Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Desktop Linux: The dream is dead
Renegade:
Matt Hartley has a take on this topic, and in the process makes many of the points Josh has made over the years:
My switch to Linux wasn't an immediate one. But what was apparent early on during my Linux adoption was my motivation for making the switch in the first place – no longer wanting to use Windows. This is where I think the confusion begins for most new Linux adopters. As we make the switch, we must fight the inherent urge to automatically begin comparing the new desktop experience to our previous experiences with Windows. It's a completely different set of circumstances, folks.
I've grown to dislike the idea of comparing Windows and Linux as I feel that it's a lot like comparing apples to oranges. Both run software and each of them has its strengths and weaknesses. Trying to trump one over the other is time wasted in my opinion and leaves you with no benefit. It took me years to fully comprehend this, but the fact is that expecting one to behave like the other is just a silly waste of time
Slashdot follows up on the discusssion:
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/11/09/0119208/Should-Being-Competitive-With-Windows-Matter-For-Linux
-zridling (November 09, 2010, 04:24 AM)
--- End quote ---
Interesting.
I liked this:
I've grown to dislike the idea of comparing Windows and Linux as I feel that it's a lot like comparing apples to oranges. Both run software and each of them has its strengths and weaknesses. Trying to trump one over the other is time wasted in my opinion and leaves you with no benefit. It took me years to fully comprehend this, but the fact is that expecting one to behave like the other is just a silly waste of time.
--- End quote ---
The thing I didn't like was:
my motivation for making the switch in the first place – no longer wanting to use Windows.
--- End quote ---
I think that's a piss-poor reason.
I wish I were independently wealthy, because then I'd switch to Linux and not care. I can't though. The world runs on Windows, and I need it to put food on the table. :( But I don't really care too much. I really just want a system that's easy to use, powerful, and let's me "play" the way I want to. Both Linux and Windows do that, though admittedly for me Windows does a better job because the way I like to play involves Visual Studio.
My motivations for Linux are purely philosophical. I like the idea of freedom and not being chained to someone else's idea of what's good for me. There's enough of that BS in the "real" world, so I sure as hell don't want to put up with it in the digital world. :)
Sigh... I'm still not where I'd like to be though, so I'm still chained to whatever OS pulls in the cash.
mahesh2k:
Well linux stopped attracting me when major software corps didn't came up with any paid software so far. There are very few paid apps for linux and i guess too much clutter in license and open-source issue is the reason behind it. Besides that if OS is free, how come many customers are going to pay me for building custom apps for them (i came across many such people who think like this i.e. why pay for apps if OS is free ?). Consultancy, maintenance, support will not sustain the developers business(atleast solo developer will have hard time).
Renegade:
Well linux stopped attracting me when major software corps didn't came up with any paid software so far. There are very few paid apps for linux and i guess too much clutter in license and open-source issue is the reason behind it. Besides that if OS is free, how come many customers are going to pay me for building custom apps for them (i came across many such people who think like this i.e. why pay for apps if OS is free ?). Consultancy, maintenance, support will not sustain the developers business(atleast solo developer will have hard time).
-mahesh2k (November 09, 2010, 09:50 AM)
--- End quote ---
I think you've really nailed a key failure in the Linux community.
The Linux community seems to have attracted too many people that are attracted to "money free" versus "freedom free", and that entire cheapo "I'm not going to pay for anything" mind-set has basically become synonymous with Linux and open source. It's not created a healthy ecosystem for Linux, and Linux has suffered for that.
What is really needed is for more developers to write software for Linux to make Linux a more attractive platform for people to adopt. At the same time, the lack of users, or rather the lack of users willing to pay for software makes Linux unattractive for developers. Why write software for unappreciative people? (Saying "thank you" really only has meaning when it's backed up by cold hard cash that puts food on the table. Most merchants don't take print outs of user testimonials. At least the last restaurant I went do declined to accept them... Maybe it's different somewhere else. :P )
So it's catch-22.
Add to it all the massive fragmentation in the Linux community, there's nothing but confusion for people. Ubuntu? SuSe? Fedora? Linspire? WTF?
For a lot of purposes, Linux just isn't a viable OS because there's just not enough software for it. Sure you can play with Audacity, but you can't use Audacity for anything but playtime. It's a good piece of software for amateurs and hobbyists, but it's not up to snuff for work. The bar is continually being raised, and it can only become more difficult in the future to bridge that divide.
I think that the best hope for Linux at the moment lies with .NET and Mono. If more developers can target Linux with very little additional cost to themselves, then having more software available for Linux will make it more attractive. It's a matter of costs. You can't spend 6 months or more in development for 3 people that won't pay anyways. Despite what some people think, developing software requires a large skill set, lots of time, and it flat out isn't free. Mono makes it easier to develop software for Linux at a minimal cost to developers. I don't see anything else really being viable on a massive scale. (RealBasic and other cross-platform development tools have smaller communities, and while they are good, the size presents a problem.)
