The Linux desktop is in trouble

[Nasty7]

The Linux desktop is in trouble

What are your thoughts?

[TWPonKubuntu]

I"m of mixed mind on this. I like having multiple options in desktop selection. I also see that resources and income are spread thinner across those who offer those options.

Were it not for income (money) from either advertising or server based (for pay) Linux installations, the larger Linux based businesses could not offer a "free" desktop to the end users like you and I.

My prediction: (worth every cent paid for it) is that there will be decline in the number of desktop versions available, with end user usage being concentrated in just a few. Look to the bigger players to survive. Canonical (Ubuntu) is an example but not the only company with enough resources to survive while continuing to fund a "free" desktop.

We already have quite a few desktops which are created by small groups of people who are basically working for free, in their spare time from other paying jobs. I don't see that as viable in the long term.

I don't believe we will reach the point of having only a single desktop option for Linux. There will always be those who want something different and who can write their own desktop code.

[Nasty7]

Yep, I just hope things do get better. I would rather run Linux Full Time, but at the moment it is not possible for me. Even the one Laptop I have Kubuntu on I've had many Wifi issues, and this would not be good if this was my Main PC. I'm positive Windows 10 would run super on this laptop, and that's what I expect Linux to provide regardless of how the gets the job done. Certainly some choice is good, but to many choices without quality is not good. Just some better Hardware support would be the most important thing IMO. Kubuntu has been quite good all but for this Wifi issue, and if I had a better supported Wifi Card I think all would be quite smooth.

Thanks

[TWPonKubuntu]

I'm also running an HP Pavilion with a Broadcom BCM 43142 wireless adapter. It works fine.
What is on your system for wireless?

[Nasty7]

Broadcom BCM4313

[TWPonKubuntu]

My wireless adapter was NOT recognized by the system at time of install (Kubuntu 19.04 Disco Dingo).
Can you be more specific about what problems you have with wifi under Kubuntu?

[Edit] My built-in adapter needed to have the Broadcom driver installed, it was not recognized automatically. During install, I used an external wireless adapter (tplink) which was recognized by the Kubuntu installer. Once I had everything installed, I used the Broadcom driver, from the repository, and removed the tplink device.

You can run the Driver Manager and let it search for your internal wireless adapter and then choose the recommended driver.

[Snowhog]

Broadcom BCM4313

I have the same wireless adapter in my HP Pavilion g7 laptop, which is over seven years old, and running Kubuntu 16.04 LTS. It has worked flawlessly.

[TWPonKubuntu]

Oops, I had to edit my reply (#6) to give the correct process for getting wireless to work. Note that it needed an external wireless adapter to get a connection to the repositories during install.

[WWDERW]

I"m of mixed mind on this. I like having multiple options in desktop selection. I also see that resources and income are spread thinner across those who offer those options.

I think that there should be a single core option that is rallied behind and then from there you can splinter off for those that want to be "brave".

My prediction: (worth every cent paid for it) is that there will be decline in the number of desktop versions available, with end user usage being concentrated in just a few. Look to the bigger players to survive. Canonical (Ubuntu) is an example but not the only company with enough resources to survive while continuing to fund a "free" desktop.

It also depends on desire to fund these desktop options.

We already have quite a few desktops which are created by small groups of people who are basically working for free, in their spare time from other paying jobs. I don't see that as viable in the long term.

It doesn't help that users of said DEs don't really contribute back. That's a big failing of opensource. Quite a few users take, take and take. It helps longevity to contribute back (and there are a variety of ways to contribute back), but not a lot do.

I don't believe we will reach the point of having only a single desktop option for Linux. There will always be those who want something different and who can write their own desktop code.

I think what really happens is not really eliminate choices, but rally behind one predominate choice as kinda of a "flagship" if you will for especially people just coming in (only real way to help keep showing that there is a reason for continued investment is also tied with increase user base) that makes it easier for others to wrap their heads around this fangled thing called "Linux" (or I think the die hards would say "GNU/Linux").

When I came in, distro hopping is/was the suggested practice to find what one is comfortable with. Shoot, the majority of people don't like installing an OS anyway, much less swapping and installing different ones on a regular basis. After a couple yrs of distro hopping, firmly landed with Kubuntu and KDE Neon (not much different between the 2).

I think that things should be narrowed down "officially", that way something could be seen as unified coming from this niche area of the computing world, then when people got more settled and willing to be "brave" (if they are, some just don't like dealing with computers other then the bare needs), they have those options out there. I'm not saying remove those options, but get behind something specifically. Not going to please everyone, that's for sure, but everything is really fragmented. There needs to be more unification.

But, too, the end users need to be willing to give more back as well. I use Linux full time, 4 desktops and 1 laptop, all my productions programs (all of which are portable, so I don't have to worry about different package managers as well) are through Linux (used to VM Windows, only fire those up for nostalgia now). I support every project that makes me money (either with monetary support or with tutorials or even code on occasion). I don't think a lot do though.

