Are Open-Source Desktops Losing Competitiveness? 663
An anonymous reader writes "Peter Penz has been a user of KDE since version 1.2, and he led the development of the Dolphin file manager for the past six years. Now, he's quitting KDE development and handing off Dolphin. His reasons for quitting KDE development are described in a blog post. Penz speaks of KDE losing competitiveness to Apple and Microsoft due to increased complexity and other reasons. 'Working on the non-user-interface parts of applications can be challenging, and this is not something that most freetime-contributors are striving for. But if there are not enough contributors for the complex stuff behind the scenes and if no company is willing to invest fulltime-developers to work on this... well then we are losing ground.' Are open-source desktops losing?"
Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
*nix users have been moving to OS X on the desktop for a long time. If you defend the X desktop in a lot of circles where it would have been popular in another time, prepare to be mocked, ridiculed and told to just "buy a Mac".
Under these conditions it doesn't surprise me that KDE is stagnant. Fewer people are interested in it these days.
- Still an X11 user when I have the choice.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
OSX would be better if it had more Xisms. For one the only competent focus follows mouse I could find costs money. The lack of middle click paste is also very annoying.
Re: (Score:3)
OSX would be better if it had more Xisms.
I guess that's why OpenDarwin was so wildly successful, right ?
Re: (Score:3)
Focus follows mouse does not work in OS X because the menu bar is separated from the application. But it works in application. Eg I can scroll a browser window even if it not in focus, or input stuff in a terminal window. Works fine.
And the middle mouse paste? I don't miss that at all, got used to use cmd+c/v. Middle mouse is show all windows of this app, wonderful thing, couldn't live without it.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm, not working. I guess that would be because I have two monitors and I am not always on the primary one.
Re: (Score:3)
Try four, its a bloody nightmare.
Re: (Score:3)
None of those options seems quite ideal to me.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
It made sense on 15" monitor fifteen years ago. Today, not so much, because after you slam your mouse all the way up and make a selection, you then need to bring it back to the document window you were working with, and it's suddenly that much further away.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not like OS X's per-application menu bars are the only UI element with a fixed size and location, there's the dock, desktop icons, and top right area, and the corresponding elements in Windows are the same way, the task bar, the bottom right stuff, the start menu, and icons.
The difference between those and the menu bar is that menu bar is the one that you use all the time while working with one particular document (= window).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've never understood how anybody thinks focus follow could possibly be a good idea. I like it to be me that chooses the window I am working in and I want it to stay that way until I make a positive decision to work in a different window. The idea that this should be done by positioning the mouse pointer in the window you are working in is totally brain dead.
Firstly, it means the mouse pointer has to be obscuring part of the window you are most probably looking at. Secondly, the last thing I want is for
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:4, Informative)
Don't worry. We'll get our chance to ridicule Mac users when Apple does something stupid with OS X. The lack of software freedom will bite them eventually.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry. We'll get our chance to ridicule Mac users when Apple does something stupid with OS X. The lack of software freedom will bite them eventually.
LOL! Yeah you just keep thinking that, it's been well over 2 decades and even the significantly more locked down Microsoft Windows still hasn't done anything that has caused its users to abandon it in favor of free OSes. If through all that unloved Microsoft has done isn't biting anyone in the ass hard enough to change then I don't see it happening to Apple either.
You can keep trumpeting software freedom and that the YOTLD is coming, but i'm certainly not seeing evidence of change, in fact the popularity of iOS suggests the opposite is true.
Re: (Score:3)
Uh, yeah, they kinda did.
hrm no they didn't.
That was when people started demanding alternate OSes on their commercial purchases.
The only thing people were demanding was XP instead of Vista, not free OSes.
It isn't that one or another OS had taken over, it's that there are lots more choices, and today it's a multiple-choice question, it's no longer either-or.
It's been like that for well over a decade.
Re: (Score:3)
Balls. Several of the vendors started offering Ubuntu because of customer demand.
Rubbish, wonder why big box manufacturers don't anymore? Because no-one wanted them, so you're wrong! If people wanted them they'd be popular, but they aren't, because people don't want them, even the failure of Vista didn't make people want them!
They didn't do it just because they felt like it.
Lots of manufacturers tried and failed to do that because no-one wanted them.
Again, balls. VMs were around a decade ago, but they didn't work worth a shit.
Firstly they've been workable for many many years, and secondly i was referring to the fact that you have had the choice of dual booting and not having to be constrained to either-or.
Re: (Score:3)
Um, yes, I believe you did. You replied to my comment about VMs with a comment about dual-booting. Which implies that they have something significant to do with one another.
Wrong, I replied to:
It isn't that one or another OS had taken over, it's that there are lots more choices, and today it's a multiple-choice question, it's no longer either-or. [slashdot.org]
It was clearly quoted in the post [slashdot.org], so you fail.
Well, no shit. That is exactly what I stated. Thanks for agreeing with me.
The hint was with the first word 'yes', in case you missed it.
What??? Your link has nothing to do with "software freedom". You just referred back to things that we have already discussed.
Wrong, read the post moron it quite clearly states The lack of software freedom will bite them eventually. [slashdot.org], which is what i responded to, so you fail again idiot.
And from that you conclude that it wasn't tried due to customer demand?
Well if you believe otherwise then show me there was demand,
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure you'll get to ridicule us and then we'll all move on to something else that works and Linux desktop users will still be a small and diminishing minority because it's all ideology first and usability second. When the choice is between open and better, the latter will always win.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
When the choice is between open and better, the latter will always win.
#define "better", to me, kde is far more functional than os x, I recognize others don't think the same but they likely aren't using it in a similar fashion as to what I am. Without criteria defined there is no such thing as "better".
