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."

["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?

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.

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 23:44:59 -0600, AnonLinuxUser
wrote:

On 9/11/2019 6:51 PM, Rabid Robot wrote:
On 2019-09-11 4:19 p.m., 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."

I, for one, thought that Unity was pretty good and that some of the
ideas were pretty clever but yeah, the Linux zealots are pretty
resistant to any kind of decent innovation. If it doesn't look like it's
from the 90s or the early 70s, it's not worth using apparently.


McSprocket nym looks more like a snit sock puppet than anything else.
He's used McNuggets from what I recall.

I agree it appears to be a snit sock puppet but in the slim chance
that it's not I will offer my 2 cents.

I think Shuttleworth is right, over the years, desktop Linux hasn't
been able to offer anything substantial to the user experience that
has been better than Windows already offers. At least not for the
typical, non programmer user.
Linux's advantages of cost and source code mean nothing to the average
person ordering a PC via Amazon.

That being said, the biggest obstacle to Linux's acceptance as a
desktop system has been Windows being pre-installed on systems.
This is a huge disadvantage for Linux and coupled with the fact that
Windows offers more, again useful to the average user, software, the
user has no motivation to move to Linux.

Hardware support, while not as much of a problem now, has definitely
been a problem in the past and stunted Linux growth. Things like
WinModems and WinPrinters, seriously moronic ideas IMHO, torpedoed
Linux during the time frames where they were popular.
Nvidia wasn't always friendly with Linux as well,although that has
obviously changed.

It might be too late though.

I don't believe that fragmentation and multiple distributions have
much of an effect, if any, in Linux adoption. A free market will sort
itself out and the good will be accepted and the bad will disappear.

The Linux community itself has also been a thorn in Linux's side.
Again over the years and not so much now. Reputations are difficult to
repair.
As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will
certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text
based system needing a command line to run.
Sad but true.


Personally, I think Linux has matured and will be fine for the
majority of desktop users who aren't gamers or need specialized
applications.
And while I like the open source concept and believe it is going to
grow in popularity and ultimately become the de facto system, it's
going to take a while.
The good news is Linux is extremely popular in the server, embedded
device market as well as of course Android etc.

Mr. Hand wrote:

The Linux community itself has also been a thorn in Linux's side.
Again over the years and not so much now. Reputations are difficult to
repair.

Although lying, freedom-hating trolls have often claimed otherwise,
there is nothing wrong with the Linux community's reputation

Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it.

Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them.

As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will
certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text
based system needing a command line to run.
Sad but true.

Neither sad nor true.

The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not
be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a
"GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of
people.

--
"Low brow, anti-social basement dwellers imbued with a self importance
which combined with their hatred for anyone or any thing which is
successful makes them nasty, vindictive, self important weenies." -
"True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:27:35 -0500, chrisv
wrote:

Mr. Hand wrote:

The Linux community itself has also been a thorn in Linux's side.
Again over the years and not so much now. Reputations are difficult to
repair.

Although lying, freedom-hating trolls have often claimed otherwise,
there is nothing wrong with the Linux community's reputation

Actually there is.
https://www.networkworld.com/article...ons-style.html

"A prominent Linux kernel developer announced today in a blog post
that she would step down from her direct work in the kernel community,
saying that the community values blunt honesty, often containing
profane and personal attacks above “basic human decency.”

Sarah Sharp (who now goes by Sage Sharp), an Intel employee who until
recently was the maintainer of the USB 3.0 host controller driver,
wrote that she could no longer work within a developer culture that
required overworked maintainers to be rude and brusque in order to get
the job done. She continues to work on other open-source software
projects, but says that she has begun to dread even minor interaction
with the kernel community."

Here is the inventor of Linux demonstrating a similar attitude.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/b...ux-development

And another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux

"Responses to criticism
The Linux community has had mixed responses to these and other
criticisms. As mentioned above, while some criticism has led to new
features and better user-friendliness, the Linux community as a whole
has a reputation for being resistant to criticism.[47] Writing for PC
World, Keir Thomas, noted that, "Most of the time the world of Linux
tends to be anti-critical. If anybody in the community dares be
critical, they get stomped upon."[47] In a 2015 interview, Linus
Torvalds also mentioned the tendency of Linux desktop environment
projects to blame their users instead of themselves in case of
criticism.[48]"


And there are many others.
How you can deny this is laughable.


Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it.

They become aware the first time they enter the typical Linux group
and get told to RTFM.

Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them.

I'm talking about the community not a company.
So, people like you for example as you prove my points rather
succinctly.


