Will 2017 be the year of the Linux desktop?

>>58876160
Too many gaymers and "Linux iz fur baysment dwellrz and autistic haxorz, wangbluhz is bettuh" faggots...

>>58876200
If Linux supports 4K properly.

>>58876160
linux is a kernel
there will never be a linux desktop
maybe a kde or gnome desktop

>>58876241
That's not going to happen.

If Vulkan takes off? Definitely. Maybe in 2018.
If not? No.

>>58876273

If I could just interject for a moment....

>>58876307
This time next year
>If x takes off? Definitely. Maybe in 2019.
>If not? No.

File: 1024px-Kylin_OS.png (586KB, 1024x640px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1024x640px

>>58876160
It's been the year of the Linux desktop for a while in China & North Korea.

hello,

work in this field, I would like to remind users gnu+linux is not a consumer OS! it is used in specialized areas of computing i.e. supercomputers, enterprise, certain areas of software development, networking and storage management (servers).

there are reasons for this which can be loosely categorized by 'externally' and 'internally'. externally, gnu+machines are easier to maintain, cheaper and more reliable. internally, the l-kernel itself responds and is better suited to the tasks I previously mentioned.

notice that these tasks listed are generally not consumer oriented! linux is taking great steps and leaps in trying to penetrate that market but as of today and tomorrow won't be a consumer OS. If you are interested in this type OS, use XNU! It is a consumer friendly.

thank you for reading!!

>>58876571
Copypastas belong here.
>>>/b/

>>58876331
Pretty much, Linux OSes are always behind to be usable as proper desktop replacement OS.

>>58876589
Kek, if that pasta would have been approving of Linux then you would not have said that.

Faggot.

>>58876160
No.

>>58876589
You should get one of these
>>>/girlfriend/

>>58876644
>being on 4chan
>using "faggot" as an insult
wew lad

>>58876200
when will neckbeards accept that pc gaming is dead?

If one makes the presumption that the modern IT is all about the internet, then you have to ask yourself
'Does Linux even have a choice in this matter ?'

A modern computing system is not one that is run from the command line - it is a system that is tied in with the internet Cloud. Just have a look at Windows 10 with Cortana and OneDrive for an example of this done right.

You need the outlook to connect in with the mass of email flowing around us every day. And then there is document collaboration - the sharing of Wordfiles and Excels between users across state boundries ! Voice over IP, cloud enabled 'Surface' computing, and voice command interfaces - all tied together with .NET and the OneDrive.

The driving force behind this internet is the Microsoft Sharepoint Server - a central peice of systems software which connects all these end points together, in a synergistic kaleidoscope that achieves both balance and symmetry.

The smart Vendors know that in order to get ahead in the future IT, that means integrating with the Cloud.

Linux has nothing on the Cloud.

>>58876670
>a synergistic kaleidoscope that achieves both balance and symmetry
>a synergistic kaleidoscope
whoever wrote that should get diagnosed for fucking graphomania.

>>58876661
If it was dead, nVidia would be bankrupt

checkmat

>>58876655
Insult? Sorry if you took it like that, it's just like saying "anon" or "bro" in the end of a sentence to refer to the original poster.

If you get butt pain like that easily, get it check m8.

>>58876466
Most still use old Windows XP in China

File: gskill_trident_z_rgb_1.jpg (398KB, 1175x814px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 1175x814px

Does Linux even support RGB RAM?

>>58876762
wot is that

>>58876722
>Sorry if you took it like that
last I heard this was the internet hate machine
what happened

>>58876655
shame these digits went to a asspie

>>58876160
No.

2017 won't even be the year of the Windows desktop.

Desktop PCs are dying.

>>58876875
is this why apple didn't bring out new imacs?

>>58876957
One of the big reasons, yes.

File: fuck.gif (19KB, 300x214px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x214px

It will be if windows 10 continues to be the biggest pile of dicks in the known and unknown universe. I can't fathom how an operating system can be this obtrusive and assfuck retarded.
Also can anyone else tell me why microsoft has opted to remove all text from installers, so I have to wonder if they're still jerking off in my registry or hanging because it lost its connection for a second and just gave up.

>>58876646
I'm gay.

It doesn't even matter to me. I use Linux cause I was tired of Microsoft and it's products. I don't give two shits if people don't care about Linux.

>>58878183
faggit op

the year of the linux desktop will be thanks to android, as normies charge their phones where their PCs and laptops used to be

>>58876160
Every year will be, yet none of them are.

