Why did Linux on the desktop fail?

Why did Linux on the desktop fail?

Maybe because it was never meant to be a desktop but a server OS

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=KFKxlYNfT_o
youtube.com/watch?v=lqgugAj69xw
steamdb.info/linux/
techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/comes-3096.pdf
freecode.com/projects/deadbeef
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Why did Linux on the desktop fail?
It didn't. People are currently using Linux on the desktop.

Enjoy your malware or uncustomizable babby OS.

Yeah, but that's about only 1% of the desktop marketshare

And?

Except Linus started Linux as a desktop OS so he could have *nix on his desktop.

Enjoy your dead OS with no mainstream support

I'll let Linus Torvalds answer that for you.
youtube.com/watch?v=KFKxlYNfT_o

>no mainstream support
Such as?

EFFECTIVE EVANGELISM

>no photoshop
>no itunes
>no vidya
>no foobar2000
>no mpc-hc

Trash

This is still 1 of each 100 users of desktops and laptops on earth, how many users is that?

There are literally only disadvantages using linux

Plenty of better alternatives

It really didn't. Only gaymen faggots complain about Linux on desktop.

>foobar
>mpc-hc
>itunes

So no shitty programs? sign me in.

I just tested positive for gonorrhea.
I got it from your mother.

Chromebooks outsell Macs 3 to 1 in the US so at least Linux won Mac OS X in the desktop

>mpc
>foobar
>mainstream

Only one you named that actually makes sense is photoshop, the rest is either garbage or manchild shit.

>no photoshop
GIMP, Krita, Inkscape, photoshop on wine
youtube.com/watch?v=lqgugAj69xw

>no itunes
If you really need to buy apple devices which are restrictive as fuck even on windows then go for it

>no vidya
This argument is false right now and it's getting even weaker:
steamdb.info/linux/

>no foobar2000
You can run it on wine if you need it so much but linux definitely has no shortage on music players, if you tell me that the only good one is foobar well... that your opinion man.

>no mpc-hc
mpv by itself is better and theres a lot of GUIs for it like smplayer.

>Trash
Seriously, i get you don't like linux but why do you need to paint it as thrash? There's any good reason or you only see this as a tribal war?

>RHEL and Linus build most of the system
>Google or Mozilla make the browsers
>community provides misc apps and support

Honestly what else would I need at this point? Everything just works and I want to start contributing myself.

I don't need a Pajeet telling me to disable 50 instances of spyware on Windows through registry hacks, because at the end of the day it's a spying, bloated, disorganized piece of shit. Windows programs are literally worse than Linux programs, built by volunteers.

Neither do I need to install an outdated piece of shit that isn't even optimized for modern hardware. I would take OS X under some circumstances, but Macs are expensive and probably not really my thing anyway.

Photoshop is the only useful software that you named here and GIMP gets the job done just fine for the average user.

Everything else is deprecated trash, mpv alone beats all the garbage media programs you named.

>Why did Linux on the desktop fail?
Nobody went on to create comfortable user enviroment.

Who said that loonix is meant as a server OS?

I use loonix on my desktop, just werks and fills out all my needs.

Moreover I think it was meant to be used by people who know what they're doing. I don't mean that as a pejorative. Foe example if I want to change my audio output device on Windows I don't have to know exactly where that option is. All I have to know is "go to settings/Control Panel, look for sound." With enough reading I'll eventually find the drop-down that I want.

Across Linux distros and DEs, there's no unified "settings." There's not necessarily one at all. In that GUI interface there's not necessarily something called "sound" and only half of the available sound options might even be listed there. I have to either know myself or find someone who does know exactly which value in which file somewhere on my computer needs to be edited.

That's what I mean by knowing what one is doing. There is quite often very little hope for basic discovery on a Linux system the way there is on Windows/OSX. I'm forever looking stuff up because I'll never stumble upon it with a little common sense. Desktop OSes thrive on users getting by on intuition alone.

It was never meant to be anything but a toy really. Thats why linus never bothered to make a gui or userspace tools for it. Linux distros are just a mish mash of like 3 different open sores projects.

>There are literally only disadvantages using linux
ok, if being able to do all my work with direct access to tons of useful programs that can be distributed without restrictions while at the same time having access to a lot of proprietary software like games if i need it, and knowing that using open and well documented format and APIs protects me from locking myself into only one ecosystem allowing me to open my files everywhere and deploy my programs on a lot of platforms if required, at the same time there's full transparency and i know it's not easy for my software provider to push bullshit on me and i don't have to accept it because i don't have any dependency on them are considered disadvantages, then yes, i guess you're right.


