Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CyberAbc

Why The Linux Desktop Doesn't Matter Anymore

Recommended Posts

shutterstock_134327498.jpg

 

 

Linux was touted as the desktop of the future, but it never succeeded in meeting the needs of average users.

 

The Linux desktop crew is a hardy bunch. Despite it being abundantly evident that the Linux desktop has lost whatever slim chance it once had to be relevant, Linux advocates continue to wring their hands and say, "We kinda already won!... Sort of."

While it's true to say—and I've been saying it for years—that Linux qua Android now reigns as the "desktop" champion, it's equally true that Linux has completely failed as a desktop operating system.

 

My personal experience::

The reason is pretty simple: Linux has never been easy or useful enough for normal user

 

 

Make ur comment PLZ

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as much as i like using Linux and how open sourced it is to use, but compared to windows the it far more advanced to use, if they make it more UI like windows is, then people woudn't be so afraid to use it 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My own comments (for what they are worth) ...

 

I've been running Linux distros for over 10 years now. Started back in the days when I was a Unix System Admin and discovered that you could get something similar to run on your own PC.  Back then, a LOT of work was needed to install a Linux distro, which is probably why they referred to as "hobbyist" solutions -- obviously intended for folks with lots of time to learn what they needed to get a Linux distro actually working on the personal computer.

 

And every year, we hear from the Linux fans about how "this year" was going to be the "Year of the Linux desktop".

 

Well ,,, yeah ... that didn't happen.

 

My view on why that did not happen are closely related to my former professional experience where I was charged with overhauling engineering processes and organizations only to discover (surprise!!) -- folks really don't like change. Plus, they don't like being mislead by folks more interested in championing their causes than in telling it like it really is. And finally, folks press back real hard against change when they see nothing to gain from  the change.

 

Personally, I think this last is the key deterrent against Linux taking over the desktop world.  Most folks who have a PC (or tablet) bought theirs with an OS (and some apps) already installed and working.  While they might be curious about switching their device over to another OS, when you tell them they'll only end up (in terms of functionality) in the same place they are right now, they see no value in making the switch.

 

They hear folks say that Linux can do everything Windows can do -- which, from personal experience in several very different Linux distros over the past 10 years, I can state is NOT true, not unless you define "everything" in very broad terms like "surf the web", or "watch videos", or " create documents". Some folks try out Linux and discover that the Open-source alternatives to their favorite Windows apps do not quite measure up to what they're used to.  Even if they do provide the functionality they need, the menus, the pulldowns, the radio buttons -- they're all different!  Now, they're facing with learning all new ways to do what they already knew how to do!

 

Then, you get the folks that go running to Ubuntu to "get away from Windows" (free at last!!) -- only to have their next question be how to run their favorite Windows apps, which (again from personal experience) I can tell you mostly do NOT work well with various Linux workarounds like Wine, PlayOnLinux, and WineTricks.

 

Or, they grab a copy of VirtualBox, install a (probably pirated) version of Windows -- only to then proclaim, they're now "Free of Windows!!"

 

Or, they spend a LOT of money on some brand new hardware and discover that the Linux drivers are nowhere up to the capabilities of the Windows drivers, such that their laptop overheats, their networking slows down, their "Hybrid Graphics" simply don't work, nor does their internal SD card reader.  

 

So now, they're REALLY PISSED!! Why? Because didn't their Linux friend tell them that "Linux can do everything that Windows can do!"?

 

I find Linux distros fun to use -- they're like free toys that you can play around with to your heart's content.  Currently, I'm using both Mint 15 and Mint 16.  I switched over from Ubuntu because I actually LIKE menus (run my Win8 PC in Desktop Mode), and can't stand the smartphone-tiles interface on my desktop PC. But ... when I recently upgraded my video card to an AMD HD 8850 because my onboard HD 4290 was going out, it took a LOT of work scrounging through forums to find out how to install AMD Linux drivers that actually work; whereas with Win8, it installed them without my having to do anything.