To some users, windows has better usability for them than os x because different is seen as unwanted. Familiarity is weighted into it. I imagine this mostly comes from people adjusting their workflow to that which their present environment allows, once you have it fine-tuned people rarely wish to change.
My usage of UI is quite simple, I want to be able to hit alt-f2 and type a program name to run it, and have a bar at the bottom for quick selection of the various windows I have open. My entire workflow never uses a double click ever even in file managing situations with konqueror. Once you run single click for all double click seems awkward and superfluous. Do others have different needs than I? of course, but I would hardly call my UI preferences "worse" than others.
Long story short, to some people, OS X has a crappy interface, to some, windows has a crappy interface. All depends on your criteria and means of working.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep exactly.
OS X and win7 both have a fine UI if you are of the point and click variety. Of users. Most power users and devs though know very well what's behind their DEs and WMs and only want effective access. There nothing beats custom configuring Mutter or writing extentions for xmonad.
The thing is, I really understand the fact that they (common consumers) are outnumbering devs and ubergeeks in the thousands and for those people even switching from Win7 to OS X (which pretty much are the same UI) is diff
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
I really don't see the great appeal of the Mac desktop. While some complexity is hidden, other things are crippled to the point of being not useful. If you have demanding requirements, you may find yourself right back at the console.
Perhaps there are more things you can BUY for MacOS, but Windows is much better in that respect.
Buy a Mac? Why bother?
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
I have used OS X as a Linux Administrator before I missed 2 things that made me get a Linux box at work - middle-click paste and kde io-slaves (fish:// in Kate, so really I missed Kate). However, I never considered OS X 'crippled to the point of being not useful.' Assuming you're not just trolling, what exactly was wrong with OS X for you.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:4, Insightful)
That OS X has a UNIX console is one of its strengths when talking about UNIX professionals moving to OS X so I don't know why you're holding it up as a negative. I have used OS X as a Linux Administrator before I missed 2 things that made me get a Linux box at work - middle-click paste and kde io-slaves (fish:// in Kate, so really I missed Kate). However, I never considered OS X 'crippled to the point of being not useful.' Assuming you're not just trolling, what exactly was wrong with OS X for you.
I don't personally consider OSX to be crippled. I do wonder one thing, though.
As someone very satisfied with Linux, what would OSX offer me? Any "Unix professional" can handle Linux. This isn't someone who is afraid of the command line, or of making technical decisions. That alone destroys most of the appeal of OSX (a system that has worked beautifully for several non-techies I know who didn't want to deal with those things). For me, moving to OSX would mean gaining nothing I don't already have, plus having to pay a premium for it. I also very much value software freedom as implemented by the GPL, and I don't believe Apple is willing to negotiate on that one.
What would possibly make me consider OSX? I assume I am well outside of their target market, but I am willing to consider your answer.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
I can tell you why I gave up on Linux. I used it for a really long time, starting from kernel 1.0.
1. Breakage. I got sick of every software update from Redhat or Debian or whatever arbitrarily breaking a bunch of stuff. You might have spent a whole day figuring out how to get printing to work with your printer etc, then they'd swap to a new version of lpd or something and you'd have to start again. Even for a tinkerer, this eventually gets old. The big vendors do better in smoothing things over with upgrade paths.
2. Hardware support. Shopping for hardware is exhausting when you've got to spend days of research trying to figure out what hardware works, and even then you make mistakes, and/or are disappointed when it doesn't really work right. This problem is even more acute with the general trend towards laptops.
3. Speed of change. Often free software just evolves too quickly in directions that are questionable. I haven't followed KDE for a long time, but I'm hearing voices that this happened with KDE. Just when you learn some software and come to deal with it, the whole thing changes completely from under you. Yes of course, the big vendors do this too, but nowhere near as often, and not as arbitrarily.
4. KDE vs Gnome. I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra. Linux is too small to support 2 different environments. Any enthusiasm I had for developing for Linux was squashed by the continual doubt in my mind about which environment I should develop for, or which one would survive. I'm surprised one or the other hasn't died by now. Having an overlord to make tough decisions in this area would be good IMHO.
I think free software ws always at its strongest when it is copying an already existing design, like the kernel itself. When it goes its own way, with hundreds of developers, it can lose its cohesiveness. I think without a corporate benefactor to pay for a lot of development, it would be better off copying OSX. Not because OSX is the last word in OS but because at least it is well thought out, and lots of people know how to use it.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Insightful)
You could've just shortened it to this:
I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra.
and that is why a mac is what you need.
Great for people who don't want choices, but it sucks for those who do.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Interesting)
4. KDE vs Gnome. I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra. Linux is too small to support 2 different environments. Any enthusiasm I had for developing for Linux was squashed by the continual doubt in my mind about which environment I should develop for, or which one would survive. I'm surprised one or the other hasn't died by now. Having an overlord to make tough decisions in this area would be good IMHO.
well they both can run the others programs just fine so just flip a coin or choose which ever is easies for you to program in or has best libraries for what you want to do. there is a good reason that there are two major desktops it is the same reason that the US has two major parties because not everyone agrees. what would be best ideally is if people realized that it is not a all or nothing deal. i can have gnome desktop and kde apps. that the way my computer is i have a mate desktop with a kde terminal emulator, a gnome text editor and apps from half a dozen other projects. the linux desktop has a problem of not knowing where to go right now. but that is true of computers in general right now look at windows, they cant decide what the hell they are. consumer compututainment has just met a new potentially disruptive technology and no one other than apple seems to have an idea of what the hell to do about it.
so let me summarize what i think computing need to figure out.
1. the family of libraries and desktop environment don't matter. what matters is license and how well it works for your purposes.
2. different form factor require different interface paradigms and environment libraries can stay the same just change who you use them. this is where kde is excelling right now multiple environment one for touch one for desktop.
