
Will The Linux Desktop Soon Be Irrelevant - linuxmag
http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7733
======
doron
The desktop is far from being dead.

I run two machines, one with SuSE+ KDE the other with ubuntu+gnome, its a
choice i have made.

That said, Linux will never have its "desktop year" at heart i believe the
issue is design, the UI in most Linux apps falls far from the closed standard,
most probably due to the fact that design decisions are made mostly by
developers rather then UI designers.

Be it on a desktop or on the cloud, people will not use badly designed UI.

with very few exceptions, i have not been convinced open source development
model makes good design choices. graphic design follows a different path then
software.

~~~
timwiseman
_with very few exceptions, i have not been convinced open source development
model makes good design choices._

I know this is a matter of opinion, but I would beg to differ. I think FireFox
is better designed than IE ever was. I think the design for GIMP, OpenOffice,
and Pidgin are every bit as good as the comparable closed source offerings. In
particular, after the "Ribbon" was introduced I cam to think that OpenOffice
had the better design.

While it is a niche product by and for developers, I find Spyder to be
amazingly well designed and choose it over ever other IDE out there for short,
simple scripts (it works less well for large programs for which I pull out
Eclipse, which is also OpenSource).

And I do all of this on Windows since my primary job is as a SQL Server DBA (I
do have Linux at home alongside windows, but even there is a secondary for
certain niche tasks). Even in Linux, I think the design is quite good.

I do not beleive design is the issue. I think it is a combination of Windows
being ubiquitious already so it is easy to get, easy to find help with, and
you know it will work with just about all major software. In fact, the only
program I can't easily run in Windows really is Sage (a mathematics suite) and
that has competitors that run nicely on Windows.

You do not have to think about getting Windows, it is the default. Getting
Linux or even a Mac requires a deliberate choice.

~~~
krainboltgreene
Pidgin isn't _to bad_ , but OO and GIMP? They're a horrid example of UI. GIMP
especially with how clunky everything is layed out.

~~~
aphyr
I can't speak for OO, but I definitely prefer Gimp's interface to Photoshop.
On the other hand, I use weird window managers.

~~~
albemuth
>>but I definitely prefer Gimp's interface to Photoshop

wow, maybe it's just that I got used to PS before using GIMP, but I find
GIMP's UI to be nothing short of ghastly.

~~~
aphyr
Yeah, most discussions I've read on this boil down to "it's what I learned
first." Seems to be a familiarity thing.

What bugged me about PS is that it's really hard to manage all the panels and
subwindows. They end up covering what I'm trying to see, and moving them
around efficiently took way too long. I prefer the Gimp's docks and tear-off
menus, which collapse quickly and respond nicely to my window manager
shortcuts.

On the other hand, looking at my co-worker's CS2, it looks like photoshop has
moved towards that behavior some... so I'm probably out of date. It's been
several years since I used CS on a regular basis.

~~~
krainboltgreene
Check out some of the screen casts of CS4. It's pretty awesome.

------
stcredzero
Why try to compete on the old platform niche from the 1970s? Technology is
opening up new platform possibilities. Actually, they've been around for
awhile, but the tech has reached the level where we can do really slick and
convenient implementations for a reasonable price.

Also, don't discount the power of the marginal.
<http://www.paulgraham.com/marginal.html>

The inherent advantage of Linux is its openness. M$ and Apple can never match
this. It is an inherent quality. How can it be turned into an unassailable
advantage? One thing for sure, we'll never do that by playing Apple's game or
Microsoft's. How do we play our own game and stop playing catch-up in theirs?

~~~
krainboltgreene
Agreed. This "Year of the Desktop" bullshit is why Ubuntu is a pile of bloat.

------
shin_lao
What about this reason: Windows 7 is good _enough_.

What would switching to Linux bring to a person that doesn't care much about
computers?

~~~
nailer
Windows 7 can run a web browser, sure yes, it is, but so can anything else.
The thing you use to run your web browser doesn't really matter as long as it
works and isn't expensive.

------
anarayan
If we had a company that sold Linux desktops, provided good tech support,
ensured most devices/cameras/printers etc. worked out of the box, marketed the
online software side correctly, (because your average person is not aware of
Google docs for example) - and this unfamiliarity of Linux came at a reduced
price, people would go for it. I don't think they'd care. ( e.g. most people
can switch cell phones without thinking twice because they know it does
photos/calls/emails/SMS)

But there won't be a company like this. Because it doesn't make business
sense. We don't pay too much of a premium for Windows when it comes pre-
installed. And if the demand conveys that even that premium is too high -
Microsoft can comfortably reduce that to maintain share. So the company that
gets into the Linux desktop game is never going to win.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
> _I don't think they'd care. ( e.g. most people can switch cell phones
> without thinking twice because they know it does photos/calls/emails/SMS)_

I think you'd be wrong in that assertion or at least not entirely right - the
differences in predictive text between different handsets is enough to prevent
a lot of people changing; or indeed the differences in UI.

MS make more from Office and server software than from OS sales don't they?

~~~
anarayan
I meant non-smart phones. Check this on switching phones:

[http://www.crowdscience.com/blog/article/android_battles_iph...](http://www.crowdscience.com/blog/article/android_battles_iphone/)

Users of phones other than iPhone & Android are quite willing to switch.

True that Office+Exchange+Servers is bigger than Windows. But Windows 7 is
stronger than ever. Just see last quarters numbers for MSFT.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Anecdotal, but it generally goes against my observations of family and
friends. Blackberry users are not typical phone users, my sister has one but
she wouldn't be able to tell you what an operating system was - if she can
receive calls and email without the OS getting in the way then it would be
fine but I'm sure she'd prefer to keep the current phone as this requires no
additional learning effort. If you're not a gadget fiend then why change to
get functionality that you already have?

Non-smart phones have predictive text, or at least every mobile phone I've
ever had has including my current Siemens A50 (!) which uses T9 I think (yes
I've used newer phones it's a quirk that I'm back to this one).

------
jasonlbaptiste
The biggest issue comes down to OEMs. There are practically no OEMs making
Linux machines, especially great ones. The masses don't install operating
systems. It just comes with their machine ready to go.

------
idlewords
With all due respect to the people who use it, when was the linux desktop ever
relevant?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I'm not sure what that question means.

It's been relevant for me since I started using it 12 years ago (Slackware
reviving an old laptop). Yes I use MS Windows XP/Vista/7 and OSX
(occasionally) but a Linux desktop manager is a big part of my homelife and
worklife.

So I guess it's as relevant to me as the Internet - it's something I use
everyday for work and pleasure but that a lot of people don't have, or don't
realise they have, don't use and/or don't understand.

[http://www.google.com/trends?q=%28ubuntu|kubuntu|xubuntu%29%...](http://www.google.com/trends?q=%28ubuntu|kubuntu|xubuntu%29%2C+%22windows+7%22%2C%22osx%22%2C%22windows+xp%22%2Cfedora+linux&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0)

is interesting.

