The Linux desktop is in trouble

[claydoh]

We *almost* got things down to two desktops, or close enough to 2, at one point.
Then Gnome 3 came along in 2010-ish and , ahem, forced things like Cinnamon, Mate and Unity to happen. So it is Red Hat's fault?

KDE 4's initial offering in 2007-2008, of course had no bearing on this in any way whatsoever, nope, not at all, nope. No way.

[WWDERW]

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.

Wouldn't it be IBM now? I'm sure that would really up the fear factor there.

[TWPonKubuntu]

I've distro hopped before (let's have a hallelujah!) and I'm proud of it. Sometimes, a given desktop will be broken on my system, so I install something else. That's what's nice about Linux, I can find the same functionality in different desktops, sometimes even the exact same utility. I'm also a reasonably experienced user and not afraid to adjust parameters and risk breaking functionality.

For the new Linux user, I agree that there is a learning curve which is complicated by the many choices in Desktop design. That is where a more "standardized" desktop might (maybe, perhaps) be useful. The risk is that new users may think that the "standard" is also the only option, which will delay their learning process.

Having been a Windows user (real feeling of shame and regret for the wasted time) and "seen the light", I think I know what the new Linux user may find as they try something new. It can drive people back to Windows, for a while. That is where Forums can be helpful (not just this forum, but all Linux forums). by offering discussion and assistance. Sure, some Fora are better than others, but the intent is there.

Honestly, I don't see Linux ever getting to the point of having a single, default desktop (let the mud slinging begin). At most, I predict a smaller set of desktop designs and I'm not going to even try to suggest which those might be... Some may not even exit, yet.

[WWDERW]

The risk is that new users may think that the "standard" is also the only option, which will delay their learning process.

That would need to be something that is communicated to the new user. It's not let them go into this knowing nothing. Forums would still be able to communicate that as well.

Take into consideration, how many people are use to installing their own systems? How many are used to wading through hundreds/thousands of posts online to find the answer? How many do you think are going to tough it out?

Having been a Windows user (real feeling of shame and regret for the wasted time) and "seen the light", I think I know what the new Linux user may find as they try something new. It can drive people back to Windows, for a while. That is where Forums can be helpful (not just this forum, but all Linux forums). by offering discussion and assistance. Sure, some Fora are better than others, but the intent is there.

I would be cautious here. I was 6 when I was learning DOS in school. It was 2010 before I even heard Linux for the first time(that should give you some inkling of my age). It was 2015 before Linux was the only OS on bare metal, but I still was VMing Windows to help ease the transition. It was only this year that I was comfortable enough (and had Linux alternatives for my production software (ironically Adobe is often sighted as the stumbling block, but that wasn't the piece of software that kept me from migrating totally, that was actually the first bit of software that I was off)) to not even have to go into Windows except for nostalgia.

How many people (new users) are going to be comfortable VMing software? I see some people do it to run Win only software on a Mac (same software that was tripping me up for the longest time during my switch) that still look like deer in headlights. I mention a VM to my niece (11 yrs younger that I am) and she has no idea what I'm talking about (as is the case of most everyone except my mom, who did a little programming in COBOL in her younger days).

There is a lot of things that people are going to have to persevere through to make it work. Still a long of misconceptions that people have. That need to push through takes a ding out of efficiency. The more of a ding it takes out, the less likely they are going to keep pushing through.

The ones that are really going to keep pushing through are the ones that are more like ""shoot" no I'm not going back to Windows (or Mac, whatever the case may be)" and that quite honestly like working/playing on computers. It really takes both aspects to help people push through and get going through Linux.

As far as forums go, I've been in some forums that people didn't take kindly to new users or users that didn't always keep BASH running at all times. Hated the newbie questions. Some were the polar opposite. Not knowing where to start that would be the most beneficial to new users, that can be a put of right there as well.

Honestly, I don't see Linux ever getting to the point of having a single, default desktop (let the mud slinging begin). At most, I predict a smaller set of desktop designs and I'm not going to even try to suggest which those might be... Some may not even exit, yet.

I agree with that and unfortunately that and other fragmented aspects of Linux are what help keep it at a paltry 1.8% market share. Keep in mind, that fragmented nature also may affect other software support from going to Linux (if nothing else as an excuse for not keeping a Linux version) and without getting into the closed source v. open source debate, having more software and especially more software that people are familiar with and know that workflow will help. Doesn't mean that you or I have to use that software (again options), but it's about having that there and making it easier for them to target one particular flavor (typically those that do target Linux, tend to target RHEL and RHEL based flavors, which I can tell you aren't that easy, although I did like Fedora, it's EOL cycle is brutal in certain environments) and help people have an option of what OSs that they can use.

Going from Windows with very little options to nothing but options is very jarring. Having something that is focused in in one area, so the new user can work on learning other areas would certainly be more helpful, then having to learning/worry about everything. It's like were do you start. Then when the basics are taking care of, then spread your wings to the beauty that is Linux.

