Linux desktop neglect

Linux on the desktop - time is now

SJVN, thanks for the nice shout out to SLED 11 at Novell -- we appreciate it. Of course, we at Novell are very excited about the recent launch of SLED 11 and look forward to working with our OEM partners to make it as ubiquitous as possible. And I completely echo your comments on the importance for continued participation from OEMs to more strongly promote desktop Linux in the market -- clearly, they will be key in helping us to build up a strong community around it and ultimately, give choice and alternative back to the customers. You probably know of the recent IDC study we ran at Novell (www.novell.com/idc) -- in it, we found that roughly 50% of enterprises surveyed are accelerating their adoption of Linux on the desktop, largely driven by today's macroeconomic climate. I really do hope that strong customer evidence such as this, combined with key trends we're seeing today (which frankly, have largely evolved within the last several months) -- increasing maturity of open source apps, growing adoption of open standards, and emerging form factors like netbooks or technologies like cloud computing -- will only continue to fuel more excitement and opportunity for the OEMs in pushing Linux as an alternative desktop OS. In my opinion, the time has never been better than right now.

What about

What about the users?

Go on any reasonably well educated computer-orientated site. Most people will say they use:

-Windows XP for gaming
-Linux variant of their choice for everything else.

This is bound to spread. What the techies start, the mainstream completes. Techies drove the consumer base away from Vista, just as well as they can drive the consumer base toward, say, Ubuntu or Fedora.

It shouldn't say much that the typical techie forum is filled with users who see Windows as nothing more than an gaming system. Hah, the irony!

The Desktop

I cannot second the comments although I usually find SJVN's comments rather insightful. There is no "Windows Desktop" just as there is no "Linux Desktop" or "Mac Desktop". If you are for example a hardcore gamer you will need Windows as it supports the latest hardware which - unfortunately - is not true for Linux even if things have become a little bit better during the last years. Since these machines are generally custom built and changed often, no vendor can do anything about it, its simply the force of the current market. On the other hand, most designers still prefer Macs, a small, but stable niche market. I am working in bioinformatics where my laptop is also my development server - quite naturally a Linux machine. Also, more and more people see the advantage of easy upgrades between Versions of MacOSX and Linux while it is a pita with Windows.
And for those complaining about to little functionality in certain applications: It often helps to think a little bit before complaining about limits. Yes, you can calculate very complex things with Excel, however, very few people who do this know that Excel still has a lot of numerically unstable functions that do not throw an exception in case of an error but give a wrong result (compared with the symbolic solution from Mathematica), has severe problems with some of the distributions commonly encountered in everyday statistics and still has localization problems when exchanging files. So its: use the right desktop for the right environment and use the right tool for the right task; after all, to those only in posession of a hammer everything looks like a nail.

A User's Opinion

I would classify as what most people would consider a normal user. I am not a professional IT guru, I do electrical controls work for a living. My computing experience is based on Windows due to that's what my school and places of employment have implemented. I am bound to using Windows at work because of the proprietary software that I have to use to do my job. It is only available for Windows.

That said, I would like to know why the Linux haters posting here are so against Linux? I have experimented with several versions of Linux and currently run a dual boot system with Windows XP/ Mepis 8 at home. For home use, I see no reason why Linux will not work. It is definately more secure, has never crashed on me, and never got a virus. All three of those are very important to me. The advantage is definately to Linux in these areas. In addition, because of the anti-virus and spyware software that I have to run to protect my Windows, Linux is much faster. Just because you have to learn a little something new doesn't mean Linux sucks. That's the equivalent of saying that a manual shift transmission sucks because I learned to drive in an automatic. There's no logic there, only a fear to learn something new.

Just some observations from someone who lives in both the Linux and Windows worlds.

Linux Desktop Neglect

I do enjoy a good debate, but most of the articles such as these end up being nothing more than "flamebait."

Why isn't the Linux Desktop more accepted? It's simple and obvious, really. Most of the software that the average user has is purchased. They have been carefully taught that commercial software is what they need. Since that is the case, programmers write for the lowest common denominator in the hopes of maximizing availability and profit: Windows.

Microsoft knows this. That's why everything to them is focused on keeping market share.

Linux is a fine operating system, and has many technical achievements. Setting all the hype aside, it can be used for virtually any task that Windows can.

As "internet devices" with open protocols slowly become consumer's choice, I think we will watch the Windows (or Linux) Desktop PC die a slow death. It will take years, perhaps even the better part of a generation, but there can be little doubt as to the direction the world is headed.

All of this argument is really only valid for us, as desktop users, and of course, we will choose what we feel most comfortable with.

Such denial - such reliance on force to implement

It's amazing. The serious level of denial in the community.

SVJN gets this right. People won't adopt until until Linux works as well as WIndows and is supported like Windows. Never going to happen while the community is in such a state of denial.

Gains are being made in government mandated programs (Munich, China, etc), but not in the real market place. Where's John Galt?

Get out of your little worlds and work with the people that do a job in your companies. Ask them what they want and LISTEN!

IT people are famous for not listening! After all, we all know how to run the companies. That's why we are in the back rooms and not the board rooms.

If you listen, you'll find out that there really aren't many things customers want, but those things are pervasive.

Simplicity. Consistency. Does the job without any hassles. Windows has problems, but Linux just doesn't deliver.

To get people to adopt Linux is like a boxing match. If a contender ties with the Champ, the belt goes to the Champ. The contender must wipe the floor with the Champ to be awarded the belt!

Linux is the contender and doesn't even qualify to get in the ring at this point. The champ is fat and bloated, but Linux can't even compete with that.

One must also ask, why should Google put in the $billions required to go head to head with MS? Not much chance of success, so why waste the effort?

If the community isn't willing to fix the desktop problems, learn to live with the weankess of Linux on the DT and go back to the server room.

If the community is willing to listen to the end users and quit telling them what their needs are, then maybe, just maybe Linux on the DT has a chance.