As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will
certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text
based system needing a command line to run.
Sad but true.

Neither sad nor true.

It is true.
Try it yourself.

The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not
be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a
"GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of
people.

While it is true most people may not even know about Linux, from the
ones that do, many still believe it's a CLI system for geeks.

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.

Mr. Hand wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux

And there are many others.
How you can deny this is laughable.

You focus only on those who are critical.

There are also those who praise the community.

There are billions of people who have benefitted from the community's
efforts.

What is "laughable" is that you think that you can present only "one
side of the story" and arrive at the truth.

Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it.

They become aware the first time they enter the typical Linux group
and get told to RTFM.

Although trolls with bad attitudes will claim otherwise, that normally
does not happen. Almost always, people who are respectful get treated
with respect.

Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them.

I'm talking about the community not a company.

On what basis would you claim that reputations are less important to
companies than they are to communities?

So, people like you for example as you prove my points rather
succinctly.

Now you have resorted to lying.

Do you, by chance, also go by the name of "Mayayana"? He also likes
to launch insulting attacks, and then, when people object, claim that
his "point was proven".

As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will
certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text
based system needing a command line to run.
Sad but true.

Neither sad nor true.

It is true.

Nope. It's pulled from your rear end.

Try it yourself.

How about you prove your ridiculous claim.

The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not
be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a
"GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of
people.

While it is true most people may not even know about Linux, from the
ones that do, many still believe it's a CLI system for geeks.

Nonsense.

--
"The HUGE majority use MSO and are happy." - "True Linux advocate"
Hadron Quark

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

On 2019-09-12 10:41 a.m., Mr. Hand wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 23:44:59 -0600, AnonLinuxUser
wrote:

On 9/11/2019 6:51 PM, Rabid Robot wrote:
On 2019-09-11 4:19 p.m., 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."

I, for one, thought that Unity was pretty good and that some of the
ideas were pretty clever but yeah, the Linux zealots are pretty
resistant to any kind of decent innovation. If it doesn't look like it's
from the 90s or the early 70s, it's not worth using apparently.


McSprocket nym looks more like a snit sock puppet than anything else.
He's used McNuggets from what I recall.

I agree it appears to be a snit sock puppet but in the slim chance
that it's not I will offer my 2 cents.

I think Shuttleworth is right, over the years, desktop Linux hasn't
been able to offer anything substantial to the user experience that
has been better than Windows already offers. At least not for the
typical, non programmer user.
Linux's advantages of cost and source code mean nothing to the average
person ordering a PC via Amazon.

Exactly. Since none of the people buying hardware ever factor in the
price of the operating system (since it's included on each computer),
the benefit of Linux being free is worthless. It might be worthwhile if
the person is using something like Vista and is shockingly resistant to
the idea of buying more recent hardware, but people who aren't stubborn
mules won't see the advantage.

That being said, the biggest obstacle to Linux's acceptance as a
desktop system has been Windows being pre-installed on systems.
This is a huge disadvantage for Linux and coupled with the fact that
Windows offers more, again useful to the average user, software, the
user has no motivation to move to Linux.

Hardware support, while not as much of a problem now, has definitely
been a problem in the past and stunted Linux growth. Things like
WinModems and WinPrinters, seriously moronic ideas IMHO, torpedoed
Linux during the time frames where they were popular.
Nvidia wasn't always friendly with Linux as well,although that has
obviously changed.

It's better but unlike Intel and AMD, NVIDIA is not bothering to
open-source the video driver.

--
Your friendly neighborhood Rabid Rogue

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.

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?

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

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

On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:03:32 -0500, chrisv
wrote:

Mr. Hand wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Linux

And there are many others.
How you can deny this is laughable.

You focus only on those who are critical.

No.
I made a statement that you claim was untrue.
I offered proof.
You offered insults.

There are also those who praise the community.

Of course there are.
Who said otherwise.
You are now moving the goal posts after you snipped what I've said.

There are billions of people who have benefitted from the community's
efforts.

Of course.
Goal post move again.

What is "laughable" is that you think that you can present only "one
side of the story" and arrive at the truth.

No.
What is laughable is how you lashed out and attacked me while I
provided data for my claims and you snip and then try to move the goal
posts.

Even if there was, the vast majority of people would be unaware of it.

They become aware the first time they enter the typical Linux group
and get told to RTFM.

Although trolls with bad attitudes will claim otherwise, that normally
does not happen. Almost always, people who are respectful get treated
with respect.

There is a reason for the bad reputation of the Linux community.
And it's easy to Google examples, I provided some, you snipped the
data.