>>58876160
>>58876200
>>58876241
>>58876275
>>58876307
>>58876331
>>58876571
>>58876625
>>58876645
>>58876875
>>58878204
>>58878739
>>58878781
It was in 2013 you newhumans (steam on GNU/Linux)

>>58876661
PC gaming is more alive than ever (PC = Personal Computer = Linux or BSD) you writing about WC gaming (windows only)

File: 1478712586416.gif (188KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 500x375px

>>58876160

No.

And unless the Dell's and HP's of the world start making Linux the default option for PCs they sell to normies, it will NEVER happen.

Fact of the matter is that 97% of computer users in the world will never install an OS. They just use whatever OS comes pre-installed.

>>58876160
No.

File: theo_de_rat.jpg (3KB, 200x198px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 200x198px

>>58876160
Will <insert a year after 2016> be the year of the Linux desktop?

>>58880407
do you realize that they already tried that, and this resulted in customers returning back the goods

>>58876160
I sincerely hope that year never comes. The way it works now is the best. Vast majority uses some platform, all the viruses and aids are designed for that platform, and you can use something "obscure" yet functional to your heart's content.

>>58876670
cancer

File: 1485893420224.jpg (238KB, 850x360px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 850x360px

Chromebook linux desktop. Chromebook linux tablet.

>>58876160
idk about the rest of the world but 2001 was the year of the Linux desktop for me DESU

It will be the year of the Hackintosh desktop.

>>58878204
I use linux because it's robust / reliable. ubiquitous, unobtrusive.

>>58876160
By nature, there will never be a "Year of the Linux desktop". Developers and the general community actively discourages this.

>>58876160
As long as my cold dead hands can use any kind of device, I won't let that happen.

>>58880688
this

There's a few problems with the "Linux Desktop".
1. There's no standard user friendly Linux interface. It should be easy for regular people to use. Most macOS users aren't familar with Unix at all and are able to use macOS just fine.
2. Linux needs more applications. Commercial application developers look at Linux, see a smaller market and a much more difficult platform to deploy on, for various reasons (see https://youtu.be/5PmHRSeA2c8?t=4m42s for 7 minutes). So good business sense tells them not to bother.
3. Linux has no company or organization behind it vertical enough to provide a complete user experience. Hardware components, laptops, firmware, support and update services, brick stores, branding, etc.


Linux isn't a consumer solution. It's tool for people across technical disciplines. Linux based consumer solutions come in the form of Chromebooks, Steam machines and smartphones.

>>58881876
There are standards, but what you are referring is UI/UX standard.

Want a Windows-like graphical experience? LInux Lite has it, and the project should have more support.

>>58881906
>There are standards, but what you are referring is UI/UX standard.
There aren't standards for what I'm talking about I mean a standard way of building, deploying, debugging and updating applications with a consistent look and feel. This goes way beyond UI/UX. It's about ABIs, packing, libraries, resolving dependencies. You should be able to run an application written 20 years ago, built against whatever GUI libraries were around then, on a fresh install in 2017 without recompiling. I've seen commercial applications with different binaries for RHEL 4 and RHEL 5. That's unacceptable.

>Want a Windows-like graphical experience?
Personally, I don't want anything. I'm just explaining why there is no popular Linux based computer for ordinary consumers. It doesn't have to look like Windows but it has to have the attributes of a finished product at least.

>>58876466
Why was activities translated to overview in Russian here

>>58876160
Every year is the year of linux desktop

>>58876670
>be me
>sysadmin
>dev approaches me saying "where can I go to learn THE linux"
>dev is VS/C# MVC/IIS/Sharepoint
>me: "that's a good question, there are some courses on our CBT nuggets accounts but I've never really though about it
>dev: "well how did you learn?"
>me: "I installed it one day and have fought with it for the last 10+ years?" "O'Reilly books?"

the words THE linux stuck with me. I had to pull up the cathedral and the bazaar on amazon just to start to explain to a monoculture dev that the argument and diversity IS the OS

suggestions in dealing this welcome but I think this is cultural impedance mismatch

File: 1486247444015.jpg (56KB, 470x495px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 470x495px

>>58876160

Maybe in year 3000.

File: r7w70.jpg (63KB, 612x380px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 612x380px

>>58882738
>THE linux

>>58876571
>work in this field
kekt & ignored

freetards be like creating new package managers

>>58876160
linux is just a kernel OP

>>58876160
Only when plugins are fully deprecated. Performance is not equal across operating systems and it's keeping Linux back.