▲▲

It is 1.55%, 2.1% if you count chromeOS

For tough talk, that's actually very reasonable.

okay list them

By the normal definitions of "fail" and "succeed", it hasn't done either because it's still in the shadows.

It's still used, though.

Linus invented Linux to use on his desktop

>no photoshop
I'll give you this one, although GIMP is getting better
>no itunes
HAHA
>no vidya
get a PS4 already, it actually has games now
>no foobar2000
Clementine is like a million times better than that shit and it can scrobble last.fm now without a plugin
>no mpc-hc
email madshi and tell him to port madvr to mpv

>click sound icon
>sound settings

It's not my fault you got meme'd into an obscure tiling DE so you could rice your weaboo shit

Because most people never change the os that comes on their system.
I'm sure that's why windows 10 is a forced upgrade because people just wouldn't do it any other way.

I would say linux should come preinstalled on some computers as an option, but people would be confused by it being not windows.
There would need to be some cheesy 90 style video that came with it explaining how it is different if you wanted it to work.

>obscure tiling DE
There's no obscure tiling El Capitan.

>Across Linux distros and DEs, there's no unified "settings."
Unless every Linux desktop looks and works exactly like yours, you added nothing to that sentence.

It failed because of systemd/anything lennart-related, really; and canonical.

systemd's made Linux 10x more usable

...

>click on sound
>only a slider
>have to open start menu>control panel>sound settings
>just to even modify anything

GNU/Linux:
>Click sound button. Change all settings

>2.1% if you count gentoo GNU
???

less*
sorry, typo

>implying that having every linux desktop operate in the exact same way is a good thing

That's actually pretty true, with the caveat that there isn't any real alternative to this situation. Gentoo is unironically the only distro that works for me, but unfortunately it has a lot of ill-maintained packages.

wow it's fucking nothing

>my OS doesn't have these programs, so they're shit

Because LinuS is bankrupt and FINISHED! XD

>GNU/Linux:
>>Click sound button
Button?

I'm being cheeky but seriously, you guys are intentionally missing
>Across Linux distros and DEs, there's no unified "settings."
over and over again.

Let me lay it out in something that will tickle your e-peens: Linux on the desktop WOULDN'T fail if across all distros there was uniformity and an overarching philosophy of "most everything a user wants is readily discoverable in the DE." Neither of those are true across the board.

foobar is more autistic fedoraness than any program on linux

If you say so, i don't want to support those guys, they're batshit crazy and they think their money protects them from anything including manipulating what media says about them.

techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/comes-3096.pdf

I just don't want to support them because i know they try to lock their users from any possibility of choosing any competing product even if it's by dirty means, they see this as a war where everything is valid, is up to each one if any of you feel sympathy for that.

For the Linux desktop to be successful? Absolutely yes. 100% that would be the single most good thing that could happen.

Also I forgot the pic.

The real problem is people and even software distributors don't know how to assemble the right pieces. If you know what software to choose in Linux, you're golden. There's a good, stable and fast program for absolutely anything a home user might need.

>most everything a user wants is readily discoverable in the DE

but they are, obviously you haven't used a modern DE in the last three years

>For the Linux desktop to be successful? Absolutely yes. 100% that would be the single most good thing that could happen.

Then just use GNOME since that's what Fedora and non-cancer Ubuntu uses, which make up the majority of linux users

sounds like a weekend project for you, user. godspeed!

Sure. For the kind of uniformity and discoverability I'm talking about to work, the right pieces must be chosen and be presented to the user right "out of the box."

>less choice is a good thing

kill yourself macfags, I don't give a fuck if you don't use linux/gnu

the only reason you're so butthurt is because your own OS is le shit and you are constantly searching for an alternative

...

>Lincucks bash Windows 10 for not gaining traction early on even though they're giving it away for free.
>Linux has been given away for free since forever and still only has 1.8% market share.

You do understand that there would be no Internet as we know it today without Linux and Unix, right? The only field Linux hasn't completely taken over is desktop.

>if across all distros there was uniformity and an overarching philosophy
I don't think we should regulate a free market.
What if someone doesn't have a certain feature?
Should it not be allowed to be in the repositories?

W H O C A R E S
H
O

C
A
R
E
S

Seriously, give me one good reason why I should care whether or not linux/gnu caters to your whims

I don't give a flying fuck, linux works on my desktop and has worked on my desktop for a decade

just because you keep taking the corporate cock and are either too lazy or too stupid to make the switch doesn't concern me in the least

Yup. This is why I mentioned the distributors aka the people in charge of the large distros.

