Asa Dotzler on Why Linux Isn't Ready for the Desktop 958
An anonymous reader writes "Asa Dotzler of The Mozilla Foundation compares the explosive growth of Firefox to the anything but explosive growth of Linux and what it needs to do to get there for the "regular user" AKA mom, dad and grandma Bootsie."
Re:Well, here's my take (Score:3, Informative)
it IS ready... (Score:3, Informative)
Anything worth doing is worth some effort. Just sit down with linux for a bit and you will find it can do everything that Windows can do, just a bit different.
God I hate these articles (Score:2, Informative)
Apps (Score:2, Informative)
There is cost (which is slowly declining over time) associated with a transfer from Windows to Linux.
Sums up my reasons (Score:1, Informative)
Say what you want about how much better it is, Linux won't become widely adopted until it can satisfy the lowest common denominators - your manager, your parents, your cousin who keeps asking why he gets all those pop-ups...
I applaud the companies who are working to make this happen. But until mom & pop can turn the PC on and make it do what they want it to on the first go, it's an uphill battle. They don't want to have to remember their password or the root password - security be damned. They're also working with years of windows experience in most cases. If you can't put it into windows terms they will relate to, they won't buy in ("your 'My documents' is now 'Home'").
For dedicated techs, yeah - linux is a great thing. But try telling your mom to go read the MAN file the modify a config file in her editor of choice. Wait for the blank stare...
I failed to set up a printer on linux ... :-( (Score:3, Informative)
She went ahead and bought a printer... but she couldn't set it up, so I drove three hours just to set up her printer (an HP OfficeJet 4215 connected via USB)... and failed miserably. The GUI wizard was able to detect the printer model string, but beyond that there was no evidence that it could reach the printer at all. Although the model string had the make and model the wizard couldn't use that information to select the make and model and thereby pick the right CUPS configuration. When I manually picked the make and model nothing happened. I searched all over for something wrong, but didn't know enough to figure it out (I've only successfully set up one or two printers on GNU/linux in my entire career, the most recent success was using CUPS to connect to a SAMBA shareed printer... that just worked and was easier than doing it on Windows 2000).
Not only did BeatrIX fail but so did Knoppix-V_3.8! I was rather demoralized. Meanwhile my step father (a WindowsXP user) chuckled at the botched attempts.
Granted, if she had a broadband connection I probably could have searched the internet for tips and tricks and eventually figured it out, however the conclusion I had to make was that my favorite distribution wasn't ready for the vast majority of regular computer users out there.
My solution will be to buy a !@#$%^&*() OfficeJet 4215 for myself just so I can figure out how to make the stupid thing work, and then make that 3 hour trip again.
But for Christmas she'll probably get a digital camera and a new struggle will begin. Notice, I'm not optimisitc anymore.
I LOVE GNU/linux as my desktop, but it sure isn't ready for the masses.
The Problem Isn't Linux (Score:2, Informative)
The problem is with trying to integrate the whole freakin' OSS world (plus a piece or three of proprietary stuff here and there) into a functioning distro.
Yeah, it'd be great (in a way) to have central control over the Free Desktop System, but that'd be a bit of an oxymoron.
Slowly, though, things are standardizing quite naturally
Of course, as I say this, I had to run fsck.ext3
Reread that article, dammit! (Score:3, Informative)
There's a lot of bullshit comments being made already, and the vast majority surround this one chunk:
Regular People don't want their OK and Cancel buttons reversed -- tossing out years of finely tuned muscle memory. Regular People shouldn't have to learn what
Nothing else makes any real reference to being "Windows-like". Toss it out and read that article again. And again. And for anyone who designs a distro, read it, bookmark it, make it your home page, or print it and put it on your wall.
Asa is saying that Linux *must* be more user-focused, and there's almost nothing in his article except good suggestions that will not remove any of the "geeky cred" or usefulness of Linux.
Things like (for those too lazy to read the RTFA, or are reading with blinders on):
So, what functionality is the Linux power user going to lose? None. But you'll make it a lot easier for "normal" users to not only get things done, but have fewer questions for their support staff (you).