So, I'm back to rooting for Novell. I hope that we continue to see more great advances from Miguel and his team. They're what I see as the key to an open and free future for computing.
zridling:
The Linux community seems to have attracted too many people that are attracted to "money free" versus "freedom free", and that entire cheapo "I'm not going to pay for anything" mind-set has basically become synonymous with Linux and open source. It's not created a healthy ecosystem for Linux, and Linux has suffered for that. -Renegade (November 09, 2010, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
That's a licensing/distribution issue, though. Why pay for something that was built to be free? Companies have tried (Linspire, Xandros, Corel, etc.), and have failed. I really appreciate not having to upgrade on a corporation's [profit] schedule. No matter, public institutions (libraries, schools, park services) and governments (local, state, federal) should not be spending taxpayer dollars on proprietary software, ever. Especially not using proprietary formats for their files. Any future for public files in the cloud will depend on open data formats.
What is really needed is for more developers to write software for Linux to make Linux a more attractive platform for people to adopt. At the same time, the lack of users, or rather the lack of users willing to pay for software makes Linux unattractive for developers. Why write software for unappreciative people? So it's catch-22.-Renegade (November 09, 2010, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
More developers to write desktop software. For example, if Adobe had a Linux version of Photoshop, that would make a world of difference. But we settle for GIMP, however quirky it is. There was so much cross-platform software between Windows and Linux four years ago that I made the switch quite comfortably. Which specific programs would you like to see?
Add to it all the massive fragmentation in the Linux community, there's nothing but confusion for people. Ubuntu? SuSe? Fedora? Linspire? WTF?-Renegade (November 09, 2010, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
You say fragmentation I say choice. Ubuntu is making a move to lock-in certain programs for its distribution. I don't agree with it since it's been tried before and didn't take, but it's their prerogative. Intel and Nokia are working to unify the mobile side with MeeGo, while Novell has long tried to standardize the certification of applications for distributions. However, any standardization faces the issue of getting developers to cooperate. If a standard is deemed too restrictive, it'll be difficult to get a good base of developers creating applications that follow it.
For a lot of purposes, Linux just isn't a viable OS because there's just not enough software for it. Sure you can play with Audacity, but you can't use Audacity for anything but playtime. It's a good piece of software for amateurs and hobbyists, but it's not up to snuff for work. The bar is continually being raised, and it can only become more difficult in the future to bridge that divide.-Renegade (November 09, 2010, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
Okay, that's an example. For people who've downloaded it 70 million times, however, it is cross-platform, available for Windows, Mac OS X, BSD, free, open source, and good enough.
I think that the best hope for Linux at the moment lies with .NET and Mono. If more developers can target Linux with very little additional cost to themselves, then having more software available for Linux will make it more attractive. It's a matter of costs. You can't spend 6 months or more in development for 3 people that won't pay anyways. Despite what some people think, developing software requires a large skill set, lots of time, and it flat out isn't free. Mono makes it easier to develop software for Linux at a minimal cost to developers. I don't see anything else really being viable on a massive scale. (RealBasic and other cross-platform development tools have smaller communities, and while they are good, the size presents a problem.) So, I'm back to rooting for Novell. I hope that we continue to see more great advances from Miguel and his team. They're what I see as the key to an open and free future for computing. -Renegade (November 09, 2010, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
Except when you go the Mono route, you start down the slippery slope of dipping a toe into Microsoft's patent bullshit, which as we know, any corporation is more than happy to spend a decade suing the living crap out of anyone that gets near their IP. For me, it's not worth the headache, even though Miguel de Icaza has done some wonderful things for us all.
40hz:
Except when you go the Mono route, you start down the slippery slope of dipping a toe into Microsoft's patent bullshit, which as we know, any corporation is more than happy to spend a decade suing the living crap out of anyone that gets near their IP. For me, it's not worth the headache, even though Miguel de Icaza has done some wonderful things for us all.
-zridling (November 10, 2010, 07:31 AM)
--- End quote ---
+1 :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:
Mono is a neutron bomb waiting to be detonated. I think it's only a matter of time before Microsoft shows its fangs despite whatever "gentleman's agreements" and "unofficial "understandings" it has with the Mono community. Or more to the point, that the Mono community thinks it has with Microsoft.
And all that will happen very shortly after a huge part of the Nix app world has grown completely dependent on Mono and/or Linux gains enough overall desktop market share for Microsoft to see it as a creditable threat to its business.
The old Microsoft software strategy used to be: Embrace - Extend - Extinguish!
Now that so much of their capacity for innovation seems to be used up, the new paradigm will be: Tolerate - Litigate - License!
8)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version