have to download the driver yourself, but at least you have one

notorandit 2y ago

Running Linux on my main productivity PC since 2003 Mainly laptops, but also a couple of desktops. It's not always been easy, especially before 2015-2016. I tried Slackware, Gentoo, SuSE, Ubuntu and, finally, Arch Linux. It is still not easy, but at least quite well documented. To me everything works pretty well. Everything but a single thing. Hw-accelerated WebRTC. Almost all browsers are chromium-based. And Google supports hw-accelerated WebRTC only on Android and ChromeOS. I can imagine the latter (which is a browser centric OS), but why Android? Firefox hw-accelerated seems not to work too. My Linux box gets on its knees when doing Zoom/Teams/Meet/Slack with video on. I think this is either intentional or simply stupid.

cess11 2y ago
I do a couple of hours in video conferencing a day on Linux and don't consider it particularly resource intensive. It's another service than those you mention plus one way video on Teams because they don't allow video in Firefox because they hate us all, but still, I think it's a WebRTC thing. People on Windows seems to have more issues with performance than me.

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

"The first obstacle you run into as a newcomer, is the ridiculous number of different operating systems that exist under the Linux umbrella. The Linux community loves to call them "distros" as a way to express that there are not many differences between them." I have been trying various distributions over the years. Being someone who likes to compile software, and coming from BSD, I am still not into package managers. (Yes, I tried Gentoo.) I have arrived at Frankenstein Linux. It's a hybrid of glibc/musl, various portable BSD stuff and custom text-processing utilities. Linux distributions contain multitudes of software I never use; I removed all of it. Every program is statically-linked, even GCC; I keep no libraries other than what comes with the compiler. There is also an area for running dynamically-linked binaries using a musl or glibc dynamic linker, when that need occasionally arises. I am not a graphics person so Frankenstein Linux is command-line only, textmode. It's smaller than LFS but larger than Tinycore. In the process of creating and using it, I have discovered many interesting compilation-time and run-time facts about various software I use, stuff I see written about nowhere. Linux overall seems generally hyperfocused on binary packages. When in a rush, these can be convenient but I do not think I will ever prefer binary packages over software I compile myself. I am not a fan "package maintainers". I learn nothing about the software I use by choosing binary packages and these maintainers too often make compile-time choices I would never make myself.

supriyo-biswas 2y ago
> In the process of creating and using it, I have discovered many interesting compilation-time and run-time facts about various software I use, stuff I see written about nowhere. Doesn't the LFS documentation serve as an entry point for most of this stuff?
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
  For some people it might. But the problems I encounter when compiling software are not addressed in LFS. These problems are usually solved through reading the documentation from the software authors, if any, reading the source code and through experimentation, trial and error. There is no single project that includes everything I need/want nor that excludes everything I don't want. Also LFS recommends only GNU software; I use some BSD versions of common utilities and other stuff. To me, LFS was one person's project to construct a userland for the Linux kernel according to his own preferences. In that tradition I am doing the same. His choices might seem "conventional" but they are choices and in fact can be varied considerably. The interesting thing to me about LFS is that it predates all the projects people recommend today as "source-based" distributions or projects for building "embedded" systems. There are so many different choices and variations, enough for endless online debates over what some project "is" or "isn't" and which is better or worse. To me this simply represents the freedom that Linux, as a kernel-only alternative to BSD, allows to construct a userland any way one wants. Not according to some pre-ordained rules. Compiling each item of userland software oneself, without using a third party's shell scripts and/or makefiles, leads to discoveries of all the author idiosyncracies and quirks that come with it. Some folks might not want to know. Others might discover some useful knowledge. Truthfully, I prefer to spend time learning about the compilation of the individual software rather than spend it learning how to use someone's automated system used to compile all of it in one go. With BSD, it is easy to trim the userland down to only what one needs. Most of it is in one place, a single source tree. With Linux, I am doing the opposite, building the userland up from nothing. The resources are in various places, spread across the internet. In both cases, I am seeking to understand how the ssytem works.

tmtvl 2y ago

I've been using GNU/Linux as my daily driver full time since 2012. It does everything I need: I can send and receive e-mails, LibreOffice works well enough for my needs, I can listen to music, watch videos, and play video games (I have an embarrassing total of over 1,000 hours in Fallout New Vegas and Dragon's Dogma combined). But I recognise that my experience isn't universal and people who have specific needs should use the system that meets those needs.

benrutter 2y ago

I think this line is really compelling: > Chrome OS is Linux based. Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux said that Chromebooks might be the way Linux finally wins on Desktop. I'd love it, but I don't see most non-techie people consciously adopting free software out principle. On the other hand, I reallh can't see how new platform developers like the people behind Android, Chrome OS and the Steam Deck wouldn't choose linux. It's there, customizable and works great. From that angle, it seems like unless Windows or Apple continue to be the desktop platform of choice indefinitely, (i.e. there won't be any new desktop platforms) something linux based taking market share of the desktop at some point becomes inevitable.

subjectsigma 2y ago

I really wish there was a filter for HN articles. These threads are so useless, boring, and stupid. I feel like I could recite all the fanboy cliche from every major OS by heart at this point.

samyar 2y ago

Every post i read with the title "My first experience with Linux" starts with a breaking and an unpleasant experience. because nothing works/worked? I guess Linux distros should prove they work seamlessly. cause the Fedora i installed 1 year ago could not detect my monitor resolution. and i have to write a custom script to fix it. a very hard challenge event for me which is a programmer. i don't think normal users have the tolerance to bother stuff like this. a lot of other stuff did not work too. and i don't think 1 year is enough time to fix them

tmtvl 2y ago
My first experience with GNU/Linux was back in 2012. I had just accidentally borked my Windows 7 install on my desktop PC by mucking with the registry and needed to reinstall. Of course I had data on the machine which I wanted to keep, so I needed a way to get it off my desktop PC and onto my laptop. A quick internet search pointed me to using a Ubuntu live USB. Using it my desktop booted fine and I was able to back my data up with no problems. Afterwards I reinstalled Windows 7 and tried to go on the internet. Which failed because I hadn't installed the ethernet driver yet. Remembering that the internet worked just fine under that Ubuntu thing I decided to install that instead. It worked fine, and I've been using GNU/Linux ever since. I, however, haven't used Ubuntu since the whole fracas around the Amazon lenses got me distro hopping until I landed on my current mainstays of OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Arch.
account42 2y ago
> Every post i read with the title "My first experience with Linux" starts with a breaking and an unpleasant experience. That's just selection bias - the 99.9% of people without issues don't have any reason to publish a rant.

simonblack 2y ago

I really love Linux Mint. I actually loved it so much that I kept using it for years. Yeah, me too. I discovered recently that I had been using Linux Mint for 10-12 years. In 99.99* percent of cases, it just works out of the box. And it has all those proprietary codecs and other things that are a pain to add with many other distros. As far as I'm concerned, Mint just works so don't try to fix it. * I neglected to add a WiFi card to my desktop when I was customising the order from the Lenovo factory. I just threw a USB WiFi dongle into it without investigating what sort of weird chip it used. That means I just run a script to install a driver for it during installation of a fresh system. No biggie.

prakashn27 2y ago

I use popos based on Ubuntu. Pros: - tiling support - workspaces - all Ubuntu apps