SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I've been using MacOSX as my primary desktop since the days of Rhapsody. But I always had Linux virtual machines running on occasions. A dwindling number of machines at home were running Linux, most notably a couple of Raspberry Pi and a Synology Diskstation. And when I installed Linux, I usually went for Ubuntu, which did a good job polishing the user experience. The build ring for Tao3D includes a number of virtual machines running several major distros for testing purpose, but it's been quite inactive for a while, and repairing it is on my short-term to-do list.
Working for Red Hat, I thought I had to use Fedora as my primary desktop. And the experience has been a bit underwhelming so far, unfortunately. In just three days, I managed to render a Mac Book Pro unbootable in OSX, had several different issues with skippy or laggy mouse cursors and even non-responsive keyboards, had a driver crash attempting to access my home Wi-Fi, found out the hard way that NFS performance is just horrible, and had to use Google for trivial things way too often.
I complained several times on this blog about what I perceived as a degradation of OSX software quality since 10.6, but this experience with Linux puts all this in some serious perspective.
(Score: 2) by pvanhoof on Friday December 23 2016, @09:11PM
The main user interaction I have with my workstation nowadays are things like apt-get or yum, make, a whole lot of UNIX tools like find, make, tar, vim, cp, etc. And things like qtcreator, but that's because I got spoiled at some point.
For that, the Linux thing is awesome.
In the end, most of the software I work on using that workstation (for which the Linux thing is awesome) ends up being deployed (with a UI, true) on a machine or appliance of which the user has no clue that underneath it all it's a Linux (desktop). And it's good that way. Computers were only during an interim period (the nineties) desktops for the big target audience. The users of most of our software don't want to know that the thing is a computer anyway. They call it a smartphone, a tablet, a in-vehicle-infotainment system, a TV or a digibox, glasses and tomorrow their shoos, jacket, fridge, microwave oven, etc.
For that, for making those things, the Linux thing is awesome.
And I'm sure it was and still is awesome for those server stuffz 'n thingz too.
But desktop? Desktop? I guess not. No. Meh ... but gdb on a xterm on a desktop works quite good..
(Score: 2, Insightful) by darkfeline on Friday December 23 2016, @09:58PM
The irony of course is that Linux was originally designed for a desktop OS, and now desktop is the ONLY area where Linux isn't dominating, all other areas are dominated by Linux (smartphone, embedded, supercomputer, server, appliance, etc.).
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by pvanhoof on Saturday December 24 2016, @12:09AM
Originally whatever. Linux is right now what Linux right now is. Here and now. Like the mindfullness quatch. Exactly like that. Here, now.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ledow on Saturday December 24 2016, @12:33AM
Linux is fine on the desktop.
As we move towards web interfaces and even virtualistion, the OS barely matters any more.
The "problem" of Linux desktops is tradition and people perpetuating myths (like the people who still defrag every week because they think they are doing something useful).
I ran a Linux desktop for 10 years. I did so while managing Windows networks for a living. Yes, my own PC was Linux and OpenOffice (of course, now that's LibreOffice) while I was helping people run Windows and Microsoft Office.
I manage school networks, and my standard Windows image is getting simpler every time I make one. It used to be a huge complex of software with difficult-to-install pre-installed software, pushed network packages, specific drivers for different models and architectures, and a ton of manual tweaks. Nowadays, it's Windows, Office, Chrome and a bunch of freeware. Seriously. All the "big stuff" is database front-ends that could be written in anything, and web-based interfaces that work on everything. There are more iPads than PC's in my school, as many Chromebooks, and PC's are mainly back-office things for staff and the IT rooms rather than the ubiquitous devices staff and pupils carry (iPads, Chromebooks, smartphones, etc.). All the main services are web-accessible, even printing.
As we go forward with things like Windows 10, people are shifting to things like Chromebooks. Their "office" is now just a subscription to 365 or even Google Apps. Everyone you know I guarantee you owns at least one non-Windows machine, whether it's iOS, Android, or Chromebook. And so we've trained a generation of kids that what matters is releasing software that works on all platforms, not using a mono-culture OS that has to work a particular way you're familiar with (MS had their chance with this, and regularly blew it by making Windows and Office work differently in every version).
We're training the next generation that OS doesn't matter so long as they have a web browser. That's perfect for a Linux desktop.
We're training them to use Windows, iOS and Linux. Even if that's just on a Raspberry Pi or an iPad instead of a full-blown PC.
We're training them to expect applications to be web-accessible and cross-platform.
We're even training them out of my job - there won't be much need for IT departments in a cloud-based future, once we manage to do that properly - look at Chromebook management. Everything in a web gui via Google Admin, everything customisable and able to be locked-down, and you just press a key on first boot to tie a device into your domain. There's no need for huge on-site LDAP / SQL setups except as a backup, and you could easily make them one-click deployments with web-management. Hell, I have a bunch of cloud-managed switches and wireless points. Any fool could manage them from anywhere in the world with the right credentials.
Linux won't take over the desktop as it's not necessary any more. You can use it as a desktop any time you like. Novice or experienced. But by the time you get decent figures on desktop penetration, desktops will be a thing of the past.
Already, I'm seriously considering running Linux personally next time my laptop dies, virtualising Windows only for work, but even there I'm actually thinking that renting a desktop server (something quite common nowadays - literally, just rent the equivalent of what I provide to my users over RDP from a dedicated server host) would suffice.
While everyone was pondering this question, the world moved on and made it moot.
I honestly use my PC in work for admin tasks (AD, etc.), Office, Chrome and email. That's it. And I run the network. And there's no reason at all that my user's need the admin tools, so they can happily live on any OS.
The only problem is culture and convincing them of that. Which is infinitely easier since all their stuff is web-based or via Google apps now. I'm honestly going down the road of talking to the bursar about removing Microsoft-based desktop services within a few years. So long as users have a browser, an office suite of any kind, and a way to store files and check emails, they can do everything they do now. Literally EVERY other function they perform is available online.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by chromas on Saturday December 24 2016, @03:22AM
This prospect disgusts me. But on the other hand, history implies thin clients are just a fad and we'll soon be back to full applications again. Perhaps Qt and GTK software will replace them, with their XML+javascript (and other script language) support. Applications could be run off the web but with native widgets.
Webapps suck, though. I'm using Google Docs right now to tweak a spreadsheet for someone and it's sloooow and has far fewer features than Quattro on DOS.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Saturday December 24 2016, @09:44AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Saturday December 24 2016, @05:51PM
(Score:3, Depressing)
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday December 24 2016, @07:19PM
No. The problem with Linux on the desktop is devices and programs that were designed for a different OS and don't see any reason to be more flexible. I kept a MSWind95 machine around for over a decade because it had some applications that wouldn't run on anything else. This is why dominant platforms that depend on selling new versions feature PLANNED obsolescence. They need to make the transition to the next version desirable and easy. When it's not desirable you don't sell upgrades. When it's not easy you don't sell upgrades.
But even with careful planning, lots of times the upgrade is going to be resisted, sometimes for good reason. One of the companies that built software for MSWind95 went out of business, and thus never upgraded it. So I couldn't run it even under MSWind98. So I kept the MSWind95 computer without upgrading, and was careful to ensure it didn't get attached to the net. (I hadupgraded it to MSWind95B.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.