
Why The Linux Desktop Still Rocks - Garbage
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/159906/
======
Argorak
Honestly, I was expecting a "next year is the year..." post.

But this is a point that I can definitely relate to, especially as someone who
regularly flies to africa with some Ubuntu CDs in my backpack. A completely
free stack (both as beer and as speech) has a tremendous advantage in
countries where owning hardware is already a big feat. The ability to tinker
with everything that comes with the system is a also a huge advantage for
people inclined to learn by doing, which seems to me one of the best ways to
learn in the so-called "development countries".

------
fexl
Yes, I've been using Ubuntu exclusively on the desktop for about 6 years now.
I recently bought a new laptop (from LinuxCertified.com) and tried out 11.10
(Unity) for the first time. At first I liked it pretty well, but a few days
later realized that I really _missed_ the GNOME task bar, where I could see
everything running at a glance, and click to open an active window, and click
again to minimize it.

That feels indispensable to my work flow, so I'm logging in with GNOME Classic
now instead of Unity. Although I commend Mark Shuttleworth and his crew on
their achievements with Unity, I just _gotta have_ that task bar. Right now
the laptop feels like a dream machine -- the keyboard is perfect and I'm a
master with the touchpad.

Also, the desktop behaves so beautifully that it makes my wife slightly
jealous, so when her Windows computer gives up the ghost I think she's gonna
want the Linux desktop.

~~~
loboman
Talking about wives... My wife has been using Ubuntu for some years already.
For a while she went back to Windows, until she found the countless problems
with Windows bugs, spyware, adware, etc. again. That was the last time she
used Windows on her computer.

Maybe the year of the Linux Desktop already happened some time ago.

~~~
akeck
Regarding perennial Year-of-the-Linux-Desktop talk, I think it's as Gibson
says: "The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed." I
got my wife a Dell Mini 9 a few years ago running Ubuntu 8.04.1 LTS. Her
response was "This is almost Mac-like". After the initial updates, all the
hardware worked correctly, including sleep-on-close. She then declared that
she didn't want Windows anything in the future. We've not had a Windows
machine since. People act as if Linux will be "on the desktop" all at once. I
think instead it's been a matter of various persons' comfort levels being met
as the Linux desktop experience gets continually refined. For my wife, 8.04.1
hit the mark. For others, more recent revisions fit their needs.

------
cs702
Makes sense to me.

Just as Android is spreading like wildfire in the developing world via lower-
end handsets, I would expect zero-cost free-software desktop stacks to gain
share in 'less-developed' countries as hardware prices continue to drop. (The
Free desktop stack is already economically viable in the new range of sub-$25
PCs; proprietary stacks are not.)

My impression (based purely on anecdotal evidence) is that use of Free
software on the desktop has been growing at a fast pace in the poorest regions
of the world for some time, but the trend is still somewhat 'invisible' as the
aggregate numbers are still quite small.

~~~
apetrovic
Poor countries have very little (if any) piracy control. Cost of Windows XP or
Win7 even in Eastern Europe is usually exactly the same as Ubuntu.

~~~
cs702
eigenvector, apetrovic -- that used to be a more important factor some years
ago, when the Free desktop was unusable for regular folk, and pirating
software was much easier.

I'm not sure it's an important factor anymore, because the Free desktop has
become more usable, and using pirated software has become much more difficult.

Nowadays, users who pirate proprietary operating systems end up with
unpatched, insecure systems that can't be easily updated, and which require
all sorts of workarounds for installing non-pirated applications, among other
problems. Meanwhile, proprietary software vendors have been hard at work to
make life unpleasant for anyone who attempts to use their code without
permission.

------
jsight
> I later got Real Player to work which allowed me to play some mp3s. That was
> one of my best days ever,

I only don't think I've ever seen "Real Player" and "one of my best days ever"
that close to each other.

Seriously, do people actually still use Real Player? Doesn't Ubuntu have
better solutions for playing MP3s than that?

~~~
Uhhrrr
Tons - but the context is that it was "during my second year at the National
University." Back when I got Real Player to run on my SparcStation in (maybe
1998?) I remember thinking it was pretty cool too.

------
danmaz74
_I did not hear of Linux until a year and half later and the worst part, I was
misinformed about it. They said, "It is expensive and you cant get
applications for Linux very easily"_

I really wonder how was that possible: Linux _expensive_? Who could say such a
thing in a university??

~~~
CoughlinJ
>Who could say such a thing in a university? I've heard way dumber things come
out of college students mouths.

------
gdg92989
where are you people getting all of these viruses from? I use probably 75%
Linux, 25% windows and I can honestly say I've never gotten a virus on windows
7 OR Ubuntu.

~~~
funkah
Dunno. I got one yesterday that I could not remove after trying all sorts of
anti-malware and googling to find the actual problem. While running Windows
Update get the latest security updates, one or more of the updates failed and
left my install in an unbootable state. I had to format & reinstall the whole
thing, even after diddling with the "recovery" options on the Windows install
disc. It sucked and I was disappointed at the state of the art for Windows (I
use Mac, but boot into Windows to work). I suspect the IV was the Java plugin.

------
ap22213
If I could only find a laptop vendor that could replicate the build quality of
my MBP, I'd be in.

~~~
bryanlarsen
Which MBP do you have? The original MBP's have high failure rates. Pretty much
any "business-class" laptop would have been more reliable.