Micro$oft has a bad reputation, and it hasn't harmed them.

I'm talking about the community not a company.

On what basis would you claim that reputations are less important to
companies than they are to communities?

The fact that Linux doesn't have a company, maybe?
I thought that would be obvious.

So, people like you for example as you prove my points rather
succinctly.

Now you have resorted to lying.

Your snipping, goal post moving and straw man building along with your
personal attacks on me proves my points rather well.

Do you, by chance, also go by the name of "Mayayana"? He also likes
to launch insulting attacks, and then, when people object, claim that
his "point was proven".

I'm not Mayayana, and you are resorting to lying.
I didn't attack anyone, you did.
You attacked me.

As an example, ask some random person about Linux and you will
certainly encounter some people who still believe Linux is a text
based system needing a command line to run.
Sad but true.

Neither sad nor true.

It is true.

Nope. It's pulled from your rear end.

See. You attack.

I will provide evidence of my claim right here. You will snip it, move
the goal posts and continue to attack me though but I will post it
anyway.

And again, this is but a single example. Google is filled with others.

https://itsfoss.com/myths-about-linux/

"You are he Home / List / 5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New
Users
5 Myths About Linux That Scares Away New Users
Last updated March 4, 2019 By Abhishek Prakash 94 Comments


Myths about Linux debunked
Are there really myths about Linux? I mean there are plenty of facts
about Linux and how powerful and secure it is that the entire tech
world is relying on it.

Yes, the world relies on Linux to power its technologies but we are
not talking about the ‘industrial Linux’. We are talking the desktop
Linux. The Linux that a normal user should be using as its daily
driver for surfing web, for document editing, listening to music and
casual gaming.

When it comes to the desktop version, there are actually some famous
myths about Linux and if one believes them, he/she will be very
reluctant to use Linux.

5 myths about Linux that you shouldn’t believe


In this article, I will bust these myths about Linux. I am not going
to trick you in switching to Linux by lying, I’ll counter these rumors
with facts, the best way to do it.

Myth 1: Linux is very difficult to use
Myth about Linux: It's difficult to use
If you think Linux is difficult to use, let me ask you this. When you
used a computer for the very first time, how did you feel?

The answer would be that you just didn’t know how to navigate or use
the operating system (Windows, I presume). Creating new files,
installing software, troubleshooting issues, everything seems
complicated at beginning. But did you quit it at that point?

No, you kept using it and gradually, you get comfortable with it.
Linux is no different. Things might seem a little complicated in the
beginning but give it enough time before being judgemental.

Still not convinced? Okay! You do know that Apple’s macOS is a popular
desktop operating system. But have you ever tried to use macOS?

macOS is as much confusing in the beginning as Linux. You will have a
hard time figuring out how to navigate to files, folders. Installing
new software in macOS is another challenge when you just don’t know
how to do it.

Linux is no different. Perhaps it gives so many options that it
overwhelms a newcomer but this doesn’t mean it is difficult to use
Linux.

Myth 2: You need to know commands to use Linux
Myth about Linux: You need to know commands
This is another myth that scares a new user. Using command line for an
operating system? That could be a nightmare for many.

Linux has a powerful command line interface, there is no doubt about
it. In fact, you can use Linux entirely in the command line.

But this is not what you have to do while using desktop Linux. If you
know a few commands, it will help you troubleshoot issues you may
encounter (like in any other operating system). But you don’t have to
know commands or become a command line ninja for that.

Most beginner friendly Linux distributions provide a complete
graphical interface. You might never need to use the command line.

At worst, if you find some issue or if you are trying to install
software in Linux, you might come across commands suggested by people
on the internet.

Using those commands is very simple. Open a terminal and copy-paste
the commands.

However, basic knowledge of Linux commands will help you at this point
to avoid using dangerous Linux commands that might harm your system.
Linux command line is like a very sharp knife. You can do wonder with
it but you can also cut yourself. It depends on how you handle the
knife.

To sum it up, use a Windows like Linux distribution that will have
almost no requirement to use the command line."




Try it yourself.

How about you prove your ridiculous claim.

So you can snip it like you did my other claims?
I just did.


The vast majority would have no idea. Those who had an idea would not
be assuming what you claim. If anyone, at all, thinks that Linux is a
"GUI-less operating system", they are a tiny, insignificant number of
people.

While it is true most people may not even know about Linux, from the
ones that do, many still believe it's a CLI system for geeks.

Nonsense.

See above.

I strongly suspect you will soon be resorting to your usual "snipped
unread" routine as you have once again been out debated.