3. just because an idea is old does not mean it is bad or needs replaced. the desktop paradigm didn't change for so long not because it was we all worship windows 95 but because the windows 95 gui engineers finally figured out the best type of interface for the form factor. they tried other styles that hadn't worked see bob or windows 3.11, but wimp (windows icons menu pointer) was best. and still is for the desktop.
4. desktops make data and consume it, tablets only consume it don't try to change the nature of the beast you will fail.
5. experimentation is good and can improve anything do it slowly or every one will hate you when you f*** up and you will, and make it fixable see gnome three unity windows 8. not fixable not really the fixes are awkward and halfa**ed.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:4, Informative)
I think free software ws always at its strongest when it is copying an already existing design, like the kernel itself.
I'd like to know of another completely open design (source) kernel that has anywhere near the level of advance as linux does.
Linux is often the first kernel to have quite a few things, it's the experimental testbed of choice for new ideas and thus isn't really "copying" anything in a lot of ways. Sure it's posix compliant, but that is just an interface, not a design.
Linux is too small to support 2 different environments.
I'm surprised one or the other hasn't died by now.
So obviously, it's usage is big enough to support two environments, and in actual fact, many more.
I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra.
Survival of the fittest only functions when there is choice. What constitutes fittest depends upon the fitness criteria, which changes from person to person and so it makes sense to have choice as different people need different things.
Having only one choice is an evolutionary dead end and is a rather silly thing to strive for.
Hardware support. Shopping for hardware is exhausting when you've got to spend days of research trying to figure out what hardware works, and even then you make mistakes, and/or are disappointed when it doesn't really work right. This problem is even more acute with the general trend towards laptops.
As a general rule, if you buy hardware 6 months to a year old it will work from the get go in your distro of choice, unless it's very obscure hardware. But most mainstream parts function.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:4, Interesting)
Warning:This is a rant from someone that has spent a lot of time at the command line for work for far too many years. If seeing 'sed -i' doesn't make you ask "BSD or GNU?" you probably won't find much here that you agree with.
Well if you want the nostalgia ancient versions of the gnu utilities, OSX is great.
If you want the set time function to be the easiest way to check the time in another city it is great.
If you want window resize to only happen if you grab the lower right corner OSX is great
If you want applications to stay running despite all the windows being closed it is great. (I understand why one would want that behavior, but from experience most mac users don't get that closing the windows doesn't close the app and reboot in order to free up the memory from all the open applications.)
You get the joy of a weird user land that is a mixture of old GNU utilities and BSD utilities so you get to keep typing COMMAND -v to remember what you are using. Also most server scripts assume that RHEL and Debian stable are the oldest GPL things that they have to support so you get the joy of either porting the scripts or installing a new userland that uses current software.
You will get the joy of having your drop down menus on the other monitor if you have a two monitor setup.
You get to pay top dollar for low cost Chinese goods. (There is high quality Chinese manufacturing, but Apple sure isn't going to pay for it, when they can get an iPhone built for $20 plus materials.)
On the upside you will be able to run Adobe Creative Suite
On the serious upside, you can pay $100 a year to become an iOS developer download xcode and install any software you want on your iOS devices without rooting them or otherwise trashing the iOS security (really, from a *N*X persons perspective it's the only reason I can think of to put up with all the other stuff)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:5, Interesting)
Things I very much do not like about OSX.
Re:Partially a lack of interest by users (Score:4, Informative)
"There is no address bar in Finder, so I can't type where I want to go."
Yes, you can. Click on "Go" and then "Go To Folder" in the main menu. (Or press Shift-Apple-G.) Type in your destination.
"I heard that a long time ago some OS had a shelf where you could temporarily drag files to and from. That sounds like a good idea.)"
Actually this is a prime job for the old dual-pane file manager. There are at least several decent Finder-replacement programs out there that work in dual-window mode. Among the best of them is Forklift. But you might try muCommander. It's free.
"No" (Score:5, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines
This is a really bizarre troll-baiting headline, and based on sample size of 1? By an "anonymous reader" nonetheless. Y U NO require a pseudonym, at least?
No problem here (Score:5, Interesting)
My productivity has never been higher using "awesome" at home and work
http://awesome.naquadah.org/ [naquadah.org]
Installation was quite painless, apt-get install awesome and its all done, pretty much. It is... awesome
Oh wait, were they talking about those gigantic slow clunky things that include a kitchen sink and everything? Yeah, those can just go away... please.
I kind of liked xfce4 also but thats getting a bit too desktoppy. Too much extra junk I'll never use. I want my apps not the desktop environment's selection.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm always looking for lighter, faster, simpler desktop environments. I've never heard of Awesome WM. Is it light?
Lately, I've been using LXDE + openbox on Arch Linux. Before that, tried XFCE. On an old computer with 128M RAM, I find LXDE is still too heavy. Incredibly, LXDE needs about 64M. Got better performance by dumping LXDE and going with just IceWM.
As for openbox, I'd just as soon turn off some features. "Roll up/down" and "Un/decorate" are not things I want presented to newbies. But it's
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not a chance (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not a chance (Score:5, Interesting)
Blah blah video drivers, KDE3 never had issues with them, and yet 4 does, regardless of if composting is enabled or not. Why does Linux have to play follow the leader while breaking core functionality? People aren't going to start using Linux because it can do the Apple desktop cube spin, it's as simple as that.
Re: (Score:3)
KDE4 caused me to switch to Gnome... and then unity came along and I'm not sure where to go next!