Be aware as well, not many people actually like messing with computers (certainly not the desktop metaphor). The easiest that it can be, the better it is in getting more users. From the outside looking it, with Linux's fragmented state, people don't know what's going on and it makes it hard weeding out the static even if they had a desire to weed through it, some don't. And with all the misconceptions out there that the laymen as of Linux, doesn't help either.

This isn't about eliminating options, this is about being more focused, if nothing else. The lack of focus has it's pros and cons, and if the lack of focus is something that one likes, have to take the bad with that as well.

[TWPonKubuntu]

So, throw new users into the deep end of the pool (Linux) and let them sink or swim... That works if there were no other alternatives, but reality is that it also sends potential Linux users toward Windows or Mac.

Re Fora, sure, there are some from which I was repulsed by and never went back. That is true for all operating system. Please note where we are holding this discussion... Thank you moderators for your degree of acceptance and tolerance for thread drift.

Re having only one desktop, I stand behind my statement, one is NOT enough. In Linux, we have an OS which not only allows modification but is designed to allow choices. This is not Windows: "Thou shalt have but one desktop and We shall control it". Let us not go that route.

As I said before, I'm not going to try to predict (or dictate) which desktop might be used as a defacto "standard" for the rest of us. Instead, let's all advocate for our favorite desktop(s) and the winner is whoever gets the most users. There is no prize, just a better OS. Right now, I'm voting and advocating for KDE and XFCE as my DEs of choice, KDE under Ubuntu and XFCE under Mint. Sorry, there are choices to be made by the new user.

We could extend this into Browser selection but I already run about four or five on each of my systems so it doesn't matter which OS is behind them. I prefer having choices.

To any new users who have waded through this thread; Congratulations, and welcome to the deep end, you have learned to swim. OS Diving lessons are next on the curricula. You can dive alone or with a group but I highly recommend finding a group who fits your needs. You're in the forum, so you have already made some good choices. Enjoy the swimming. ASK QUESTIONS!

[WWDERW]

So, throw new users into the deep end of the pool (Linux) and let them sink or swim... That works if there were no other alternatives, but reality is that it also sends potential Linux users toward Windows or Mac.

That's the way that it is now. If the method that is being used by Linux now is the most beneficial, then why the paltry 1.8% usage?

Please note where we are holding this discussion... Thank you moderators for your degree of acceptance and tolerance for thread drift.

I don't see this as "thread drift", it's about the "survival" of Linux as a desktop metaphor. I don't see how it drifted from that, but if it has, I apologize for that.

Re having only one desktop, I stand behind my statement, one is NOT enough. In Linux, we have an OS which not only allows modification but is designed to allow choices. This is not Windows: "Thou shalt have but one desktop and We shall control it". Let us not go that route.

This is not about having one desktop and only one desktop. This is about focusing information/direction on one environment to makes it easier for newbies and making it easier for them to start while providing resources to help them grow. Once they are comfortable then they can branch out and try different desktops etc. This is not about eliminating choice.

As I said before, I'm not going to try to predict (or dictate) which desktop might be used as a defacto "standard" for the rest of us.

This is only about helping more with newbies, for the "rest of us" use what works. Again, this is not about eliminating choices. This is about focusing information into one initial direction and once comfortable it's not quite the shock going to another distro/DE or they can stay with where they are at. It gives newbies a definitive place to start, from there they can make whatever decision/direction that they want to go in. Right now, there is no true starting off point.

Instead, let's all advocate for our favorite desktop(s) and the winner is whoever gets the most users. There is no prize, just a better OS. Right now, I'm voting and advocating for KDE and XFCE as my DEs of choice, KDE under Ubuntu and XFCE under Mint.

Aren't they all really under Ubuntu? Just may not be all found directly on the Ubuntu website (well I guess Mint also has the Debian edition, but that's only with the Cinnamon desktop, not XFCE from default)? Of course, I do have to worry about the sustainability of the Mint Project as well.

Sorry, there are choices to be made by the new user.

They still have a choice. I don't know how many times I have to mention that. This is more about focusing the information/energy to help with newbies.

If the way that things work now is so great, why still have the 1.8% user base? I know quite a few people that want to switch from Windows, but they wouldn't be able to. It's that simple. It might be due to erroneous misconceptions that aren't valid anymore (I've debated this point quite a lot), it might be choice overload and don't know where to start or lack thereof depending on what we are talking about.

Something has got to change with the status quo in some fashion, because if it was so great, we wouldn't even bother having this discussion.

Don't get me wrong, I love using Linux, it truly put the fun back into computing (especially this distro, it's by far my favorite), but it isn't easy being a newbie in the world of Linux and it needs help in some fashion in getting above 1.8% usage.

[TWPonKubuntu]

So, what would the "starter" DE offer to the new user? What features, which software? Who decides this? How do you get the various distros to offer this DE?