>>58884885
That would be okay with me desu

>>58882239
>I've seen commercial applications with different binaries for RHEL 4 and RHEL 5. That's unacceptable.
I bet you run arch because everything is
>bloated

Remember, the year of the linux desktop is always currentyear + 1

>>58880336
yeah almost anyone you come across that plays video games has a linux computer that he plays games on

It's never gonna happen. Even if Linux had everything Microsoft does people would still be too lazy to switch and learn basic staff from scratch.

It wasnt the last 5 years it won't be this kne either.

>>58880336
I've literally never met anyone with Linux on their PC... Literally no one. I work in fucking IT.

Currently got hard drives holding every version of Windows past 7 for different things, as well as more for Crunchbang++, Debain, and Arch.

I've never met fucking anyone, who knows shit about Linux in my job (bar one person who was genuinely a basement dweller neckbeard).

>>58885354
I don't run Arch. If you must know I use paid support RHEL at work and for personal I use Fedora and Ubuntu. have nothing against Arch. But you have to understand that Arch is just one system among many. That's the "problem" with the Linux ecosystem, you have all these different flavors and ways of doing things. This distro only supports Free software, this one has user contributed repos, this one is commercially supported, this one is for games. That's a nightmare for people like Adobe, Autodesk, National Instruments, PTC. They want to create one binary and enable all their Linux customers for a dozen years. In the current state of things they can't do that.
Back in the good ol days, when you needed a degree to even come close enough to sniff a computer, the industry was a lot different. People didn't care about things like ABIs, binary compatibility and human factors advised UI/UX. Serious software users could rebuild software from their vendor and get it running in their shop, maybe with the help of a vendor's engineering support. That's the tradition most of the hardcore Linux community is still in. But the world moved past that and became a PC world. It was all about distributing cheap software to as many users as possible, not painstakingly supporting powerful, tailored niche software for advanced users.
The Linux model is built for technical end users and developers. Linux is not for consumers who care about specific commercial applications. These masses don't care about how Free their underlying system, how industrial strength their TCP/IP stacks or even extreme stability.
The Linux model, due in part to a lack of controlling body, is in fact hostile to the rest of the industry that values ideas like consistency in user experience, easy of use, simplification and abstraction of deeply technical computer concepts, partnerships with for profit companies, and confidence of compatibility across generations of releases.

>>58882239
>I mean a standard way of building, deploying, debugging and updating applications with a consistent look and feel.
And this exists on RHEL/Fedora. Why should the entire Linux universe be put against a single macOS or Windows release?

>libraries, resolving dependencies.
Name a single operating system anywhere with better library linking and dependency resolution than Fedora with dnf.

>>58886331
I hit the post length limit. In a similar way, Linux failed on the desktop, Microsoft failed in mobile. They couldn't use their monopoly in desktop to gain market share with technically inferior products. The industry changed, the core values changed and Microsoft didn't get it so they couldn't get traction into the market.

>>58886446
>And this exists on RHEL/Fedora. Why should the entire Linux universe be put against a single macOS or Windows release?

Because unfortunately that's the situation we find ourselves in. There is no de facto standard Linux system. You want to focus on RHEL specifically? Fine. Which version are you talking about? What's the hardware support like on any particular server, desktop or laptop? Can I run my commercial application originally written for and built against a Red Hat system from 15 years ago on a laptop I just bought last week? Will it still work 15 years from today? Will it work the same? Will it look the same? Does it matter what else I have on my system? Will this kernel work with my vendor's hardware dongle? Will my vendor support me on any version of RHEL out there?
This is what Linux is up against when you compare it to Windows or even macOS.

>Name a single operating system anywhere with better library linking and dependency resolution than Fedora with dnf.

dnf is good. I use it all the time. I'm sure a lot of smart people spent a long time getting it ready. I realize I opened a can of worms here by even mentioning packages but I was trying to illustrate a point. I may have failed. My point is that even getting into the deeply technical mechanics of package management, which is beyond what most users want to get into whether you like it or not, is thinking too small scale.

>>58886446
>>58886673
Continuing...

Forget packages, think about the fact that developing for and deploying on Linux that works for all Linux users and will work for 2 decades in a engineering task a lot of companies who are just trying to stay solvent don't want to get into. The engineering investment is too costly.
For a better articulation on what I mean, look at this Linus talk from DebConf 14. Starting around the 4:40 mark they get into this topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PmHRSeA2c8

Lasts for about 7 minutes.

>>58886673
>>58886722
Yes I want to focus on a single OS instead of pitting the set of all distros against 1 macOS release and 1 Windows release, otherwise RHEL would somehow be worse because Arch crashed or whatever.