Here?: http://mate-desktop.org/ [mate-desktop.org]
e.g.:
http://www.howtogeek.com/110052/how-to-install-the-mate-desktop-go-back-to-gnome-2-on-ubuntu/ [howtogeek.com]
http://www.webupd8.org/2012/04/mate-desktop-12-released-install-it-in.html [webupd8.org]
Re:Not a chance (Score:5, Interesting)
I was a skeptic on Ubuntu's Unity... (Score:5, Informative)
But I spent a bit of time delving into this interface, and I have have now given up my Windows unless I absolutely MUST use it. No more hunting through menus looking for files or software functions. One hot key, followed by a few letters in the name, and up it pops. Wonderful!
Re:I was a skeptic on Ubuntu's Unity... (Score:5, Insightful)
So it's exactly like Windows 7?
Seriously though, I actually like Unity's interface quite a bit. What I don't like is the bugginess of Unity (and Compiz) which makes it nearly impossible to use with more than a few windows open. You wind up with windows flying every which way, like one of those cheap video games with a broken physics engine.
Re:I was a skeptic on Ubuntu's Unity... (Score:5, Funny)
No more hunting through menus looking for files or software functions. One hot key, followed by a few letters in the name, and up it pops.
There's this crazy thing on my Debian box that works the same way, but its even faster and marginally cooler. The UI is a little different though, you type a couple letters THEN hit the "hot key" which happens to be the tab key and then the enter key if the tab guessed right (kind of like Siri, sometimes it gets it wrong). So its like oct-TAB-ENTER and in instants you're running octave. I believe they call this desktop environment "bash" although theres 80 million clones like csh tcsh dash and even this weird operating system called "emacs" or maybe it was "vi" I don't remember.
Speaking of octave, it has a fascinating user interface too, where you use that row of digits on that old fashioned keyboard thingy to enter numbers, instead of clicking colorized, styled, fonted, widgeted "buttons" on the screen.
Its an interesting change of pace, but I do warn that this "CLI" user interface thing is way too new and experimental for all but the newest, most 'leet, early adopter hipsters, like if you only own a iphone 3gs instead of a 4, don't bother with this trendy new fangled CLI fad.
Re: (Score:3)
I would have to say that the majority of computer users use a CLI on a regular basis, whether it be a video game or a chat program.
The question isn't if they can adjust to a CLI, it is knowing the commands that is the hard part.
OEM Investment (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that Microsoft has thrown sand in the face of their OEMs, perhaps the OEMs won't be so afraid of pursuing and investing in non-Microsoft operating systems. Microsoft may have a legacy, but much of that legacy could be emulated or relegated to VMs if necessary. And here's a perfect example of such an opportunity.
If anything, now's the time to do it as Microsoft won't be able to punish the OEMs without being blatantly anti-competitive. And it'd breathe some life into the stagnant PC space.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, just get Adobe, Autodesk, the Microsoft Office folks and the rest of the big application writers to go along and you're there!
Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, by "yes" I mean, "never had a prayer."
I love Linux. I have a great life thanks to Linux. But Linux on the desktop is complete shit and always has been. Especially now with Gnome 3, Unity and KDE 4 giving the finger to users and designing craptastic interfaces.
I'm using Cinnamon at the moment just for a semi usable desktop experience. XFCE is also good. But by and large, desktop environments on Linux are a disaster and it's only getting worse with Gnome pushing systemd on us and Fedora fucking everyone by forcing restarts all the damn time.
I'll stick to server OS's with crappy window managers that I can tweak myself from now on and keep a Mac around for anything desktop related I really want to do. I'm tired of fighting with the fucking desktop environment. I have real work to do.
Gnome devs and KDE devs pissed away promising interfaces and aren't even taking community feedback into consideration anymore. The best thing anyone says about these environments these days is "It's not as bad as it used to be." or "It doesn't crash every 15 minutes like it used to"
People like me moved to Linux because we were sick of Windows 95 crashing all the damn time. We laughed at Bill Gates when Windows 98 crashed during a live demo presentation to the world. Now suddenly we have desktop environments that are worse than 95/98 ever were and we're expected to stick around for this shit? Fuck no.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
And so, Linux desktops...
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
I never thought twice about the desktop until I upgraded recently. It "just worked".
Gnome3 is an insult. It's almost totally useless. Half of the basic functions I require to do my daily work aren't even available at gunpoint.
Cinnamon was better, but the whole screen freezes except for the mouse pointer and the only cure is to kill the desktop and all apps running in it.
XFCE was closer to Gnome 2 and the screen doesn't lock. But it randomly resets the accessibility and power settings so that on the one hand, hibernation doesn't work and on the other, the keyboard effectively quits working right in the middle of typing things.
I haven't even tried KDE. I didn't like KDE all that much before everyone hated it.
HOW can we have so many desktop choices and all of them be BAD???
Why is complexity happening? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, I love my Win7 laptops at home, but at work we're all still very comfortable running XP. I have less than no interest in adopting Win8, or even The Ribbon. Meeting increasing challenges of hardware, web standards, etc. is necessary (maybe,) but the thing that XP-7-8 has taught me is that needless complications are needless. Maybe it's time the open source community starts asking *why* a particular change is desirable or necessary to the userbase. (Are you listening, Mozilla???)
Honestly, probably 80% plus of my Word Processing work I could still do in WordPerfect 5.1, if only there were an OS that could handle it.
Re: (Score:3)
Meeting increasing challenges of hardware, web standards, etc. is necessary (maybe,) but the thing that XP-7-8 has taught me is that needless complications are needless. Maybe it's time the open source community starts asking *why* a particular change is desirable or necessary to the userbase.
What Peter Penz said in TFBP [blogspot.nl] was
Figured this out in 2003 (Score:5, Interesting)
I figured this out on the day in 2003 when I first tried out OS X. I've been using LInux since 1995 and had tried every available desktop: CDE, KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment (The horror .. the horror ...), Window Maker/AfterStep, fvwm, and even older ones like Motif and twm. I'd used Mac OS 7 and 8 in college and hated it, but OS X was a revelation.
