
Improving The Linux Desktop? Why, It’s Elementary - linuxmag
http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7811
======
jcromartie
The answer to the desktop Linux usability problem used to be: "we should look
more like Windows!"

Now it's: "we should look more like OS X!"

Where's the innovation? Why is an _exciting new desktop_ just _another
imitation_?

> /opt? /bin? /sys? dll files? What is all that?

Most users have no reason to even wonder, since they are already tucked away
from them. Stuff like this just shows that the project is out of touch right
from the start. Linux desktop projects _constantly_ misjudge their audience.
This one is no exception.

~~~
wmf
Innovation is really risky. If they aren't even competent enough to clone OS
X, trying to innovate past it sounds like a recipe for failure.

~~~
amttc
Maybe. It depends on if we're talking about individual applications or just
the desktop experience in general.

The thing about people using applications like Photoshop and Word is that they
have established workflows that its users have come to expect. From a design
perspective, they're pidgeonholed because any significant UI change means that
they would have to retrain the vast majority of its users. So Adobe and MS
make minor tweaks to its UI instead. Admittedly, MS made a big change with the
ribbons ui element, but you get the picture.

Open source stuff has the advantage (I guess you could call it that) of having
a much larger volume of new users and a much smaller volume of old users, so
there's more room to experiment with different UIs to solve the problem of
getting people to interact meaningfully with the programs. I'd say for the
vast majority of the projects, the UI is an afterthought so it ends up being
poorly designed. Even so, the opportunity is there.

The desktop is a little different though, there's already a load of user
expectations that you have to live up to. The space for proposing solutions is
a lot smaller. Riding on the coat tails of OSX may not be a bad idea so long
as the developers understand the reasons why Mac made the design decisions
that they did and adjust accordingly.

At least that's how I feel. Trying to innovate isn't a bad thing, it has to
lead to failure first before you get it right.

------
vault_
Everyone seems so concerned about the Linux desktop. I don't see the problem
with Linux as being the dekstop itself. Coming from using only OS X, think
that the problem is the applications available to run on the desktop. In my
experience, there are no Linux apps that match the ease of use and well-
designed-ness of whatever the closest analogue would be on Mac.

~~~
ekiru
The article seems to indicate that a large focus of elementary is improving
the UI of individual applications(it specifically meantions the Nautilus file
browser and the Midori web browser).

~~~
tung
Maybe I missed it, but did the article say anything about the differences of
the Nautilus file browser compared to Ubuntu's?

------
asdflkj
Here is the real problem with desktop Linux: nobody wants to take the only
thing that Linux is good at, and make it better. I'm talking about
hackability. Ubuntu and similar systems make it worse. There is too much ugly,
incomprehensible and plain unedifying kludge between the neat Unix core and
the whatever shiny crap is in fashion this year. If a minimal distro is a pool
with no shallow end, then Ubuntu is a pool with a shallow end, and barbed wire
between it and the deep end. It's hard to make a pool with a shallow end that
gradually gets deeper, but as far as I know, nobody is even trying.

Not every potential user is an idiot. There are plenty of people who would
learn, if the learning process felt more like lifting weights and less like
having drain cleaner poured on your face.

~~~
cookiecaper
The real problem with desktop Linux is that people don't care. They use
Windows because they have to. They use Windows because everything works with
it and everything comes with it preinstalled. Everything works with Windows
because people make sure that their things work on Windows because that's what
everyone uses.

I don't think anyone interested in "hackability" feels like it's analogous to
having "drain cleaner poured on your face". There may be ways to make cool
scripting more accessible, but there's nothing particularly contrived about it
IMO.

The bottom line is that people don't care that much about computers. If
Windows lets them do everything they want to do, then there's no problem. And
all most people want to do is use Facebook, Excel, the proprietary program
needed for their profession, and email. All of these work fine on Windows and
everyone knows how to get to them from the Windows interface. They know the
ins and outs of Excel and for most Excel jockeys, OO Calc isn't going to cut
it, because they have to relearn some shortcuts, button locations, etc. to use
Calc, but they already know how to use Excel and can hit the ground running,
so they prefer Excel. Same with almost all other software.

So the real reason the Linux desktop isn't going anywhere is because nobody
cares. If you want Linux desktops to proliferate, you have to give people a
reason to care; something new and specific that a normal person would think is
cool and buy-worthy. For most people, technical arguments like "The TCP/IP
stack is great!", "iptables is great!", or whatever, they don't care about
that.

~~~
amttc
I think that this has to do with flaws in the UIs themselves though. Having
one sellable point is a great plan, but not if the rest of the user experience
is poor. People should never have to open up the command line, yet you have to
do it all the time in order to get any use out of a distro even like Ubuntu.

------
jasonlbaptiste
This isn't a software problem as much as it is an OEM/hardware vendor problem.
How many "normal" people get a computer and are then like "oh shucks, let me
install that Windows software!" ? None really. They buy the computer and
Windows is there. Microsoft has the deals with tons of OEMS and local whitebox
vendors. Ubuntu has pretty much close to zero. Dell made a half assed attempt
with ubuntu offerings from comments ive read and guys like system76 are an
okay start for a boutique. If Ubuntu or whoever the hell wants to make linux
popular on the desktop, they need a quality OEM strategy. From there,
improving the software continually and making it usable is very important, but
I think Ubuntu is at a point where many people would be happy with it.