>Can I run my commercial application originally written for and built against a Red Hat system from 15 years ago on a laptop I just bought last week?
I mean, can you find me a macOS .dmg app compiled 15 years ago and run it on Sierra?

>Will it still work 15 years from today? Will it work the same? Will it look the same? Does it matter what else I have on my system?
I'm going to assume these questions were added for some rhetorical effect, the answer is 'yes' to all and 'no' to the last.

>Will this kernel work with my vendor's hardware dongle?
If there are drivers for it yes, if not it's the vendor's fault.

In any case, you're turning this into a huge "EVERYTHING BREAKS ALL THE TIME". Can you give me some examples of stuff that stopped working between RHEL versions? I don't doubt you can come up with a thing or two, but so can I for any other OS: a Pages document on macOS suddenly stopped opening with my version of Pages (outdated for about a month, the horror!) and forced me to update (which failed twice because App Store), and I have about 4 games running on compatibility mode in Windows (no, I don't have enterprise examples in Windows because I use Windows for gaming only).

All OS's break compatibility every now and then. I don't think RHEL and Fedora break more than Windows and macOS.

>>58886829
>I mean, can you find me a macOS .dmg app compiled 15 years ago and run it on Sierra?
Maybe, Unless Apple specifically says that can't work. Also remember for macOS there's one development environment Xcode and targeting your commercial application for newer versions of macOS is realistic from an engineering standpoint. You don't have to support 5 different versions of macOS each with multiple releases of incompatible ABIs. If there are differences Xcode is pretty good at taking care of them for you, so I hear. Also remember you can buy developer support from Apple. Doing the same for Red Hat is an option I suppose. But what about SuSE, Ubuntu and Debian?

Now for Windows, the story is a little different. I routinely run commercial software on my windows machines from 10 or 15+ years ago.

The commercial Linux software we have at work is built specifically for our versions of RHEL. Which is fine, but deploying and maintaining the applications is something beyond most normal uesrs.

>the answer is 'yes' to all
The answers are "who knows". What desktop environment are you running? What version? What widget libraries do you have installed? What fonts? I could go on.

Did you watch that video from Linus about Linux in the desktop market? What did you think of his response?

>it's the vendor's fault.
This is part of the attitude that will keep Linux relegated to niche user bases.

My whole point is that the state of the Linux ecosystem is not ready for the same kind of model enjoyed by Windows and macOS. Saying dnf is better than Yum or RHEL is a choice is missing the point and is ignoring a larger problem.

>>58886829
>All OS's break compatibility every now and then. I don't think RHEL and Fedora break more than Windows and macOS.

Linux break ABIs quite frequently.

https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-abi-compatibility

Go to some major commercial software vendor's Linux download page (which supports Linux in the first place obviously, which is a rare case) and you might see a whole battery of releases for all kinds of Linux systems: from vendor, to major release to point release.
Some people that and have more general installers spend a lot of money on testing and QA, limit themselves to specific libraries and statically link their applications, which some distros (Debian for example) are hostile to.

>>58887268
>You don't have to support 5 different versions of macOS each with multiple releases of incompatible ABIs.
You don't have to support 5 different versions of RHEL.
>Also remember you can buy developer support from Apple.
You can buy developer support from Red Hat.
>The answers are "who knows".
No, the answers are "yes", your questions were basically "if my computer doesn't break, will it work the same %d time from now".

>Did you watch that video from Linus about Linux in the desktop market?
No, but let me guess, he was angry that there isn't 1 version of Linux. Once again: no one is asking you to port your stuff to Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuse, Arch, Debian, etc. Spotify made a ubuntu client, the community ported it to fedora, I'm using it right now.

>Saying dnf is better than Yum or RHEL
This made no sense... dnf is the successor to yum, the developers themselves created it to be a better version of yum. And as for "better than rhel", why would I compare a package manager to an OS? Do you say "that Ford engine is better than that Ford car"? I'm legitimately confused now.

>This is part of the attitude that will keep Linux relegated to niche user bases.
What attitude? Do you expect me to say that it's Red Hat's fault that Dell never wrote drivers for it's USB-C adapter? Do you think Microsoft writes adapter drivers? Do you think Apple does it? It's the vendor's reponsibility. This isn't some snarky "well, my toy is perfect, so it's everyone else who is wrong" reply, drivers are always the vendor's responsibility.

>Linux break ABIs quite frequently.
I asked for a comparison, I've had things randomly change inside macOS, does that prove it changes more or less than Linux?