I still use Linux as a server, but for a Unixlike desktop that actually works and runs a lot of applications, OS X is it. Period.
Re:Figured this out in 2003 (Score:5, Interesting)
You like the OSX desktop?
I hate it. It is like it was designed for children and gets in the way too often. I want focus follows mouse, I want to get rid of the idiot dock bar thing, I want menus on every screen not just the main monitor.
On top of it, SHIP WITH THE FUCKING GNUTOOLS YOU MORONS. The half baked commercial versions of these tools lack way to many features.
Re:Figured this out in 2003 (Score:4, Informative)
You like the OSX desktop? I hate it. It is like it was designed for children and gets in the way too often. I want focus follows mouse, I want to get rid of the idiot dock bar thing, I want menus on every screen not just the main monitor.
And others don't. Opinions differ on merits of different desktops; story at 11. "Desktop A rules, desktop B sucks" is, absent data from a broad population of users, a personal opinion, not a statement of fact (regardless of whether desktop A is the OS X desktop or $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP and whether desktop B is $OTHER_UN*X_DESKTOP or the OS X desktop); to make it a statement of fact, prepend "for me" and append "your mileage may vary" (and, yes, this applies to you and the person to whom you're replying).
(But it sounds as if Apple may be killing one thing I really liked about Safari relative to, for example, Konqueror - Safari, at least, had an RSS feed reader built in, so I didn't have to fuck around with Akregator. Note: if you want to defend the separation of RSS feed reading from Web browsing, please explain to me - in a fashion convincing to me; convincing to you, by itself, doesn't even come close to sufficing - why I would not want to read a feed of Web pages in a Web browser. But I digress....)
On top of it, SHIP WITH THE FUCKING GNUTOOLS YOU MORONS. The half baked commercial versions of these tools lack way to many features.
To which GNU tools are you referring? Developer tools? They used to ship GCC, but when it went to GPLv3 they decided to put their efforts behind Clang and LLVM instead. I don't know whether the current version of GDB is GPLv3, but they're putting their effort behind LLDB. (They may be "commercial" in the sense of being supported by a vendor, but they're free software.) They never used the GNU assembler or linker; they have their own APSL 2.0-licensed assembler [apple.com] and APSL 2.0-licensed linker [apple.com]; presumably if "half baked commercial versions of these tools" is referring to the assembler or linker, "commercial versions of these tools" means "...commercial assembler and linker" not "...commercial versions of the GNU assembler and linker".
Re:Figured this out in 2003 (Score:4, Informative)
I started using focus follows mouse late in the 90s, and I like it because you can switch windows by basically giving the mouse a gentle slap that propells the pointer into approximately the right area. It's fast and easy. Click to focus means I have to move the pointer to a place where I can click safely, and then press the button, all of which taken together is more cumbersome. Not much, of course, but enough to matter in terms of comfort.
Do they even have anything to lose ? (Score:4, Informative)
Apart from drivers/compatibility issues, sucky desktops are what's keeping me away from Linux. Not only are they not very good in theory, they are mostly buggy and not.. play-tested. Honestly, the next-to-latest Unity, KDE, and Gnome were unholy horrors that, as a user, made me not only not want to use them, but also lose confidence in whatever governing bodies are driving features and validating code. My next Linux desktop will probably be lxde or xfce.
Sorry, I can't resist (Score:3)
Two relevant sayings:
1) You can't fall off the floor
2) You can, however, hit rock bottom and continue to dig
Love KDE (Score:5, Insightful)
And KWrite rocks.
Re: (Score:3)
I love KDE. It really should have been the default on Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
KDE and Gnome are losing (Score:4, Insightful)
KDE tries to be too much like Windows and actually does it. There are soooo many services, extensions, config files, dot directories (aka crap strewn all over the place) that it's simply become a bloated buggy mess. Gnome/Unity did some really strange and confusing things but in the end ended up being railroaded into the Mark Shuttleworth Agenda and is pretty much a tablet UI on a PC desktop now.
This is the evolution of FOSS. Things which start to suck tend to get replaced by things which suck less. The open source desktop isn't losing, it's just KDE has jumped the shark and Gnome (Unity) has gone insane. Two of the earliest game changers of the FOSS Desktop. Luckily, people with more time than I have saddled themselves with the task of changing what sucks (Thanks guys/gals) about these two Desktops and we've got some alternatives. You can't do that with Windows or Apple. You get only one and if it sucks, too bad. Buy the next version and hope.
PS: have a look at LXDE [lxde.org] or Cinnamon [linuxmint.com] for something similar, yet different.
Part of the trend (Score:3)
In favor of cloud-clients and tablet-specific os's, no?
C++ Puts Me Off (Score:4, Interesting)
Given that KDE and its applications are written in and married to C++ (and QT) I'm not surprised that few people want to contribute.
I know that C++ is the Big Thing and Right Thing in mainstream industry, but it is extremely complex with an enormous learning curve [yosefk.com] and huge demands on development resources, and developer time.
I, for one, certainly wouldn't contribute to a C++ project for fun. I only do it when I'm paid, and only if I can't avoid it.
Re:C++ Puts Me Off (Score:5, Informative)
The subset of C++ that Qt actually uses is not really that dissimilar from Java or C#.
As for the FQA, it's largely trolling. A lot of its entries aren't even accurate, and for those that are, the issues are greatly exaggerated. You could write a similar one for virtually any language other than Brainfuck; it would probably be longer for many popular ones, in fact (like PHP or JS).
Somebody suggest an environment for me (Score:3)
I've run X11 since 1989. I started with TWM, then CTWM, then KDE.
