| PCWorld:Why Linux on the Desktop Is Dead »www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/a···rss_news
Linux is awesome. It’s a powerful, capable, flexible operating system with tremendous potential. But, it’s never going to be a factor on the desktop, so don’t even waste your time considering it. On the server side, Linux is kicking ass and taking names. An IDC report from 2010 claims that Linux made up more than 20 percent of the server market. I’ve seen some estimates claiming it could be significantly higher than that today. Recent reports claim that Amazon alone is using as many as half a million Linux servers in data centers around the world to power its cloud services—a strong indicator of just how established Linux is.
Ubuntu is one of the best desktop variants of Linux, but it's no Windows or Mac OS X.
That’s great, but on the desktop side of the fence Linux is a non-issue. Compared to Microsoft Windows, even Mac OS X has trivial desktop market share, but it’s enough to put it on the radar, and Mac OS X has been growing strong in recent years. Linux, on the other hand, has never really been more than a rounding error. It is up slightly, but it generally makes up about one percent of the desktop OS market.
I spent a month experiencing Linux as a desktop OS. What I learned from the 30 Days With Ubuntu Linux experiment is that Linux is, in fact, capable of being a desktop OS. But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done. Using Linux as a replacement for Windows takes more effort than it’s worth, and in the end I was still left with a poor substitute lacking tools I rely on like Microsoft Office, or native syncing for my iPhone and iPad.
Granted, Linux is not entirely to blame. Microsoft or Apple could certainly step up and make products available and that would solve the problem to an extent. But, they haven’t, and they won’t because Linux is not a big enough player in the desktop market to warrant the attention.
To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it’s often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you’re doing.
My month with Ubuntu Linux was more effort and struggle than it was worth.
Linux is an awesome server OS. If you’re replacing or adding servers at your company I highly suggest you look closely at Linux as an option and consider the benefits of Linux servers. But, if you’re in the market to refresh or replace your desktop OS, stick with Windows and Mac OS X. Linux will be more headache than it’s worth.
I know there’s an army of dedicated Linux hobbyists who will no doubt unleash a barrage of flames and tirades as a result of this article. They’ll tell me all the ways Windows sucks, and all the reasons Apple is evil, and make exalted claims about how wonderful their lives are since they made the switch, and how they’ll never go back.
Let me preemptively say, “That’s great. I’m happy for you.” It doesn’t change the fact that you’re part of a negligible market segment. It doesn’t change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as it’s rivals, or that it lacks the third party hardware and software support of its rivals, or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker. It’s great for hobbyists and hackers, but not for an average user at a company.
So, move on. There’s nothing to see here. The dream of Linux becoming relevant in the desktop market will never be realized. The desktop OS market is a two horse race between Windows and Mac OS X.
Besides, we live in a post-PC era where even Windows and Mac OS X are being supplanted by mobile platforms like iOS and Android. Android is a Linux variant so Linux fans can claim that as a consolation prize for the lack of success on the desktop. |
|
 kleemanAustralian Expat
join:2000-07-29
Nyack, NY
kudos:1
 ·Verizon FiOS
| And?
I have used Linux on the desktop for around 10 years now. I recently had to use a windows desktop and my wife uses a Mac which I use occasionally.
I have ZERO desire to shift from Linux to these platforms. Linux is faster than either of those other OSes and it is completely free. After learning how to use it for a year or so the comments in that article are simply laughable. If you put in a little effort it eventually becomes easy to use.
Of course most people don't want to put in any such effort so they are stuck with a slow and expensive desktop. I'm not and that is great. I don't care if marketshare is small. It means zero malware for me.