>My whole point is that the state of the Linux ecosystem is not ready for the same kind of model enjoyed by Windows and macOS.
My whole point is that it's wrong to even compare a set of 500+ distros to a single other, because then all I need is for Arch to fuck up to make RHEL look bad.

>>58887351
>Go to some major commercial software vendor's Linux download page (which supports Linux in the first place obviously, which is a rare case) and you might see a whole battery of releases for all kinds of Linux systems: from vendor, to major release to point release.
Yes, because it's still realistic for an enterprise to run RHEL 3 today and it still gets support even though it was made what, a decade ago? It's not realistic to run Snow Leopard today. The only reason you don't see the same listing for macOS is because developers only support the latest version since it's fast-update system, unlike RHEL which has stable releases.
Try downloading the app files for Spotify, Google Drive, Dropbox and installing them on Snow Leopard, let me know how that works out. You mentioned 15 years? I have things from goddamn El Cap not working, that's a few months ago.

I'll say it again: every OS breaks compatibility. The fact that you see a listing of OS releases means that they're still somewhat supported, unlike with macOS where support for older versions is dropped immediately.

>>58876160
nope, thanks to the bloatware masters for making KDE4 and Gnome3.

>>58887591
>let me guess, he was angry that there isn't 1 version of Linux
Nope. And your stubborn refusal to recognize the practical problems with supporting closed source commercial applications on Linux speaks to the amount of work we have ahead of us in changing the culture of the Linux ecosystem. We have to enable developers to build applications cheaply and reliably. Users will want to use those applications. If a user has to know what version of the C library they have installed or what kernel version they have, that means not only are we quite a bit away from solving the problem, we're also quite a bit a way from understanding the fundamental nature of the problem.
>You can buy developer support from Red Hat.
And from SuSE, from Canonical and from whoever else. That's not a solution.

>I'm legitimately confused now.
Maybe I was typing too fast and got ahead of myself. My point is, this isn't about dnf or apt-get or pacman or whatever. These or deeply technical mechanical details that users don't need to get into. Do most drivers need to know the compression ratio of their engines to go get groceries?

>>58887736
>Nope.
You failed to address my point: You only have to develop for one OS. This wasteland where, if you decide to write software for Linux, people will force you to write it for every release since 2.3, does not exist. No one has to develop for several Linux ecosystems. Lots of software is released for Ubuntu only, I gave one example and can find more (basically the Steam library).
The idea that having several distros is something bad is a problem that exists only in Linus' head.

>That's not a solution.
Uh, why not? It's ok when Apple does it, but if it's Canonical or Red Hat (who has very very good support) it doesn't count?

>My point is, this isn't about dnf or apt-get or pacman or whatever. These or deeply technical mechanical details that users don't need to get into. Do most drivers need to know the compression ratio of their engines to go get groceries?
You were the one who mentioned "package management", now we changed to overall ecosystems.

>>58887796
>The idea that having several distros is something bad is a problem that exists only in Linus' head.

Linus isn't against distros. If you had watched the video like I'd asked so we'd have a common reference for discussion you'd know that.
It's about user space binary incompatibility. Package managers don't solve this. Package managers are not part of the reason why non-technical users don't use Linux. Package managers are a great solution for technical people and certain developers. I'm sorry I even mentioned package management.
Linus said he has to fight every release not to break user space. Library developers and distros maintainers don't adhere to such a strict policy.

If you want a successful Linux Desktop, I assert it's a good idea to start with a vertical company like Apple that controls the hardware, kernel, libraries, distribution channels for major software, support for 3rd party developers driver developers and business partnerships, assurance of platform stability, finished, quality products to end users. You'd end up with a fork of Linux, system libraries and X, but that's ok because tightness and control for long term stability. End users like lawyers, accountants, graphic designers even some engineers should not even need know they're running Linux underneath and the definitely shouldn't know which "distro" they're using and they should never have to even think about typing a package management command, ever.

I'll repeat, the Linux model for developing, deploying and supporting software is not consistent with the model that non-technical end users value. If you don't believe me, simply evangelize for the Linux desktop as it is now and see how far you.

>>58888082
>should not even need know they're running Linux underneath
They don't.
>the definitely shouldn't know which "distro" they're using
They don't.
>they should never have to even think about typing a package management command, ever.
They don't.
My dad uses Ubuntu, he doesn't know what a terminal is.