KDE2. was great, KDE3 was fine, KDE4 is bloated. I don't care about eye candy. I don't care about UI guidelines thought up by some hipsters. I don't want widgets. I don't want spinning 3d cubes when I change workspaces. All I want is a desktop env. that works. What I care about:
- The ability to customize window the window manager enough to map Alt-mouse-1 to move, Alt-mouse-2 to resize and Alt-mouse-3 to iconify. These are hardwired in my brain after 23 years.
- The ability for the icon manager to work vertically, so I can stick it on the side of my workspace, rather than the top or bottom. Today's stupid widescreen monitors are too cramped vertically, and I begrudge any pixels taken away from my applications
- multiple desktops
- multiple monitor support
- no fancy GL stuff that screws up VLC or mplayer playing hardware accelerated video.
That's it. That's all. I could give a flying you now what about file managers, widgets, etc.
Losing mindshare. Big time. (Score:3, Insightful)
Some 10 years ago, the Linux desktop was The Challenger. The first alternative to Microsoft. The cool OS to use for all the cool tech headed people. All people I knew working in academic research in 'hard science' fields used Linux.
That moment is gone.
All the younger cool tech-headed kids I know use Macs. Most people that I know that used Linux in the late 90's early 2000 years have migrated to Mac computers. Actually I can say that with one or two exceptions everyone migrated to Macs.
[...]
Personal annecdote:
Started using Linux in 1995. Worked as a Linux sysadmin when I was a student. Use Android phones and installed OpenWrt in my router (previous one ran Tomato). Own a Linux NAS (Debian based). I have a LWN.net subscription. My work computer runs RHEL. My parents computer (I bought it and maintain it), runs Ubuntu.
When my wife needed a new laptop, I bought her a MacBook Air. Not a chance I would inflict Gnome/KDE/Whatever on her.
I have a kid, little spare time and a fair amount of disposable income.
With the Linux desktop:
- Do I have a polished, easy to use, easily discoverable video editor? No.
- Polished, high quality photographic manager and processor for Linux (Like say, Adobe Lightroom)? No.
- Something easy to use for creating good looking family photo albums for printing? No.
- Decent priced PDF editor for filling in PDF files? No. (sorry, I am not buying Acrobat for that).
- Does my kick-ass Lenovo work laptop running certified RHEL has the fan on at all times? Yes.
If I went out of my way to find sort-of-good-enough alternatives for these things, could I do it? Probably.
Do I want to spend my time doing that? No.
The question on my mind right now, is which configuration of the new Retina MacBook Pro to order.
Yes (Score:3)
I dabbled in Linux for awhile, then switched full time to Ubuntu some years back. I wanted to run some specific games and switched to Windows 7 for awhile, until the hard drive crashed and am now back on the latest Ubuntu. I went from Unity to plain Gnome3 and now am on Cinnamon. And yes, I think the open source desktops are losing competitiveness. I personally think at this point in time OSX is the only one keeping things together. Windows 7 is actually very nice but Windows 8 looks like a train wreck. But for Linux it seems like your choices of desktop environments are either stuck in Win95-era or prior feel, or you have a "modern" DE that's half-assed at best and takes a ton of work to make it usable.
Speaking mostly for Gnome, but the colors, themes, icons...they always feel like they're missing that extra polish or something that you get from the commercial OSes. Everything just feels...clumsy. It may work, but it just isn't polished. And while I appreciate pushing new innovations both Unity and Gnome3 seem to be halfway there at best, leaving sort of mostly working setups.
Thing is, with Compiz and the wobbly windows stuff, it actually looked pretty sharp. Honestly, I think the more things I try the less I know what I want, just that what I have isn't exactly what I'm looking for!
Just my $.02.
With my recent return to Linux... (Score:3, Interesting)
None of it is true!
I formatted my Windows 7 laptop and joyfully have Ubuntu 12.04 on it. My son's Window 7 netbook was running slow and as an experiment I put Ubuntu 12.04 on that , he loves it. He has less problems than he did under Windows 7. Everyone is accustomed to an "app store" in their phones and Linux is the only OS out there that really has the same type of resource.
There has never been a better time for Linux on the desktop! With Windows 8 about to mess everyone up and a leaderless Apple (let's face it)... Ubuntu, Mint and a dozen other distros are fantastic! Ausus' latest EeePc netbook is currently shipping with Ubuntu because of Windows 8 being a mess.
Linux on the desktop is the best option right now.
Fox News, and now Slashdot Headlines. (Score:3)
Should an editor who headlines an article with a question mark be impaled with a pine cone?
Just asking a question.
--
BMO
Uninteresting crap and total bullshit nonsense. (Score:4)
Frankly, I love my Linux desktops better than any Mac or Windows nonsense. I find Windows's gui insanely bad and frustratingly limited. You guys who don't like 'em can go away if you like, no one will miss you anyway. I like all of them, Unity, Gnome3 and KDE4 just fine. I think they are different but all great in their own ways. Gnome3 and Unity might not be popular with some people but they are innovative. Whether you like that innovation or not is your own opinion.
KDE4 gets solidly better and better with each release. So some Dolphin developer decides to throw a hissy fit and leave, honestly, whatever. I personally have not seen this great exodus of Linux users to OSX, nor do I hear "normal" non-fanboi people fawn over OSX all that much.
Re:Are open-source desktops losing? (Score:4, Funny)
It's going to be the year of Linux on the desktop... any year now!
Re:Are open-source desktops losing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't tell me I don't understand statistics!
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, I like both KDE and Windows 7, but when Windows goes Metro w/ 8, then KDE will have the edge (since GNOME3.4 and Unily still haven't won back their users). But for those who think KDE is overkill, there is Razor-qt as well. In fact, there is a whole host of FOS desktops out there.