[TWPonKubuntu]

The idea of having a single desktop, or even just one which has majority support from users, is kind of (a lot) scary to those of use who went through the OS wars between M$ and IBM. "One Ring to Rule Them All" is also an appropriate meme for this.

I'll settle for a reduced set of desktop choices, which is likely to happen anyway, as the players with fewer resource backing development are forced off the field. This is not just a FOSS problem, it is part of business.

Let's watch to see what happens as M$ tries to influence the Linux Foundation toward the M$ business model. I expect blood in the streets as the cultures clash with each other. Nothing new here, just another battlefield, albeit one closer to the Linux side of the game.

[WWDERW]

The idea of having a single desktop, or even just one which has majority support from users, is kind of (a lot) scary to those of use who went through the OS wars between M$ and IBM. "One Ring to Rule Them All" is also an appropriate meme for this.

I didn't say "one to rule them all". Nor did I say only one desktop period.

However, there is something to be said for fragmented resources and keep many hands in many pies. Something is bound to give and there will be an eventually culling, desired or otherwise.

This is not just a FOSS problem, it is part of business.

Your right, unfortunately, the "F" in "FOSS" adds an extra dynamic to the issue. Which doesn't help the paltry 1.8% usage on the desktop (or thereabouts). That's not a lot of market share for a business to continue investing and providing a free OS to less then 2% of the market.

It's not only a more focused desktop metaphor, but other things as simple as be able to buy from more places (yes there are a few, I'm aware of) a machine with Linux loaded up (then becomes the question, which Linux is installed on those rigs from the get go) from the get go. This isn't even getting into the fragmentation of other things like package managers (only time I mess with one is updating, the only programs that are installed throughout the systems that I use are ones that came pre-loaded and the nvidia driver, all other software is portable).

To me, if people want a more stable future for desktop Linux, that usage number needs to go up and sometimes to do that, it does mean some compromises (like them or not).

[TWPonKubuntu]

I see a frequent misunderstanding about "FOSS", particularly from those who use or write proprietary code. The "F" doesn't refer to monetary value or cost of acquisition. It is used in the sense of Freedom from onerous regulations which prevent the modification of the software (non-proprietary). It also refers to the code being available without cost to those who want it or need to make such modifications as they find necessary.

This is sometimes expressed as "FLOSS", Free Libre Open Source Software to make the meaning of "free" more obvious.

And I agree, I was the one who used "One Ring To Rule Them All" as an allegory to having a single, "official" desktop, ie. one which has been "blessed" by TPTB as the preferred desktop.

[WWDERW]

I see a frequent misunderstanding about "FOSS", particularly from those who use or write proprietary code. The "F" doesn't refer to monetary value or cost of acquisition. It is used in the sense of Freedom from onerous regulations which prevent the modification of the software (non-proprietary). It also refers to the code being available without cost to those who want it or need to make such modifications as they find necessary.

And which is redundant. "Open Source" part of "FOSS" should in of itself lend to that mentality without the use of the "F". Which is why people (at least in my speculation anyway) seem to equate "open source" with monetarily "free". Which things typically are. Usually it's the "support" that people charge for. Now some projects like Ardour and ArmorPaint do charge for the pre-compiled binaries (ones that aren't found in the repos for free that is, which tend to be older versions), but I would say for the most part, more often then not, they are free to use and it's official support that is charge for. On the OS side you have RHEL (I'm not sure about OL (which is based of RHEL) but it might be as well).

Now, there is also another bug bear to deal with. The perception that software that is "free" as is beer, is not as good as it's commercial equivalent (also goes for OSs as well). Right or wrong, that's another mentality that needs to be taken care of.

There are quite a few misconceptions about what is/isn't Linux/FOSS etc and that's where having direction, focus helps clearly take care of things. It's confusing coming into the Linux world, especially if one isn't tech savvy and that leads to another misconception that GNU/Linux is only for the niche extreme power user group. Shoot, there are some people that think using the CLI is still required (depending on which distro that may be true), but not in all instances.

[TWPonKubuntu]

Ah! Power and control! I can relate to that!

Rather than let this thread drift go on, let's agree that there is an argument for a more standardized desktop, ok? Even if there will never be complete acceptance by all users. I might use it if it appears, but I might not, just out of my unwillingness to be corralled and directed. That is one reason I like Linux so much.

[jlittle]

I think that there should be a single core option that is rallied behind ...

The idea of having a single desktop, or even just one which has majority support from users, is kind of (a lot) scary... One Ring to Rule Them All

This is the real fear some have. The one ring is GTK/Gnome and the dark lord is Red Hat. If you've encountered some of the attitudes that have come out of Red Hat, or the Gnome project, suspicion, if not fear, is natural.

That's a very negative view on things, and I don't really see it quite that badly. I used to like Gnome, I just thought KDE is better, but Gnome 3 went and still goes in directions much closer to Windows and the Mac OS that I don't like.

...let's agree that there is an argument for a more standardized desktop...

The open desktop standards are supposed to do that.