>blah blah blah enterprise buzzwords
You can keep posting opinions or you can provide some kind of evidence that RHEl and fedora break compatibility more than macOS. I suggested installing Drive, Dropbox and Spotify on Snow Leopard - that's in line with your "15 years from now" thing. I have never even tried that, but I'll buy you lunch if it works. Or if you want to keeps things professional, the latest release of Adobe Photoshop.

>>58887796
>>58888082

Let me put this another way. Let's say Microsoft open sourced Windows and allowed 3rd parties to create and sell their own distributions. Use your imagination for this one and don't nitpick over technical details or challenges. The distributions that remain compatible with the existing Windows trunk would be fine. The distributions that break existing commercial applications, hardware support or disrupt the overall user experience would not be fine. Distributions aren't the problem. ABI level incompatibility is really one of the major issues here.
I'm far from the 1st person that's made this assertion and I'm sure I wont be the last but it's just something I firmly believe in. If you want a successful product into a certain market, and you don't have monopolistic control, you need to be exceedingly sensitive to the core values that market already maintains. This is something that the Linux community does not do for non technical users and companies that have non technical customers. I'm not saying the Linux community needs to do this or should even care. I don't care. But if they want those types of users, they have to.change their attitude about what this industry is really about: non-technical users who care about their productivity applications, not their operating systems.

>>58886086
Every self-respecting Linux expert hides their power level. You will never spot us.

>>58888233
>But if they want those types of users, they have to.change their attitude about what this industry is really about: non-technical users who care about their productivity applications, not their operating systems.
This is already done. You use fedora, are you really saying it's not miles ahead of Windows in user-friendliness? Here's an example, changing a partition (yes, yes, I know, too technical, but bare with me)
Windows:
>Start menu
>Open Control Panel
>Click Administrative tools
>Click computer management
>Click disk Management
>Right-click partition and edit
Fedora:
>Super key
>Type 'disks', open the aptly named Disks app
>Right-click, edit partition

You keep demonizing distros like they're awful turds where you have to type 30 commands to open a folder, but I'd like an example because it's still not clear what is wrong according to you. sometimes you talk about ABI breakage (so for developers), yet we know this happens everywhere except Windows. Sometimes it's about normie stuff, but what exactly is harder there. My dad is nearing 60, he uses Ubuntu on a Thinkpad just fine. The days where Linux was a hobby/server OS ended years ago and it's like people haven't heard about it.

>>58888202
>My dad uses Ubuntu, he doesn't know what a terminal is.

That's great. Is your Dad every user on the planet? Does he use every application available on the PC platform?

>You can keep posting opinions or you can provide some kind of evidence that RHEl and fedora break compatibility more than macOS.

Anecdotally, I've used commercial engineering applications that have different binaries for RHEL 3, 4 and 5 among. Not all customers have binary compatibility libraries installed and not all customers run RHEL.

I don't know how often macOS breaks but I'm guessing supporting the current version of macOS is much simpler than sustaining board Linux stability.

>>58888391
Many users I know have a hard enough time even using Windows and the only reason why they even put up with Windows is because that's where their applications are. Now you want to add in Linux, even a super user friendly Linux? It's too much, it's not realistic or practical for many, many users out there. Your dad isn't every user, business or organization.
The state of the Linux community and what they have to offer is only part of the problem. The other parts include re-learning, re-investment and lack of support for "legacy" Windows applications that business and people rely on to pay bills.
The fact that you're mentioning partitioning disks means you're way out of touch with the expectations you need to have for most desktop PC users. Spending time learning other systems like Fedora simply takes away from the bottom line and is a non-starter.

>>58876160
Probably not. But that is for the best.

GNU/Linux is currently normie proof-- there is barely any malware, and most of it would require them to run the program containing as root to do any actual damage (which most normies wouldn't know how to do).

When GNU/Linux comes into the spotlight, more programs come with it. Along with more malware to infest the operating system.

I may move to TempleOS whenever it does happen.

>>58888477
>The fact that you're mentioning partitioning disks means you're way out of touch with the expectations you need to have for most desktop PC users.
Oh for fuck's sake, it's an example I have memorized, I'm sorry if I didn't compare opening Facebook where it's the exact same thing. But fine, give me some usecases where Linux is way harder than Windows. Or is the only issue here that they have to re-learn it? Because that's a problem with business expenses, not with the OS itself.

>>58888574
But if you're Linux and you get business users to adopt your platform, it's your problem, not theirs.