Maybe the other aspect to consider is whether having the system not run on X, as OS-X does, is an advantage. The ones that don't run on X are doing fine - Windows, OS-X, Android. Maybe something to be learned here?
Re:Are open-source desktops losing? (Score:5, Insightful)
IMHO Most people could care less about a desktop's work flow. If it works in *some way* you learn that and get over it. The reason people have computers is to run programs in it.
For one, loads of people need MS Word. Not OpenOffice (or whatever is the new name for it). My sister (pro-photograph) needs Photoshop, not the fscking Gimp. You can argue they /truly need/ it. But one way or another, why should they run an OS that lacks they prefered applications, when they run one that has?
If Linux doesn't have the programs you need or programs which are `good enough for your needs`, and Windows7 or OSX have them. Linux has great browsers, but great applications are really far and few in between.
Re:Are open-source desktops losing? (Score:5, Insightful)
+1 A teachable moment.
The real reason if you RTFA is "I'm doing this project in my spare-time and usually have spend around one evening per week on Dolphin. Especially during the last 2 years this time has increased." -- So basically this guy has a life. He was willing to volunteer one day per week, but nothing beyond that, so he's decided to stop participating.
Also: "As user I always had the impression that I can do my regular tasks..... in a more efficient and comfortable way than on the other desktop-environments. But at least for my regular tasks as user this has changed during the last couple of years." -- I suspect it's because both Apple and Microsoft have improved their user friendliness over the last half-decade (well except for "where's the damn command?" Ribbon interface). Maybe he should try LXDE (lubuntu) which is not only lightweight on memory, but also nice and friendly.
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:5, Funny)
"Don't feed the ________".
Obvious ______ is obvious".
Lazy != Stupid or Ignorant (Score:5, Insightful)
My computer is a tool. I have no desire to spend any intellectual energy whatsoever in making my computer work. I have work to do, both at work and at home, and I would prefer my computer simply never stand in the way of getting that work done. (At work, my job is protocol-level network equipment diagnostics, at home it's your typical surf, e-mail, light office work, games, etc.)
Just like I am mostly ignorant of the metallurgy and exact mechanical parts of the torque wrench I used to change out my brakes today, I have no need nor desire to understand the inner workings of my operating system. I understand the knowledge I require to do my job, just as I understand how brake calipers, pads, fluid, and rotors interact to stop my car. Knowing the secrets of torque wrench construction or OS operation is not something I have or want. While knowledge is a good thing, I have limited hours in my day, and do not have time to learn everything.
To be blunt, I have better things to do with my time than to use it making my computer work properly. I spend all day, every work day, making enterprise computer equipment work, and I do not want to dedicate any resources there, or at home, making my personal computers work properly also. For all its many faults, Windows works well enough to get my jobs done. Linux, with the tweaking, endless GUI "wars" (HOW long has the Gnome vs. KDE thing been going on?), driver morass, and stacks 'o Googling required for general operations, does not. The cheap Windows laptop I'm typing this on has never required more than occasional reboots for updates or crankiness. It has not required one iota of tweaking or a single download of some obscure driver or utility, nor the editing of a single configuration file, to make it work.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever to wanting something to "just work." Knowing HOW it works can be a valuable and enlightening process (there is a reason I have a degree in Computer Engineering, and I DO largely know how it works on a low level), but it should never be required, unless it is your job.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"never were" -- competitive, or losing competitiveness?
Both. They never were competitive. You can't lose something you don't have, so they can't be losing competitiveness.
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess it depends on what you mean by "competitive". For me, KDE used to be the best desktop experience available, under any OS. That changed with the 4.x series -- now KDE has degraded to the point where it is not substantially better than Windows or Mac. So in my view, KDE has indeed become less competitive.
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux desktops were in my experience never competitive because they require too much technical knowledge. That is an obstacle easily overcome by technical types, but *not* the majority of the user population. It just isn't sustainable to say "Here, tinker, it's cool" to everybody - or more accurately ANYbody outside of technical folks who enjoy the work necessary to update one application or another. It's why many have grown tired of Windows. It's why OSX, with its draw backs, is becoming more popular - the user population at large want an experience that doesn't require at lot of work to keep working. imho.
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:5, Interesting)
I used a linux desktop for 7 years. I dutifully updated when any improvement was made.
Linux desktops were in my experience never competitive because they require too much technical knowledge. That is an obstacle easily overcome by technical types, but *not* the majority of the user population. It just isn't sustainable to say "Here, tinker, it's cool" to everybody - or more accurately ANYbody outside of technical folks who enjoy the work necessary to update one application or another. It's why many have grown tired of Windows. It's why OSX, with its draw backs, is becoming more popular - the user population at large want an experience that doesn't require at lot of work to keep working. imho.
My KDE desktop worked great "out of the box". No tinkering required. However, tinkering is an option if you want to take that road. Gnome2 was the same way.
I wont comment on Unity or Gnome3 because I think they suck and won't use them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My KDE desktop worked great "out of the box". No tinkering required. However, tinkering is an option if you want to take that road.
No, tinkering is what you end up with when things don't work as expected. Small things like my side mouse buttons not working, or the wifi actually being supported but requiring a very bleeding edge kernel, the sound volume resetting to 0 on every reboot, the upgrade process failing and all sorts of little shitty things I've had to deal with. And the KDE launch bar has crashed on me more times than Windows explorer has. And I've done the distro/version/reinstall merry-go-round as people insist it must be my
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux desktops were in my experience never competitive because they require too much technical knowledge. That is an obstacle easily overcome by technical types, but *not* the majority of the user population.
Am I the only one who doesn't see that as a problem?
Average users who don't want to learn new things about their systems are already well represented. They have several good options. What's so wrong with an OS for those who like learning and want to understand how the system works?