 

And that last part is what tends to drive folks BACK to Windows from Linux.  After hours of forum searches, scrounging around for drivers and scripts, and finally hand-bashing a system that works, along comes a kernel change, or a hardware upgrade, and you're back to square one. And, even to this day, Canonical (the owners of the Ubuntu distro) have STILL not provided a convenient way to "roll-back" a version upgrade that trashes your machine -- something Windows has had for years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a big BackTrack/Kali Linux user. What I have found is that folks are intimidated by Linux  (unless they have previos Unix user experience) because of the many different flavors Linux offers in Ubuntu and Debian. Getting compatible drivers to work with Linux has always been the biggest issues that needs to change. I find Linux far more advanced as compared to Windows. In fact Linux can fix Windows OS issues but not the other way around. IMO Mark Phelps is 101% correct and makes very excellent points on everything thing he said. Double thumbs up to Mark Phelps for his excellent comments that many of us have learned to be sadly true.

A good example is that I had a linksys wireless N" USB adapter that I had to ditch for a "Rosewill  AC1200UBE2"  wireless USB adapter  for penetration testing all because of no diver support in Linux in order to do penetration testing in the "N" bandwidth range. 

I have been using Debian Kali Linux to check our dead links here at CP with Iceweasel using grease monkey and scripts Tech 425 shared with me. Bottom line it is BLAZING faster than anything else I have used to date.

IMO both Debian and Ubuntu have a lot more work to do before  they hope to win over folks to their OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

IMO both Debian and Ubuntu have a lot more work to do before  they hope to win over folks to their OS.

Actually, some of that is happening right now -- but with negative consequences in all too many cases.

 

I'm a regular contributor to both the Ubuntu forums and Mint forums, and now that XP has been declared "dead" (by some), folks are flocking to the two to "replace" XP with Linux -- and discovering, in the process, that whether or not that works well depends critically on how you define "replace".

 

The primary motivation for this move (at least, what the folks are saying about it), is that they want an OS environment that is "safe" (free from infection), and with MS NOT distributing security patches for XP anymore, they are scared (some of them SERIOUSLY!) about their PC being infected.  They have heard that Linux does not have viruses (NOT true!) and that it does not get infected (also, NOT true), so they erase XP from their PCs, install a Linux distro -- and are mortified to discover that one or more of the following is true:

1) The machine does not work (no desktop, no working OS)

2) The machine restarts but does not display a working desktop

3) The machine displays a desktop but it's very "laggy" or there are display "artifacts" making it difficult to use

4) The machine mostly works, but one or more hardware devices don't work well or don't work at all -- most common is internal memory card readers

5) The machine works well

 

Admittedly, we don't really hear from the 5) folks -- so it's impossible to tell what percentage of the "migrants" (folks who migrated to Linux from XP) have really good result, but the reasons for the other 4 problems are generally well understood among those of us who have been around Linux for a few years, mostly having to do with processor/memory/video hardware requirements for modern Linux distros.

 

And yeah, folks really DO expect their 256MB (system memory), 64MB (video card), Intel P4 (processor) PC to run like lightening on a modern Linux distro and EVERYTHING (read that, all hardware devices) to work as well, if not better, in Linux than in Windows.

 

When we tell them they need to wipe the drive and install something like Lubuntu (at best), or more likely, Damn Small Linux or Puppy Linux, they are sorely disappointed and then ask how to go back to XP.

 

It's even worse (surprisingly) for folks with new machines (e.g., Win8 laptops) that have stuff like Hybrid/Dual graphics (which largely don't work under Linux) or self-idling multi-core processors (which don't work nearly as well in Linux due to known kernel limitations).  In many cases, they restart after install and don't even get a desktop!  And, when they go to run Reset on the Win8 PCs and discover it won't work because they messed up the partitioning scheme, they're really upset.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming them, per se.  It's not their fault that laptop manufacturers have adopted customized hardware solutions for which Linux driver largely don't exist -- but the folks making the switch don't know this, and they're certainly not told this by the Linux "fans", so they're unprepared for the disastrous results.

 

And, now that MS has finally come full circle to recognize that forcing a smartphone interface on everyone (even desktop PC users) was not a good idea and is restoring the Start Menu for "Threshold", it's likely that more folks will switch over to it, than switch over to Linux.

 

SO, no, I don't see the Linux desktop population growing enough for this to be the "Year of the Linux Desktop".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

give it a year or so  mark,  changes  are a  commin...as   kids  learn  more in school,  linux based apps  are  being  more  popular than ever... so you, like  me, are  old school  and  don't  really see  what the  18+  age groups are growing up  with...especially the  tech savy ones, like MY kids

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×