Say I use Pro/E every day for work. How can I switch to Linux? Use Wine? Maybe, but for arguments sake lets say that doesn't work, not because I know it doesn't work with Pro/E but because I know it doesn't work with a lot of things. Do I ask PTC to support Linux? They likely wouldn't even consider it. Say PTC magically created a binary for me. How do I get support from my local CAD support group when a system that works with what I'm doing no longer works? What if I somehow get all this working and my boss wants to know why I'm behind on my project? What if the IT support group wont support my desktop system now because I'm not using Windows? Remember I'm a user that doesn't even understand what Linux is in the first place so troubleshooting my own problems is a tall ask.

>>58888733
Ok so the only problem really is software availability (even the IT support thing stems from it). There is nothing wrong with the OS itself or developing for it. That was my one and only reason to participate in this discussion. Remember I walked in when you mentioned dependency resolution and library availability.

In that case, you're right, but I don't care. I understand it makes sense for a company to adopt the OS with more software and available support. I just don't care about that in terms of debate.

Someone should print these kind of boards each year.

>>58888873
I agree with you, there is nothing wrong with Linux. It's a fine platform. It's only problem is that it's not Windows. And that's really only a problem if getting on the desktop is an objective for you.

>Remember I walked in when you mentioned dependency resolution and library availability.
I only mentioned that, not from a user's perspective but from a commercial application developer's perspective. Companies like Adobe, Oracle, QAD, PTC, Autodesk, and I can list hundreds more if I had the time, they have to make the decision to support Linux then they have to invest in that decision.
So the question is: why don't all these thousands of software companies who sell to customers all over the globe have Linux support?
BTW, I picked Pro/E and PTC for a reason. They supported Linux at one point, then dropped it. About 5 or so years ago. The particular reasons why I'm not sure.
If the "Linux" world isn't friendly to binary only commercial software, if they find themselves spending money on resolving all sorts of corner cases and gotchas out there, if they're constantly having the spend engineering resources on evolving user space binary compatibility issues, it's not going to be worth it to them.

Now, maybe if you took one particular distro, one particular point release, forked it. partnered with all the major OEMs out there on a very small subset of hardware and firmware configurations, like 1, supported that platform completely up and down the stack, got major commercial application developers to commit to supporting your platform (for which you provided all the development support for), that would maybe be a starting point for something. It would be something like the Steam Machine but for business and enterprise users.

I'm not arguing Linux isn't viable from a technical point of view, I'm arguing it's not viable from a end user, commercial application developer and value system point of view.

>>58888873
>I just don't care about that in terms of debate.

This again is the issue I see with the Linux community. They want to address the industry on their terms. Without control of the market, it doesn't work like that.

>>58882239
>You should be able to run an application written 20 years ago, built against whatever GUI libraries were around then, on a fresh install in 2017 without recompiling.

No, you fucking shouldn't and you're a moron.
Legacy = crippled future

Win32 is literally garbage and Microsoft is paying dearly for every second they keep that abomination on Windowns instead of pushing UWP

>>58889159
Except it does since the loonix way is right and with modern CI and the "cloud" and build tools there is legitimately no excuse to not maintain your software for multiple platforms.

Your retarded single binary for decades is fucking deprecated and wrong.

Deal with it and fucking modernize

>>58876160
we're at 3 - 5% right now, I expect linux to be between 5 and 7% by the end of the year. Then the next year Valve will probably achieve their distribution and make their own steam machine and try to sell them with half life 3, portal 3 and left for dead 3 as steam OS exclusives.
Vulkan will be more relevant than DX12 as croteam said. Most developers support this API. They are all interested into making games for android and they will probably have to port stuff to linux in case valve actually do some awesome stuff on linux.

Also linux is confirmed to have better performances than windows. Games loads faster, more fps...

>>58889632
>half life 3, portal 3 and left for dead 3 as steam OS exclusives
Sadly that won't happen, but holy shit linux marketshare would increase significantly if it did.

That. or a Winbaby would make something like WINE for Windows

>>58876160
No, too many gaymers and normies still use them to make any OEM move from Windows to Linux no matter how good Linux is

>>58889665
>Sadly that won't happen, but holy shit linux marketshare would increase significantly if it did.
If valve wants to push steam OS they'll have to convince gamers to buy a steam machine or install it on their computer.
There are a few ways they can do it :

1-marketing and convincing their fanbase they should install it whatever the cost
2-telling them that linux is better than windows (better performances)
3-having exclusive games that push games to have steam OS (like sony, microsoft or nintendo are doing).


First one won't bring a lot of people, 2 will bring a few people, 3 force people to make the switch.

