Comments on: Problems with the Linux desktop http://nongraphical.com/2009/01/problems-with-the-linux-desktop/ A dynamic trapeze of web design, programming, and randomness. Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:02:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Debian Denis (Deenis) Extreme Deven Gallo Dennace 3000 (like AMD Athlon64 3000+) Deven Gallo that slick main man Deven http://nongraphical.com/2009/01/problems-with-the-linux-desktop/comment-page-1/#comment-743 Debian Denis (Deenis) Extreme Deven Gallo Dennace 3000 (like AMD Athlon64 3000+) Deven Gallo that slick main man Deven Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:23:32 +0000 http://nongraphical.com/?p=193#comment-743 <p>And by the way, you say</p> <p>"The user-in­ter­face prob­lems that many Lin­ux pro­grams face can­not be fixed with­out a more com­mer­cial-like de­vel­op­ment mod­el, or more full-time (may­be paid!) work­ers. Un­til that hap­pens, Lin­ux is like­ly to re­main an in­fe­ri­or pro­duct in the eyes of the pub­lic."</p> <p>I think one of the main advantages of Linux is that it is less commercial than other systems - it's a system made by real people and mostly untouched by corporate marketers who want to manipulate you in order to extract from you your money. Linux is an open and free (libre) system with free (libre) drivers and utilities. In order to become a popular desktop OS, that would have to change. This is not possible due to the terms of the GPL, and if it were possible, you'd loose the main advantages of Linux.</p> <p>Instead, if there's to be a Unix based Desktop OS that's to be a competitor to Windows, it needs to be made from the ground up. Perhaps it could be based on FreeBSD or something at the lower levels, but the UI and graphics systems could be completely new and fresh. It would need to be developed by a corporation rather than a community (but a community could assist, since the base would be FreeBSD, which is open).</p> <p>Or something. I'm not a software engineer, so I'm probably wrong. This is just my idea though, the main point I want to make is that Linux is perhaps not meant to take over the Desktop OS market, and if you want it to, you're trying to make Linux out to be something that it isn't.</p> And by the way, you say

“The user-in­ter­­face prob­lems that many Lin­ux pro­­grams face can­not be fixed with­­out a more com­mer­­cial-like de­vel­op­­ment mod­­el, or more full-time (may­be paid!) work­ers. Un­til that hap­pens, Lin­ux is like­­ly to re­­main an in­fe­ri­or pro­­duct in the eyes of the pub­­lic.”

I think one of the main ad­van­tages of Lin­ux is that it is less com­mer­cial than other sys­tems – it’s a sys­tem made by re­al peo­ple and most­ly un­touched by cor­po­rate mar­keters who want to ma­nip­u­late you in order to ex­tract from you your money. Lin­ux is an open and free (li­bre) sys­tem with free (li­bre) drivers and util­i­ties. In order to be­come a pop­u­lar desk­top OS, that would have to change. This is not pos­si­ble due to the terms of the GPL, and if it were pos­si­ble, you’d loose the main ad­van­tages of Lin­ux.

In­stead, if there’s to be a Unix based Desk­top OS that’s to be a com­peti­tor to Win­dows, it needs to be made from the ground up. Per­haps it could be based on FreeB­SD or some­thing at the low­er levels, but the UI and graph­ics sys­tems could be com­plete­ly new and fresh. It would need to be de­vel­oped by a cor­po­ra­tion rather than a com­mu­ni­ty (but a com­mu­ni­ty could as­sist, since the base would be FreeB­SD, which is open).

Or some­thing. I’m not a soft­ware engi­neer, so I’m prob­a­bly wrong. This is just my idea though, the main point I want to make is that Lin­ux is per­haps not meant to take over the Desk­top OS mar­ket, and if you want it to, you’re try­ing to make Lin­ux out to be some­thing that it isn’t.

]]> By: Thomson http://nongraphical.com/2009/01/problems-with-the-linux-desktop/comment-page-1/#comment-742 Thomson Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:01:52 +0000 http://nongraphical.com/?p=193#comment-742 <p>I agree that Linux is not as responsive as Windows is, and this should be improved. There are also design issues with the various Desktop environments, but in particular, I'd like to reply to a few things:</p> <p>"GNOME’s user-in­ter­face has not been tru­ly up­dat­ed for years"</p> <p>Good. I use GNOME, and its current design works well and has worked well for years. There's no point in changing something just for the sake of changing it. Instead, the GNOME project should work on fixing things that actually need fixing, like GNOME's panel (which is full of glitches) or the lack of configuration options for the Metacity window manager.</p> <p>"Over­all, Win­dows is just more pleas­ant to use."</p> <p>Apart from the response times, this is just an opinion. I would honestly prefer GNOME (at least as it is now) to Windows 2000 or XP (and especially vista and OS X), and so would others. Have you considered the possibility that a big part of the problem that you have with Linux is that it's just different to what you're used to?</p> <p>Did you approach Linux thinking "I want a replacement for Windows" or "this looks interesting, I think I'll try it"?</p> I agree that Lin­ux is not as re­spon­sive as Win­dows is, and this should be im­proved. There are al­so de­sign is­sues with the var­i­ous Desk­top en­vi­ron­ments, but in par­tic­u­lar, I’d like to re­ply to a few things:

“GNOME’s user-in­ter­­face has not been tru­­ly up­­dat­ed for years”

Good. I use GNOME, and its cur­rent de­sign works well and has worked well for years. There’s no point in chang­ing some­thing just for the sake of chang­ing it. In­stead, the GNOME pro­ject should work on fix­ing things that ac­tu­al­ly need fix­ing, like GNOME’s pan­el (which is full of glitch­es) or the lack of con­fig­u­ra­tion op­tions for the Metac­i­ty win­dow man­ager.

“Over­all, Win­­dows is just more pleas­ant to use.”

Apart from the re­spon­se times, this is just an opin­ion. I would hon­est­ly prefer GNOME (at least as it is now) to Win­dows 2000 or XP (and espe­cial­ly vis­ta and OS X), and so would others. Have you con­sid­ered the pos­si­bil­i­ty that a big part of the prob­lem that you have with Lin­ux is that it’s just dif­fer­ent to what you’re used to?

Did you ap­proach Lin­ux think­ing “I want a re­place­ment for Win­dows” or “this looks in­ter­est­ing, I think I’ll try it”?

]]>