--
Aesthetics should be an inspiration not a pair of handcuffs |
|
 Sr TechPremium
join:2003-01-19
New Fairfield, CT
 ·PHONE POWER
| reply to DarkSithPro
Linux i not dead, the author must like driving a car with an automatic transmission. Even when installing I rarely need to touch anything other than updates, otherwise always smooth sailing. Only problem is that ubuntu has become a bit bloated, since moving to mint I dont need to take the time to remove unwanted programs and having to install programs that I prefer. Personally pcworld kisses MS's back side always has always will. I am at the point where I used to run linux virtual today it's the other way around as windows is my virtual client. Deep down I think, this is just the beginning hype to enable MS marketing for Windows 8? Maybe I'm wrong...
Note: Not ranting, just merely speaking my mind. |
|
HoboJ
join:2008-03-27
Cornwall, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to DarkSithPro
I will never understand these people that do opinion pieces on the state of the linux desktop. They always claim that they're constantly fighting with the OS to get what they want to do done. Then state as their reason, that their apple device doesn't work and proceed to blame linux for its lack of support. It just makes me want to club a baby seal in anger. |
|
 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·magicjack.com
| reply to DarkSithPro
I can understand his POV, as a "new" person getting into linux. It's is a hair pulling frustrating experience, if you are trying to get programs written for another OS to work in linux. My example would be World of Warcraft.
On the other hand, Linux does have substitute/alternative programs to those offered in windows or Mac OS.
Gimp, Open Office, Firefox, Chrome, are just some examples.
I agree with others that this opinion piece is just that, an opinion and biased.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?. |
|
| reply to DarkSithPro
Hm. I'd bet this guy doesn't know Mac OSX is Unix and Linux is thisclose to Unix. |
|
 reub2000Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL | said by howardfine:Hm. I'd bet this guy doesn't know Mac OSX is Unix and Linux is thisclose to Unix.
Other than using the standard Unix filesystem layout and bash as the default shell, Linux and OS X have little in common.
--
My pbase gallery |
|
 Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1 | reply to kleeman
said by kleeman:I have ZERO desire to shift from Linux to these platforms. Linux is faster than either of those other OSes and it is completely free.
And that is maybe its biggest problem, as a developer you want to give your work away?... nice the OS is (but also why so many often not really compatible versions.) Many programs only work right on certain distros
And actually Android has gone a long way to changing that (though most don't realize its Linux) Paid Apps are common but very uncommon in the desk top Linux world where the whole thing is expected to be free.
--
|
|
Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1 | reply to howardfine
said by howardfine:Hm. I'd bet this guy doesn't know Mac OSX is Unix and Linux is thisclose to Unix.
And a miss is as good as a mile in must be THIS 1 or zero in this order world.
--
|
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | reply to DarkSithPro
Um, have you guys tried to use Linux on the desktop in an enterprise? |
|
Jasu
join:2010-01-09
Finland | You mean like trying to open MS Office files with Open Office or Libre Office? Yes, I have tried and it was not nice thing to do...
Still even for Enterprise use I find Linux more handy in some cases. It is to find open source software with package managers while with Windows and Google I usually end up finding the commercial software first. For a small task it is more convenient just not to buy the software. |
|
| reply to DarkSithPro
said by DarkSithPro:Linux is an awesome server OS. If you’re replacing or adding servers at your company I highly suggest you look closely at Linux as an option and consider the benefits of Linux servers. It's beyond me how a genuine frustrated Ubuntu noob would ever "highly suggest" considering Linux on servers. Either he doesn't have a clue, but somehow believes that praising these "Linux servers" is trendy and will grow his e-penis, or half of this article has been pre-written by some PR drone.
Either way, it's sad that people "learn" about the world from such kind of crap. |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to reub2000
said by reub2000:said by howardfine:Hm. I'd bet this guy doesn't know Mac OSX is Unix and Linux is thisclose to Unix.
Other than using the standard Unix filesystem layout and bash as the default shell, Linux and OS X have little in common. You honestly think that's as close as they come? That's all there is to it? You really believe that? |
|
 nwrickertsand groperPremium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
kudos:7
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to DarkSithPro
said by DarkSithPro:I spent a month experiencing Linux as a desktop OS. What I learned from the 30 Days With Ubuntu Linux experiment is that Linux is, in fact, capable of being a desktop OS. But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done. What I have learnt from occasionally booting Windows, is that using WIndows is like swimming upstream - constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done.