Re:Reread that article, dammit! (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed. FWIW, I wrote an article on this [blogspot.com] not so long ago. One of the biggest backlashes was the complaint that "We don't want Linux to be like Windows!" I found this complaint to be humorous, because I never suggested anything even remotely like Windows. The design I suggested was more like OS X, but more advanced, powerful, and Linux focused.
Even so, I had to do a followup article [blogspot.com] to clear up many of the misconceptions people had about my suggested design.
Windows rapidly approaching desktop usability (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I don't think Windows is desktop ready (Score:2, Informative)
This is total, complete BS. By default, the XP firewall allows *no* incoming ports, even to the local subnet. I just confirmed this earlier today with a brand new XP SP2 install.
You maye have installed XP in a corporate or campus environment that had a group policy which allowed incoming ports for file sharing to the local subnet. Or maybe you choose to allow file and printer sharing to the local subnet by checking a few boxes in the GUI. But those settings are absolutely not the Windows XP SP2 default.
The only program that is allowed to listen for connections by default is Remote Assistance. But those ports are only opened if you actually start remote assistance and use it to ask for help. It is an application-triggered firewall rule. You can confirm this yourself by hitting the "Restore Defaults" on the Advanced tab of the firewall control panel.
Re:Well, here's my take (Score:2, Informative)
I see people at home using Linux, MacOS X, and Windows all of the time. And most of what I see is trouble issues with these systems.
Because of this, I can add another point, one that may seem totally strange and out of place here, but nonetheless accurate.
Home Linux users with Windows level user ability feel trapped when they use a Linux system instead.
Why? Because Windows provides the most user friendly method of downloading, installing, and using software of the Big3.
You install a piece of software on Windows, and you get 1) a central place to uninstall the junk you just put on there, 2) An Icon on your Desktop that you can click on, and 3) an icon in the infamous start menu.
Under linux, I have to hit the commmand line more than 50% of the time, and using the 10o or so different uninstaller/installer systems that come with linux is a REAL pain in the ass for the standard user.
Under Windows, I almost never HAVE to use the command line to do something. Under linux, it's just the opposite.
Hell, even OSX is moving from an easy to use system to more convolution in installation. For example, is it a
Some of these problems are being addressed. In fact, the SymphonyOS problem is trying to address all of these flaws and more all at once. (note the bias of a developer here, BTW.)
So, give me my cake, and watch me eat it, too!
Installing Programs (Score:3, Informative)
Installing programs has been a pain for new Linux users for a long time. It's hard enough to adjust to the new paradigm of getting programs from a central repository, and laying an inadequate interface on top of that doesn't help much either. The main problem with Synaptic, the best apt frontend I've used, is that you have to wade through tons of packages for libraries and servers that few end users will ever touch. To fix this, Ross Burton [burtonini.com] put together a program that lets you install and remove programs through a tree that mirrors the Applications menu. Instead of installing some cryptic package, you're adding a menu entry. It may not be perfect, but it's vastly simpler. I'm currently working on expanding the program to let you install any application, [niran.org] among other things.
The other issue that people have with installing applications is that the repository might not have the latest, greatest version that the user wants. Ubuntu freezes a set of packages and stabilizes them, which is an approach that works for many users and keeps things bug free. For the next version, the backports project [ubuntuforums.com] will be come an official part of Ubuntu, making it easier for users to choose if they want the latest packages or the most stable ones. Users won't have to try to install the Firefox binary that the MoFo provides since they'll be able to get it straight from the repositories, precluding any weird library incompatibility problems.
Things are getting better.
Re:Some good points, but... (Score:4, Informative)
This is the third or forth time I've seem mention of this on this thread. I think you all overestimate the number of people switching to Apple. How many users have they actually taken from Windows? A million? Two million? It certainly isn't much more than that. I know it's apples to oranges, but Firefox gets about that many IE switchers _every_week_. How did we go from one or two million users total just a couple of years ago to many tens of millions of users today? In part by making it work the way IE users expected it to work (without dropping innovative and powerful features like tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking.)
If there is a better way of doing things why not do it? I think constraining yourself to the way Windows does things is a little pointless.
Why not do it? Because users don't like change. Because sometimes habit and comfort are more important than making it marginally better. Unless you can make a dramatic value addition for the user, change is probably a bad idea.