Note that I'm not opposed to this idea, but rather I'm soliciting ideas on implementation.

[WWDERW]

So, what would the "starter" DE offer to the new user? What features, which software? Who decides this? How do you get the various distros to offer this DE?

Personally, I think it should be a combination of an underlying base and a DE. Otherwise, you could be having a newbie trying to deploy Arch with that DE. Then someone, as they grew, can go to another base and then add that DE through whatever means that they are comfortable with or go somewhere totally different.

I think most distros pretty much have the same programs available out the gate, unless you go with some form of minimal install (could be Ubuntu's min install option via GUI or actually starting with a headless version of the OS). I don't see why that would be a bad place to start. Have a getting started section that would give them a launching pad for getting other software or for other sources (quite a few distros have that already, but some are much, much, much better then others, if a particular distro is focused in one user area, I think that would help focus the "Getting Started" section more).

As to who makes those decisions, the closest entity that I'm aware of (there may be others that I'm not) would probably not be the one that would be the most receptive by users here (of which I could understand), but it would need to be something along that type of entity.

Something to provide focus and direction. Not necessarily control. A lot of people try to link those two and while they can be, they don't necessarily have to be.

A very herculean task and one that I don't know if it will happen and thus the desktop here would seem to be more of a blip then anything else. Which is a shame. I wish I had discovered Linux sooner, but the switch (and it was easier when I started doing it then during the early years) is not easy at all. It doesn't have to be kindergarten easy, but the edges could be refined.

[TWPonKubuntu]

You've made the point. It is not an easy task.

Let Microsoft decide, once they have control of the Linux Foundation. 90+% of users will agree with the Microsoft choice in Linux Desktop. (I wish this were a joke).

Since getting a consensus among Linux users is unlikely, why not look for an existing DE which is close enough to a "standard" and build on that? Promote this to new Linux users.

I will cast my vote for the DE I'm using now, because it works for me. But I do understand that new users may find it daunting. So perhaps something like Linux Lite? (dodges tomato thrown in my direction).

Ok, everybody, what is your opinion?

[TWPonKubuntu]

With respect to the quoted statistics, in this thread, about Linux vs Windows usage numbers and keeping in mind that statistics is the third category of lies... Look at these DistroWatch numbers:

https://distrowatch.com/awstats/awst....osdetail.html

My thanks to the person who pointed me at this, who shall remain nameless and who cannot be contacted via Kubuntuforum.net.

Linux may be doing much better than either Windows or Apple would like known...

Thank you Nameless Person!

[Nasty7]

Not sure what those results mean, but I love your Signature!

[TWPonKubuntu]

I'd rather not attempt to interpret those usage numbers, but just point out that they are significantly higher, for Linux, than the 1.8% value used earlier in this thread.

Please do remember that statistics can be very misleading and biased. So much depends on from where the sample population is taken. For instance, in my sample size of 1, I am 100% represented...

[WWDERW]

Since getting a consensus among Linux users is unlikely, why not look for an existing DE which is close enough to a "standard" and build on that? .

This is precisely why can't try to get a consensus from the users themselves. Those opinions would just be as fragmented.

The biggest thing is that people would have to get behind that entity to make that decision and respect that decision (not necessary like it, just respect it) and again this isn't something that would be set in stone, just something to help provide more direction then anything else.

https://distrowatch.com/awstats/awst....osdetail.html

Linux may be doing much better than either Windows or Apple would like known...

Sure, it "may be", but how many of those are in VMs on Window's rigs or being dual booted on Windows machines? Don't really know if they are the only OS on bare metal and if they are indeed the primary OS on bare metal.

Sure statistics can be slanted in many different directions and the means that we get these numbers isn't exactly the best, but to my knowledge it's the best that we have.

In my experience though, people tend to be with Windows or Mac more so then Linux (for a variety of reasons, software/games, ease of use (now this would be debatable for us, but not necessarily for them and just plain and simple, it's what they know). Now that is only in my experience. 1 of the 2 people that helped introduce me to Linux only uses Windows now and he is far more capable then I am of using Linux even dealing with Arch from the ground up.

[TWPonKubuntu]

Therein lies the rub. In my universe, Linux has the majority of use cases. Is my universe slanted toward Linux? Absolutely! Do I know Windows and Mac users? Again, absolutely, and I irritate them like a bad skin rash by refusing to support their OS of choice. They must look elsewhere for tech support on their non-Linux systems.

Life is not "fair" nor is it balanced exactly as I would prefer. I'm working to adjust that balance.

Re those who run dual boot systems... They ARE running Linux which I count as a win for Linux.

I really don't need to have a Linux OS running as the only OS on a given set of hardware although that is my configuration on all my systems. For those who dual boot, they get to compare ease of use and available software. The battle is half won already.

Let's try for some optimism with respect to Linux and how much acceptance it has in the user space.

[Nasty7]

I have no opinion, insanity has taken me over!