I thought Crunchbang was a brilliant concept and execution for desktop Linux. Such a shame it was cut short.

>Lincucks bash Windows 10 for not gaining traction early on

>things that never happened
>things that delusional windows users make up in their heads

Is this the year of the linux gaming desktop or is that next year?

I wouldn't call that a dead OS.

>installing malware

don't care

gaming is for man babbies and literal babbies and neither should have any influence on a computer OS

> a modern DE
Which? They're not all identical. It's a wild absolute claim that with handfuls of DEs out there, they're all definitively offering the user most everything in a readily discoverable way. Some are. Some aren't, if for no other reason than the fact that they're different from one another. Some options and settings are bound to be in more or less intuitive places from one DE to the next.

Actually if you said that to the groups who release Linux distros and not me, I'd be behind you on that. Yes. Pick one environment, make it as thoroughly intuitive as possible and set it as the default for all installations. I don't just mean "it's the pre-selected DE during installation." I mean as one automatically installed. Want another? You have to go totally out of your way post-install. Otherwise everyone is looking at the exact same thing.

>i dindu nuffin

GNOME, Cinnamon, and KDE

>Want another? You have to go totally out of your way post-install. Otherwise everyone is looking at the exact same thing.

>implying this is desirable or good

seriously, take your BS mentality and philosophy elsewhere, this is completely contrary to the unix philosophy and only someone that enjoys living in a fishbowl would say

there's a linux distro literally named fedora

As Ive grown older, I have become less and less likely to own a device I do not put Linux on. And I don't even know the OS that well.

If you enjoy computers, there is no excuse not to dual boot, and I mean that.

Take the next step, newcunts

and it was called that long before it was ever a meme

it is the stepping stone to red HAT, now you know why it's called fedora and why its spinoff is called chapeau

I'm not making claims about how things should be in an academic sense. I'm talking purely pragmatically here.

Because you're an intelligent person able to mull over ideas even if they don't appy to you personally :^)

Crunchbang was nice. Perhaps not quite as intuitive as I'm thinking because of Openbox's ridiculous demand of "just click your right mouse button asshole" but the software choices were solid.

>only someone that enjoys living in a fishbowl would say
No shit, why do you think I'm presenting this as a route to success for the Linux desktop? I'm saying fishbowls would do it.

>implying this is desirable
No, I'm explicitly saying it's functional. Whether it fits the philosophy or your desires is not the point.

>mull over ideas even if they don't appy to you personally

says the guy that wants to make all linux distros use the exact same DE

>No shit, why do you think I'm presenting this as a route to success for the Linux desktop? I'm saying fishbowls would do it.

So in other words you want to make Linux just like the other OSes that you are abandoning? Sounds like a good idea

>No, I'm explicitly saying it's functional.
Functional for who? You? Newbies? Why should the direction of an OS be dictated by people that don't understand how to use it or the philosophy behind it?

Well good thing no one cares about your opinion.

for foobar2000 you can have:
freecode.com/projects/deadbeef

One dev is came foobar too and it's pretty stable.

>mpc-hc

The hell is that?

What's next? Implying Gentoo is moar popular than OSX? It's not true and you know why.

Less is more.

>I thought Crunchbang was a brilliant concept and execution for desktop Linux. Such a shame it was cut short

Still exist in a way. I never liked openbox, so i didn't care.

>So in other words you want to make Linux just like the other OSes that you are abandoning?
In this particular sense, yes. I want Linux distros to borrow off of exactly what it is that makes other OSes thrive right now. I want that special sauce to be ripped off and put on the Linux burger so that people eat it up. I want to steal other people's successful ideas.

>Functional for who? You? Newbies? Why should the direction of an OS be dictated by people that don't understand how to use it or the philosophy behind it?
For newbies, and for its success as a desktop OS. That's the premise of this thread. Have a bunch of people sit down together with one DE, make it as comprehensive and intuitive as possible (making and modifying tools as needed) and then distribute that as the default DE of all release-distro installations going forward. No more need for threads like this.

>trump
Opinion discarded.

The "1% marketshare" of Linux desktop users are all the people out there who actually care about computing as a hobby and would own a desktop computer no matter what. The other 99%, the Windows and OSX users, are the people who probably would have never owned a desktop in the first place if MS and Apple didn't make something specifically targetting the mainstream.

Linux never "lost" the market to MS and Apple, MS and Apple just created their own (much bigger) new market of normies by convincing every normie they needed a desktop computer. The market that otherwise would have never owned a computing device until smartphones came along.