>>58876273
>what is an ubuntu laptop and ubuntu phone

ubuntu is gaining traction you can still buy ubuntu stuff

>>58889930
>what is an ubuntu laptop and ubuntu phone
Nothing, really. I bought an ubuntu phone and it's shit in every way. Only good thing is the battery life improvement over an android phone and the fact it doesn't spy on you like google does.

>>58876661
Duck off ps4 fanboy

>>58884885
Best of ever Temple Os fokers

>>58889369
I agree I don't think binary compatibility for decades is a great thing. But this isn't about what I think or you think. It's about what the market thinks.

>>58889536
Again, it's not about what I want. It's not about what you want. It's not about the Right Way. It's about doing what you have to do for users. Users need their applications. Their applications don't run on Linux. You have to get their applications on Linux. You have to motivate people to invest the engineering resources to put their applications on Linux. Do you follow?

>>58891844
GNU/Linux*

>>58890311
u mad uncharted 4 is GOTY?

>>58876829
Stupid ass RAM that changes colors. Nothing but another retarded gimmick that people are throwing in their cases to make them look cool.

>>58876160
No, the era of the desktop PC is over.

File: citation_needed_1456719209402.jpg (213KB, 2196x1230px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 2196x1230px

>>58891844
>Their applications don't run on Linux.*

*multiple citations required

>>58893244
How else will people know they wanna suck some dick?

Linux will never happen in desktop only if a large company takes over like android did

>>58876661
Does it count if I realized it 5 years ago, even if I have never had facial hair? Especially Valve, the company whose income is from 13-year-olds hijacking eachother's accounts to steal gay CS:GO knives. They're going for some kind of record with their BBB ratings.

>>58894653
Outlook, AutoCAD, ProTools, LabView, Pro Tools, Pspice, Illustrator, Avid, IAR.
I can spend the rest of the year writing off names of commercial software that doesn't run on Linux.

>>58876160
No
the fact of the matter is, the people that want to get the best out of their computer are in the vast minority
Most people just want to use their computer for browsing the web, going on facebook, booking a holiday or watching a video.
So, you might say, surely a Chromebook is perfect for them. Its also cheaper than a regular PC.
Still no. The chromebook example isnt perfect, because they might want to open windows applications such as Word for work. And whilst google docs can do this, they dont know it.

But even if they were to, and they knew linux was better, the answer would still be no. Why? Because they dont want to go through the hassle of change. They only change if they're forced to, and until that happens, Windows is here to stay.

>>58876160
I fucking hope not
Don't let the normies in

>>58897613
inb4 "but muh wine". Fuck off, in professional environments you need reliability.

>>58876160
2016 was the year of the Linux desktop. What rock have you been living under?

File: Google_chart-2_040215.png (29KB, 591x379px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 591x379px

>>58876160
It already is.

>>58876160
Sorry, the average person doesn't even want a desktop computer anymore much less a linux desktop.

>>58876160
There will never be the year of the linux desktop. Linux is just a kernel of the GNU system, so if anything, it's the year of the GNU desktop.

>>58891844
the fuck you even on about retard?

who cares about them. obviously their software is shit tier since their development process is literally mired in decade old processes that are irrelevant.

also if it isn't FOSS, it's not worth it to even have on GAHNOO SLASH LOONIX anyhow.

also look up Linux LSB to counter all of your other inane bullshit ramblings.

>>58876200
Linux natively supports ⅓ of windows games. I'm pretty sure that means they get at least ⅔ games when running wine/PlayOnLinux and more when using virtualbox (or vmware player). And this is only counting desktop PC games. Web browser and java/flash games can be run on Linux, and old console games can be emulated on both Linux and Windows bringing even more games to both platforms.
So Linux doesn't lack as many games as it's advertised to lack. Most games get ported to Linux and Mac after a few months of development. You can actually see many very popular indie games, such as Rocket League, don't starve and Terraria supporting Linux and Mac just fine. The only popular devs who haven't ported their games outside windows are Blizzard and Riot, with the exception of blizzard's hearthstone which can run in a browser and on android/iOS. Blizzard is probably poisoned by Microsoft since both companies are money-grabbing jews, while Riot's devs were proven to be highly incompetent with their recent versions of launchers breaking the game on many windows 10 machines.

>>58891844
>he thinks porting to Linux is difficult
Companies don't want to port their software to Linux because they're afraid of FOSS or are joined with Microsoft and Apple in a fight against Linux. This just makes me trust them even less.

>>58876466
Why are you root?

>>58900587
GNU/Linux*