I think desktop Linux is looking good, and it's just a matter of time before it manages to carve out its niche.
I'm a big fan of Linux (and Mac and Windows, too) and I want it to be successful. I didn't write a blog post saying "Linux can't and won't succeed," I tried to point out the areas that I think are conditions for its success. I think there's a big opportunity pre-longhorn to show that we've got the right stuff. That window is closing and things will be much more difficult after that. I think it's dangerous for us to think "it's just a matter of time."
- A
But, I like Linux the way it is... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Don't confuse the market segments. (Score:4, Informative)
This is silly. It's been raised on the Ubuntu lists time and time again. Nonetheless, they refuse to enable it, because Canonical can't guarantee security updates for it. That's also silly, in my books, but then I find the whole idea of a Universe repository very silly indeed; it's simply not possible for a distro to ever be 'finished' like that.
Unfortunately, whilst new means of distributing software [autopackage.org] are being developed, the distribution developers generally strongly dislike them and sometimes go out of their way to cause difficulty for them. At some point there'll probably be a new wave of distros derived from the current ones that take the last "easy steps" to make Linux really usable for family and friends. Hell I'll do it myself one day if need be. Fedora is so close yet so far!
Still ... it's easy for Asa to criticise now. But think about all those years that Mozilla lumbered on with essentially zero popularity outside of the geek world. It wasn't until Firefox (which took years to develop) reached version 1 that things really took off. Linux is still in the Mozilla Seamonkey stage: cute features are being developed but that last stretch hasn't been reached yet. Arguably, it hasn't even been started.
Re:Disappointed (Score:3, Informative)
It is clear you haven't used Linux in years. why on earth you are compiling applications I don't know.
My sister, someone who hates computers, hated Windows, and simply hates Linux less, types the keyword of the kind of package she wishes to install in 'kpackage' and then hits the elusively titled 'Install' button to.. you guessed it.
Recently, after 2 years of Linux use she asked "what is the command line?", having heard about it from a friend. When asked how she's going with Linux she replied "i like the way i don't have to go to websites to install programs." That's her experience of Linux, in it's would be blazing, crippled complexity.
Secondly, why are you doing using redhat's experimental, sandbox OS, one even they admit is purely there as a public laboratory for testing developments that may or may not make it into their stable, supported, enterprise software [redhat.com].
Interesting this was also the case for the vacuous author of the original article.
Frankly I couldn't care either way, Linux is fun, free, powerful and flexible. Since when have computers not been about learning something.
Linux vs Windows (Score:2, Informative)
Another thing that I have noticed with windows to linux users is that when you explain that if you want to know about a command then use the man command and that's where the problem arises IMHO. The majority of windows users don't want to have to read up on another operating system because they already know one. In my business I have deployed linux desktops to use RDP to connect to Win2K terminal services and have had amazing results and increased productivity due to lack of spyware/virus problems on the end users machine. Also with automatic YOU updates in SUSE I am not worried about the linux boxes posing too much of a security risk. This saves money on end user antivirus/spyware/firewall programs and because they only have access to a terminal server I don't have to worry about users saving important data on local hard drives that don't get backed up. So with a linux server running the usual snort, squid etc etc you only have a few points of entry to secure and protect from the ocean of headaches that arise from web browsing these days. Of course this is for a business model and home users are a completely different kettle of fish.
Where linux is lacking these days for a home user operating system is media and games. Ask a windows user these days what he is doing with his home pc and 95% of them will tell you the following:
1) Browsing the internet (Linux has Firefox so no problem here)
2) Downloading music (Linux has music players so no problem here)
3) Downloading Movies (This is a problem IMO)
4) 3D Games (This is linux's biggest shortfall for the home user desktop market)
Games cannot be played either can downloaded movies and thats ruling linux out of the end user market.
The problems of old such as installation, drivers (especially sound!!) have all been addressed. The problems above need looking at IMHO.
Just my 2 cents.
Re:Don't confuse the market segments. (Score:3, Informative)
Ahh, friend. You've hit on exactly my point: It is _the_ right time for Linux to try to do for itself what Firefox did for Mozilla.
How did we do that with Firefox? Well, there were four things.... (did you read my blog post?)
- A