The unibody MBP's are much better, though.

Reviews are indicating that the ASUS Zenbook has a similar build quality and a
MBA design aesthetic.

Of course, there are also specialty laptops like the Panasonic Toughbook that
are designed to withstand abuse.

~~~
phaus
They may be better now, but I used to run into toughbooks all the time in the
Army. Basically they were just designed as a way to scam the government out of
5k per machine. They broke more often than anything else we had, including
gateways.

I've owned an asus republic of gamers laptop and an eee slate. Both of them
are very well built.

~~~
commandar
Old school Toughbooks were tanks. I had both a CF47 and CF61 way back when and
they were indestructable. Of course, those were old P1 era machines. I know
I've seen some Toughbooks that didn't really look any more rugged than regular
consumer stuff, so maybe that's what you were dealing with?

EDIT:

I will add that I _did_ do some repairs on newish Toughbooks owned by the Army
maybe 3-4 years ago. The big plus with them is that they _were_ repairable;
all the ports were on separate daughterboards so they could be easily replaced
when broken, whereas they're soldered directly to the main board in more
typical laptops.

------
wavephorm

      ome may say that the Linux Desktop is dead
    

No, the desktop user-interface paradigm is dead. Overlapping windows,
scrollbars, context menus, using a mouse and cursor... it's all dead. This
style of computing that Xerox invented, and Mac and Windows perpetuated is
getting awfully long in the tooth.

Linux never innovated over and above the desktop model that Windows and Mac
used, and it will die along with them, and be replaced with
mobile/cloud/touchscreen systems.

~~~
rbanffy
I am not sure if this is the part of the computer that's dying. I'd bet on the
file and application management versus the kind of curated experience Apple
popularized.

~~~
wavephorm
Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in
Windows 8? How applications are installed and files are managed is a different
issue, it's irrelevant to how the user interface operates.

~~~
untog
_Why do you think Microsoft is going ahead with "Metro" touch interfaces in
Windows 8?_

Because a new form factor has emerged. It hasn't killed the old one, though-
very few people that use computers (i.e. in an office, sat at a desk) could
perform their job on a tablet.

Metro sits on top of the existing UI without replacing it, in the same way
that tablets complement existing computing setups, not replace them. I don't
doubt that tablet usage will increase and that PC usage may decline, but
tablets still fill a specific role.

~~~
wavephorm
It's not surprising that most people (even programmers, and the technically
inclined) can't even comprehend how the desktop model will be replaced by
natural user interfaces. That's precisely why paradigm shifts catch people and
entire industries off guard.

I guarantee in 10 years you won't be using a mouse, you won't be resizing
windowed applications, and moving scrollbars up and down, none of this will be
necessary. I'm not just talking about iPad replacing your Windows PC. I'm
talking about a mouse not even being necessary to perform your tasks. Why use
a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your finger, or why
click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just speak
to your computer and say "turn music on".

The operating system and form factor of the device is irrelevant. Natural user
interfaces (touch, sound, speech, vision, gestures) are going to blow the
desktop model into the dark ages. And it's going to happen way, way faster
than most people expect.

~~~
untog
_why click through 20 context menus to activate an option when you can just
speak to your computer and say "turn music on"._

Imagine, for a second, an entire office of people using voice-activated
commands. It simply would not work.

 _Why use a mouse to click a button, when you can just touch it with your
finger_

Because that would involve raising my arm and would actually be far more work
(and less comfortable) than just using a mouse. OK, we think- let's put the
screen where the keyboard is. Now I'm staring downwards for the entire day.
And where does my keyboard go? I'm sure as hell not going to dictate this
document.

I'm not saying that things won't change, but "natural interface" means
precisely nothing.

~~~
wavephorm

      "natural interface" means precisely nothing.
    

Like I said, it means using touch, speech, and gestures instead of using these
arcane mice and cursor metaphors. The computer mouse only exists because they
needed a way to activate the UI controls like scrollbars and cascading menus.
Once you eliminate the desktop UI controls, most uses of the mouse aren't
necessary. Instead of a mouse, you use your voice, and a tablet/touchscreen
device beside your keyboard. Keyboards will probably stay around for a long
time. But what I'm specifically saying is the traditional desktop we've been
using for the past 25 years is most certainly going to go away.

~~~
untog
But you still aren't outlining why any of this would be better. Like I said-
an office full of people using voice commands on their computer would be a
total, utter nightmare. How is it better than using a keyboard and mouse?

~~~
wavephorm
A voice command computer would allow me to walk into my kitchen and say "make
me a coffee", whereas the ancient desktop model of computing would require me
to log into my Windows desktop and scroll and click through menus to connect
and schedule time with my coffee maker.

There is an order of magnitude difference in usability between these
paradigms, and it doesn't matter how good the Ubuntu Unity Linux desktop is,
it won't make tasks like this any bit easier.

In every office I have worked in, people are already talking on their phones,
I don't see how talking to your computer is any different.

~~~
untog
When was the last time you made a coffee with your computer? You're talking
about scenarios that are entirely unrelated to how computers are used 99% of
the time.

 _In every office I have worked in, people are already talking on their
phones, I don't see how talking to your computer is any different._

Orders of magnitude different. Is every single person in your office talking
all the time, at once?

