What a trash comment. Actually, it's not. You just disagree with it. Sometimes when you disagree with someone's conclusions, it's hard to see the merit of thei

What a trash comment. Actually, it's not. You just disagree with it. Sometimes when you disagree with someone's conclusions, it's hard to see the merit of their reasoning. We need to... There are two complications to this. One is that the "we" of Linux development has never and will never have the kind of coherence that it takes to appeal to an extremely large audience. (Even calling it "Linux" isn't always agreed-upon). There are a great many people working on Linux or making things from Linux, but they are not all going in the same direction. This is both a strength and a weakness. The second is not so much a different reason as it is an example of a major weakness of this style of development: It's a demonstrably inefficient way of addressing the needs of certain kinds of users. The list of things you say need to be fixed with the Linux desktop, which is quite typical and also quite incomplete, has also remained constant for more than a decade as year after year "of the Linux Desktop" passed by. Although the situation has improved, "We" have not moved on to a better class of problems because most people working on them want to use the terminal, or at least don't mind editing text files for configuration, and correspondingly are not very good at addressing the needs of people very much unlike them.