I guess it depends on what kind of every day tasks you need to do.
--
AT&T Uverse; Zyxel NBG334W router (behind the 2wire gateway); openSuSE 12.1; firefox 10.0.2 |
|
kleemanAustralian Expat
join:2000-07-29
Nyack, NY
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Hayward
said by Hayward:said by kleeman:I have ZERO desire to shift from Linux to these platforms. Linux is faster than either of those other OSes and it is completely free.
And that is maybe its biggest problem, as a developer you want to give your work away?... nice the OS is (but also why so many often not really compatible versions.) Many programs only work right on certain distros And actually Android has gone a long way to changing that (though most don't realize its Linux) Paid Apps are common but very uncommon in the desk top Linux world where the whole thing is expected to be free. Well from the viewpoint of generating a commercial product you are correct but notice I didn't say that. You get what you pay for. If you want a super easy to use product then pay for that. If instead you are prepared to learn a bit you can become self-reliant and take advantage of the large historical pool of free community effort called open source software. That software has a different dynamic to purely market driven efforts. Thus if you want to take advantage of it you need to work a bit. Seems like a fair deal to me.
It is interesting how ideology comes into discussions like this. All human activities do not need to be market driven. Linux lies behind Android and RedHat which are commercial successes. BSD Unix lies behind OSX another huge commercial success. Both Linux and BSD Unix are community efforts so the commercially successful exploitation of these relies on the fact that the community based model of open source software has delivered a technically fantastic outcome.
Windows on the other hand which has not followed such a model to anywhere near the same extent is in decline.
--
Aesthetics should be an inspiration not a pair of handcuffs |
|
 MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | reply to DarkSithPro
Unfortunately he never actually tried to answer the question raised in his title. Why is Linux on the desktop dead? He didn't say. He just said it wasn't for him. Ok, fair enough, but that doesn't explain anything. |
|
Host:
All Things Unix
Mozilla Software
Android
Cyberonic
Rogers
| reply to Steve
said by Steve:Um, have you guys tried to use Linux on the desktop in an enterprise?
Captain Kirk wouldn't let me. 
--
Here's To You |
|
 firephotoFacts hurtPremium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA | reply to Steve
said by Steve:Um, have you guys tried to use Linux on the desktop in an enterprise?
Do you mean in environments where 95% or greater of all custom tools are designed specifically and only for Microsoft Windows?
Changing over to a Linux based environment on the desktop would involve no more or less training than changes that have taken place in the past decade or so with Windows only environments. OS updates, programming language changes and applications moving to the "cloud".
The biggest drawback with taking up Linux for enterprise work stations in the United States would be the big US based Linux support companies throwing the desktop market under the bus. In contrast there are companies big and small in all of Europe supporting Linux on the desktop from small business up to the enterprise needs.
There's also the fact that if you were going to use Linux on your enterprise desktops you might be inclined to roll your own solutions and to never share those solutions outside of your business giving the impression to the outside world that perhaps large enterprise ready applications do not exist for Linux. Just because someone isn't trying to sell it to you and someone else isn't telling you they use it does not mean the those "special" enterprise bits don't exist.
--
Say no to JAMS! |
|
 EUSKill cancerPremium
join:2002-09-10
canada | reply to Steve
If memory serves, Google is MS free, if a corp that large can do it, I imagine any enterprise could do so if they wished.
--
~ Project Hope ~ |
|
|
|
kleemanAustralian Expat
join:2000-07-29
Nyack, NY
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Yep. Security concerns supposedly
»www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d2f3f04e-6ccf···q931Qkfc
I would imagine however that the average google employee may differ from the average say Ford Corp employee.
--
Aesthetics should be an inspiration not a pair of handcuffs |
|