>good thing Linux will remain a failed desktop OS
If I'm right with this opinion, no, that's not a good thing at all.

>I'm not making claims about how things should be in an academic sense. I'm talking purely pragmatically here.
but that's the thing.
It is not practical to regulate these things.
Say all users wanted a system where settings were easy to find (if that's the criteria).
This already exists, so we could just pick one. Say we put gnu/linux with KDE on all computers.
Then the experience would be consistent across all desktops, settings would be just as easy to find and all your "problems" is solved.
I know a lot of people would prefer to use something else, and they should. And this is why the market is how it is today.
There is still professions which relies on special software, which right now is not available on gnu/linux, and nobody is willing to pay what they are paying for proprietary software to free software projects.
Imagine if companies paid $4000/year per person to the software project they relied on.
So many developers would flock to those projects so they could get in on that.

>I know a lot of people would prefer to use something else, and they should. And this is why the market is how it is today.
The market which was presented at the very start as "Linux on the desktop fail[ed]."

>and they should
Sure. I'm not against the existence of alternatives. I'm simply saying they shouldn't be offered or installed by default. I want the market to be different than it is today.

>professions which relies on special software, which right now is not available on gnu/linux
It's a bit like that in reverse today. I just want it to be the other way around. You need special Windows/OSX software? Great, you can be part of the small market share who has to own one of those machines.

>nobody is willing to pay what they are paying for proprietary software to free software projects.
You're dragging this so hard into the philosophical again, as if Linux as a successful desktop OS wouldn't be dominated by a 90+% use case of "checking Facebook."

tfw i installed Ubuntu 8.04 in a VM today to check how shitty it was compared to a modern OS
>200MB ram used
>0~1% processor use when running firefox, all on 1 core only
>firefox takes 45MB of ram to view Sup Forums
>all these options and submenus everywhere
>alsa/oss/pulseaudio preinstalled and working
>everything is super comfy compared to modern MATE system (since 8.04 used gnome2)
but one thing:
>the fucking input lag on mouse that is the same on MATE
we have to go back tho.

>I want Linux distros to borrow off of exactly what it is that makes other OSes thrive right now

then you should be bugging computer manufacturers to ship linux distros by default

>then distribute that as the default DE of all release-distro installations going forward

NO FUCKING LINUX DEVS WOULD EVER DO THIS BECAUSE IT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING THAT LINUX STANDS FOR

WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THIS

THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY USE LINUX DON'T WANT YOUR IDEAS AND THINK THEY ARE POISON

YOUR IDEAS WOULD LEAD TO EVEN MORE FRAGMENTATION IN THE LINUX WORLD AS DEVS SPLIT DUE TO PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES WITH CREATING A 'ONE DE FOR ALL'

YOU ARE A LINUX NOOB AND DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT MAKES IT GREAT THEREFORE YOU CANNOT EVEN COMPREHEND WHY YOUR IDEAS SEEM FUCKING RETARDED TO THE LINUX COMMUNITY

>YOU ARE A LINUX NOOB AND DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT MAKES IT GREAT THEREFORE YOU CANNOT EVEN COMPREHEND WHY YOUR IDEAS SEEM FUCKING RETARDED TO THE LINUX COMMUNITY

He typed in all caps

Linux on desktops is so irrelevant when Windows in smartphones.

>don't work
as in
>i'm incompetent to learn about the OS and operate it all by my self so it's automatically broken by my standards
?

Why do you guys reply to these threads every single day?

Linux is only good for special purposes like hacking or torshit. Only an idiot would use it as a daytoday os. It will literallydrive you insane and eat up yourtime.

Run from a live cd or usb when you need it. Dont fucking live in it.

>WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THIS
I do understand it. I'm saying that it's antithetical to the success of Linux as a successful desktop OS.

>cruise control
An idea can solve a problem even if you neither agree with the idea nor agree with the problem. You sound like you're incapable of talking about stuff in the hypothetical.

Gimp is trash to be honest. Does Photoshop actually work properly on wine?

>Windows is the best and ONLY os you should use because... well... uh... well JUST USE IT FAGGOT!!!!
is all i heard

>success of Linux as a successful desktop OS

why does this matter

When I tried to use pirated Photoshop on Wine it was pretty messy.

Single-window GIMP is great to me. I have even successfully used it for web graphics. It's more straightforward than Photoshop..

how has it "failed" when people are still using it?

Because it's the topic of a thread which started with "Why did Linux on the desktop fail?"