As a long-time Linux user, why would I feel a need for the masses to join me? I'm fine with people choosing what suits them best. I don't need them to choose what I choose. I like the choices I made in a way that doesn't depend on what someone else does.
Linux already has what it needs: enough of a userbase that there is active development and the attention of various companies which can contribute. I don't want it to become so thoroughly obscure as to lose that, because that is a good thing. I for one feel no need to "beat Microsoft", as though popularity indicated quality. Anyone who has seriously considered that question has already observed that it frequently indicates the opposite.
Why does Linux need tons of non-technical users who are unlikely to appreciate and understand the Open Source ethic? So that companies will include Linux drivers by default with hardware you buy? I've personally never had problems getting hardware to work, but then the correct way to do this is to match the hardware to the OS. Doing that, I found I had a very wide selection of hardware covering a large range of prices and capabilities. If that's what drives the desire to "go mainstream" more than Linux already has, it seems designed to solve what is not actually a problem. If that's not what drives this urge, then what does?
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:4, Insightful)
As a long-time Linux user, why would I feel a need for the masses to join me?
Because it is a hell of a lot easier to draw money and talent to the development of client applications --- programs ---- that have a reasonable prospect of running on the systems used by 99% of their potential market.
Desktop search (Score:3)
For me the Linux desktops were competitive with windows and Mac until 2005 or so when spotlight desktop search came along (followed by its windows counterpart). In GNOME (and hence in Ubuntu) there was never* a stable, solid search function that would search inside all file types and index the results for instant retrieval. For me that is now the primary way I navigate the OS, and it wasn't until 2012 that Ubuntu had anything even remotely similar (and I don't think that searches inside files instantly yet)
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not "keeping it going". That's tinkering.
If you don't bother to know what you are buying, you can end up with a lemon. The fact that you are running Windows doesn't alter this. Stuff still needs to be fit for your purposes, reliable, and fast enough.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:NO !! NEVER WERE !! (Score:5, Insightful)
The GUI's not having all of the options is not a problem limited to Linux. A cursory search of enabling TRIM in Windows and MacOS quickly led me to references for command line tools.
The last time I looked into enabling GPU video decoding in Windows, the instructions weren't for the faint of heart either.
Everyone assumes that there's never any problems with Windows or even MacOS and it's all some idealistic fantasy. It isn't necessarily.
Re:Maybe its time to consolidate on one of the the (Score:5, Insightful)
Getting FOSS developers to merge projects is like herding cats. The vast majority of it is ego driven, merging and potentially taking a backseat to someone else is rarely an options.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Everyone critisizes the horrors of proprietary software development where some dumbshit schizophrenic customer jerks your chain around constantly and you can't actually write good code as a result. Or your idiot boss gives you half the time you would've needed to do it right at
Re:Maybe its time to consolidate on one of the the (Score:5, Insightful)
create one new master desktop
That's the mistake. There is no one master desktop. Its like convincing a bunch of book authors instead of writing a bunch of pulp, they should all cooperate to write the one great american novel.
10000 religions all claiming the other 9999 are wrong? Eh, they should give it up and all cooperate on the one master religion. (with our luck, unrestrained crony capitalism?)
Re: (Score:3)
Ironically some Linux interfaces are more simple because they don't have a lot of this upgrade treadmill driven cruft.
Those interfaces would have previously been eviscerated for not having a "rich set of features".
Re:From what I could get before a 503.... (Score:4, Insightful)
And how many of you Linux guys just chuck the UI and go for the command line because it's actually easier?
A keyboard is an immensely higher bandwidth user interface.
10 fingers, 104 keys on a IBM type M, at 100 wpm vs a mouse with "a" button on a mac or maybe two on a PC and maybe a scroll wheel is no contest.
Computers are supposed to be FOR people who have no patience, not a challenge for impatient people.
Also I can't understand GUIs. Too hard to use. Something to do with eye focus. I can read and write text about 2 to 4 times faster than the fastest speaker, but I can't figure out icons, like little standardized test puzzles. Click on the mating centipedes to configure. No wait the Fing centipedes means paste. Where's my gmail, ah a red letter M how .. incredibly unobvious. Ah click on the folder on the desktop to open outlook, no wait thats a directory, click on the yellow folder, no the other yellow folder, no the yellow folder with a round thing on it to open outlook. I don't know what that's even supposed to symbolize. Why do I have to solve symbolic graphic arts puzzles to imperiously give commands? Julius Caesar never held up cryptograms to invade Gaul, although I'm sure there's some fool UI designer working on it now for .mil. Google chome icon thats a saw blade on lsd, right? So not obvious. Why can't I just type "chrome" to run chrome or "configure" to configure stuff or "outlook" to run outlook or something simple like that? I want to stop so I click the start button, just like when I want my car to slow down I press the accelerator, right? F GUIs. CLI forever. Just too freaking easy to learn and use.
Re: (Score:3)
Although there a few points in your rant I would like to make comments about, I'm going to limit myself to this one.
Julius Caesar never held up cryptograms to invade Gaul, although I'm sure there's some fool UI designer working on it now for .mil.
Julius Caeser may not have used them, but yes they have been used by the military for many years. Surprised wiki doesn't have a history portion for this entry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_semaphore [wikipedia.org]
This is a bit closer to the cryptogram comment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_maritime_signal_flags [wikipedia.org]
And this is just for fun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_Flag_Signaling_Sys [wikipedia.org]
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Informative)
Carbon Paper copies.
When signatures are required in triplicate all forms of printing that are not dot-matrix lose. This particular purpose is essentially the entire reason dot-matrix printers still exist.
Re:What about Enlightenment? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's also in perpetual beta. They've been bragging about E17 since the 90's. Enlightenment is going nowhere fast.