What Killed the Linux Desktop
-
Backwards compatibility, and compatibility across Linux distributions is not a sexy problem. It is not even remotely an interesting problem to solve. Nobody wants to do that work, everyone wants to innovate, and be responsible for the next big feature in Linux. So Linux was left with idealists that wanted to design the best possible system without having to worry about boring details like support and backwards compatibility. Meanwhile, you can still run the 2001 Photoshop that came when XP was launched on Windows 8. And you can still run your old OSX apps on Mountain Lion.
Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers.
-
Backwards compatibility, and compatibility across Linux distributions is not a sexy problem. It is not even remotely an interesting problem to solve. Nobody wants to do that work, everyone wants to innovate, and be responsible for the next big feature in Linux. So Linux was left with idealists that wanted to design the best possible system without having to worry about boring details like support and backwards compatibility. Meanwhile, you can still run the 2001 Photoshop that came when XP was launched on Windows 8. And you can still run your old OSX apps on Mountain Lion.
Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers.
"What went wrong?" Nothing. It's still the best free operating system. Is Linux dead on the desktop? I think not, if World of Warcraft is supported, if DropBox is supported, if the G15-gamers keyboard is supported. Playing Monkey Island, using a DOSBox. No, it ain't as versatile as Windows, but that's the added value that Microsoft delivers. Yes, for some people, that's worth the investment. Since money is cheap, everybody does that investment without a second thought. Still, that ain't an argument to proclaim that Linux took a "wrong" turn.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
"What went wrong?" Nothing. It's still the best free operating system. Is Linux dead on the desktop? I think not, if World of Warcraft is supported, if DropBox is supported, if the G15-gamers keyboard is supported. Playing Monkey Island, using a DOSBox. No, it ain't as versatile as Windows, but that's the added value that Microsoft delivers. Yes, for some people, that's worth the investment. Since money is cheap, everybody does that investment without a second thought. Still, that ain't an argument to proclaim that Linux took a "wrong" turn.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
-
I have a vitual bridge I will sell you.
-
There is a joke icon on his post, I don't think you needed to justify yourself. Compensating your downvote as I agree that you had a point. BTW, change "they're" to "their" before you get the grammar police on your butt. (Hey DD, where are you?)
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
There is a joke icon on his post, I don't think you needed to justify yourself. Compensating your downvote as I agree that you had a point. BTW, change "they're" to "their" before you get the grammar police on your butt. (Hey DD, where are you?)
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
Backwards compatibility, and compatibility across Linux distributions is not a sexy problem. It is not even remotely an interesting problem to solve. Nobody wants to do that work, everyone wants to innovate, and be responsible for the next big feature in Linux. So Linux was left with idealists that wanted to design the best possible system without having to worry about boring details like support and backwards compatibility. Meanwhile, you can still run the 2001 Photoshop that came when XP was launched on Windows 8. And you can still run your old OSX apps on Mountain Lion.
Supporting Linux on the desktop became a burden for independent developers.
Easy: some other article here has this quoute: "I want to focus on the job…I don’t want to think of myself as using a computer, I want to think of myself as doing my job" This is something that the Linux folks don't get. People don't "use" Windows, they do their jobs, and Windows mostly gets out of their way while they're doing it. Miguel gets this, and that's why he loves is Mac and OS X. Because he doesn't have to "use" OS X, he simply can get his job done.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.