If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
https://www.tfir.io/2019/05/15/why-l...p-failed-mark- shuttleworth/ https://linux.slashdot.org/story/19/.../why-linux-on- desktop-failed-a-discussion-with-mark-shuttleworth "Mark Shuttleworth, founder and CEO of Canonical, summed it in a few words: "I think the bigger challenge has been that we haven't invented anything in the Linux that was like deeply, powerfully ahead of its time." He also said that "if in the free software community we only allow ourselves to talk about things that look like something that already exists, then we're sort of defining ourselves as a series of forks and fragmentations." He added that it seems the desktop Linux people want to be angry at something. We wanted to do amazing things with Unity but the community won't let us do it, so here we are. He also commended Google folks for what they have built for Chrome OS." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.]
On 2019-09-11, Wingnut McSprocket wrote: Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth This video interview has been out for a while but after I watched it I wondered 2 things: 1. Does Mark Shuttleworth really have the place to make sweeping statements about Linux in general, rather than just his own corner of the Linux world? 2. When did he start looking so tired and old!! Andrew -- You think that's air you're breathing now? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
Wingnut McSprocket wrote:
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth https://www.tfir.io/2019/05/15/why-l...p-failed-mark- shuttleworth/ https://linux.slashdot.org/story/19/.../why-linux-on- desktop-failed-a-discussion-with-mark-shuttleworth "Mark Shuttleworth, founder and CEO of Canonical, summed it in a few words: "I think the bigger challenge has been that we haven't invented anything in the Linux that was like deeply, powerfully ahead of its time." He also said that "if in the free software community we only allow ourselves to talk about things that look like something that already exists, then we're sort of defining ourselves as a series of forks and fragmentations." He added that it seems the desktop Linux people want to be angry at something. We wanted to do amazing things with Unity but the community won't let us do it, so here we are. He also commended Google folks for what they have built for Chrome OS." Excellent interview I had not seen. Thank you. And good to hear folks in the Linux community say these types of things. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/11/19 1:19 PM, Wingnut McSprocket wrote:
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth https://www.tfir.io/2019/05/15/why-l...p-failed-mark- shuttleworth/ https://linux.slashdot.org/story/19/.../why-linux-on- desktop-failed-a-discussion-with-mark-shuttleworth "Mark Shuttleworth, founder and CEO of Canonical, summed it in a few words: "I think the bigger challenge has been that we haven't invented anything in the Linux that was like deeply, powerfully ahead of its time." He also said that "if in the free software community we only allow ourselves to talk about things that look like something that already exists, then we're sort of defining ourselves as a series of forks and fragmentations." He added that it seems the desktop Linux people want to be angry at something. We wanted to do amazing things with Unity but the community won't let us do it, so here we are. He also commended Google folks for what they have built for Chrome OS." What a crock. The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his QuickBooks and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Here is a quarter. Go tell it to some who cares. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. Linux is technically superior to Windows but it does not matter. Windows runs all the software. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
T wrote:
(snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. -- 'The only thing to say is that clueless "advocates" think that this flood of **** copies somehow challenges apple. It doesn't.' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, regarding Android-based phones |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote:
T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Nothing showed. I presumed infernal November screwed up. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote:
T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 2019-09-12 1:14 p.m., T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? I think that's a Message-ID. How does one look up a Message-ID, anyway? -- Your friendly neighborhood Rabid Rogue |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:20:08 -0400, Rabid Rogue wrote:
On 2019-09-12 1:14 p.m., T wrote: On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? I think that's a Message-ID. How does one look up a Message-ID, anyway? Proper newsreaders allow you to double click it and the message opens in a new window. That works for me. (Forte Agent 2.0) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
T wrote:
chrisv wrote: Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? That's not an email address, it's a usenet message-id http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cphiknedtsvjrs4kiblk1s1egiicad 7q2bq%404ax.com%3E |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:20 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
T wrote: chrisv wrote: Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? That's not an email address, it's a usenet message-id http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cphiknedtsvjrs4kiblk1s1egiicad 7q2bq%404ax.com%3E Okay I see now: T wrote: The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his Quick Books and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Many people have no need of such special applications. I see tons of folks over two counties for the last 24 years. There is always one program they have to run that kills Linux. Usually is is Quick Books, and virtually every business uses it. Some times it is M$ Office. A lot of time it it is things like Turbo Tax and those ancestry programs. There is always something. And believe me, I don't care much for Windows, even though it provided me with a fine living. I'd much rather put Linux on my customers. It is far more reliable, faster, and to be quite honest, a lot more fun to work on. Oh ya, GnuCash work on Linux (I personally use it), but it does not do inventory or payroll. And good luck trying to find an accountant that understands it. I have personally witnessed accountants tell Apple users with Quick Books files to go home, get a Windows computer, and come back with a Windows quick books file. Are you seeing a trend? Also, as the years progress, more and more applications become browser-based, making it less and less important what OS is being used. True for Cloud based programs. Edge base not so true. And I think Cloud Based systems have met their usefulness and have started to get a bit ridiculous. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. The Linux community is already doing what it should be doing. Obviously, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they could keep-up, in applications, with the 40X larger Windows ecosystem. As I have stated before, Linux is technically superior to Windows, and not by a little, by a lot. From the users standpoint, if the programs don't work, they don't care, the OS doesn't work. Here is a quarter, go tell it to someone who cares. Maybe the solution is for someone like Red Hat to get behind Wine and make Wine work right for all Windows programs. But that maybe bad too as programmers would never port to Linux. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 10:14 AM, T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? He is saying people have no need for such amazingly specialized programs as basic tax or personal accounting programs. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On 9/12/19 11:47 AM, Snit wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:14 AM, T wrote: On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? He is saying people have no need for such amazingly specialized programs as basic tax or personal accounting programs. Every small business I come across used Quick Books. It is not specialized. It is common. This is why I can't put a single business on Linux Desktops. Server are another matter. Linux just does not run enough "common" software. And it is a far better OS too. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:14:16 -0700, T wrote:
On 9/12/19 10:06 AM, chrisv wrote: T wrote: (snip) What, you just copy and paste the same stuff that your wrote earlier? Here's my response. Your response is an eMail address? Bro, do you even compute? 200 news.astraweb.com NNRP Service Ready (posting ok) (fx34.iad) (yEnc enabled). 381 PASS required 281 Welcome to usenetxs.com (Posting Allowed) article 220 0 Path: not-for-mail From: chrisv Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth Message-ID: References: qlccfj$g6o$1@dont- email.me X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 27 X-Complaints-To: NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:49:23 UTC Organization: fastusenet - www.fastusenet.org Bytes: 1607 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:49:23 -0500 X-Received-Bytes: 1658 X-Received-Body-CRC: 98773473 T wrote: The user does not give a s*** what OS he is using. He only cares if his programs work. And Windows owns the program base. From the user's point of view, if his Quick Books and his Turbotax does not work, then the OS does not work. He does not care why. Many people have no need of such special applications. Also, as the years progress, more and more applications become browser-based, making it less and less important what OS is being used. Linux's desktop have come into their own. There are several that are very well done and much better than Windows 10. Linux need to concentrate on taking over the install base of software. The Linux community is already doing what it should be doing. Obviously, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they could keep-up, in applications, with the 40X larger Windows ecosystem. -- "If we're even mildly critical of GNU/Linux, we're liars and trolls." - "Slimer", lying shamelessly .. -- -v | Two-time winner of the Checky™. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|