There is no Year of the Linux Desktop
Newsflash people. There is no “Year of the Linux Desktop”. There will never be one. Before you start looking for sharp rocks to throw at me, let me start by saying I am a Linux user. I worked with all major distributions, roamed in Slackware land for about two years, tried to get accustomed to Red Hat’s RPM hell in a time when Linux was a wasteland and there were only a bunch of people that were using it. Several years ago I settled with Debian and later Ubuntu. All the distributions above were my main desktop operating systems as I ditched Windows way back in ‘99.
But one thing bothers me and drives me nuts every January. “Year of the Linux Desktop” articles. Now and then, one bright mind can’t sleep at night, so he decides to forget about New Year’s booze that hasn’t left his system yet and type a string of characters proclaiming THIS is the year of the Linux desktop. Not the next one, THIS one. It hasn’t happened yet, he can’t wait another 12 months, so THIS must be it. Then this individual goes on telling us WHY this is the year of the Linux desktop:
- because company X bought company Y, and because company X or Y is known to support open-source, therefore THIS must be the year of the Linux desktop;
- because project Z made so much progress in the last five years and it all must come to some conclusion. This year;
- because Linux addoption rate has increased since 2002, was bigger two years ago, even bigger last year, so this year it will exlode in a frenzy of brainwashed computer illiterate users that will bow down to the kernel gods and offer them commercial software sacrifices;
- because gadget A that had it’s five-minutes spotlight runs Linux and was the perfect Christmas gift a month ago;
- because Windows sucks;
- because Linux costs nothing and hordes of coders await to please the user;
- because…
Wake up people. It’s never gonna happen. From the bottom of my heart I wish it would, but it won’t. The simple and all-powerful word and reason here is… “money”.
Forget what you’ve read about companies that “support” the OSS movement. They’re in for the image or the cash. Nothing more, nothing less. If there’s no profit for a 5000+ employee company, there’s no reason for it to adopt, promote, sell or support Linux and open-source software. No matter how they put it, no matter how much you want to believe, they simply don’t care about you or your needs. Stop making stupid petitions to Blizzard requesting StarCraft on Linux, stop praying for a native Photoshop port.
There’s a certain ideology that surrounds Linux, and it goes like this: free, free, free, no money, free. Adobe and companies like Adobe know this. As long as we have GIMP, regardless of how limited the application some might think it is, you’ll see no native Photoshop binaries in your Ubuntu. A person that chooses Linux is a person that has to make some sacrifices, and you know it. It’s not all click-click-next-next as in Windows or OS X. Sometimes you’ll have to make your hand dirty to accomplish a task that would take the average Windows user 2.42 minutes to finalize.
Here’s how a CEO sees it: if this user takes the time and has the brainpower to work in a CLI environment just to keep using Linux, what would make him empty his pockets in my company vault? They’re all geeks, they can get around certain application limitations and don’t reach for their credit card when frustration reaches a certain limit. The average Windows user pays for what he wants because he knows he’s not a tech person. Most Linux users would settle for GIMP if Photoshop CS 3 would suddenly popup in a 799$ Tux jacket. They already got used to it, and the price doesn’t justify the need for further ease of use. Sure - some will shout they DO need commercial software. But would they actually pay for it or just use the friendly neighbourhoot BitTorrent client to download the latest crack? Think before you answer. Look deep inside your soul and answer yourself this: would you pay?
I wouldn’t.
So what does this have to do with the Year of the Linux Desktop?
Everything.
Linux will not become mainstream as long as there’s no commercial software for it. Period. For software to be developed by companies interested in Linux, the operating system has to become mainstream, or there’s no profit for them in it. It’s a vicious circle. As long as there are no hot-off-the-shelf games with Linux binaries burnt unto the CD, it really doesn’t matter how user-friendly or virus-free Linux is.
So… no. No Linux Desktop this year. Or the next. There will not be a Linux year in 2010, nor in 2013. Not until new users stop asking “why are there DEB and RPM and TGZ files?”. Nine out of ten users that try out Linux give up after the first hour or so. And it’s not because it’s different, it’s because something isn’t there or doesn’t work as it should.
Open-source is - ironically - it’s own biggest enemy.
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
February 4th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
I found this very thoughtful. I couldn’t figure out how to sign up for your RSS feed. Help! Thanks!
February 4th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I figured it out. I subscribed!
February 4th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
So what do you think is the potential market growth for Linux on the desktop? And which vendor will be in the lead?
February 4th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
You fall into the same trap others use. As an also since ‘99 Linux user, I know your pain. Remember Staroffice 5.0? :D Anyway, you describe the situation in North America. I am not going to say this is the year of the Linux desktop, however, this is the year the REAL Linux desktop usage numbers in the world become impossible to ignore and the defective means that Netcraft counts users (and only in North America) as the “gold standard” measuring desktop usage is finally truly debunked. i.e. W3Schools seems to do it right.
I would submit that Linux is between 3-5% worldwide (excluding North America where $ talks, as you pointed out).
Your statement “Linux will not become mainstream as long as there’s no commercial software for it. … has to become mainstream, or there’s no profit for them in it.”
This ignores one major item, Linux on super low end machines, Eee, Everex, etc, where they IS tons of demand, market hype, etc, Linux enables the price. I think this will be huge, the same way MS took over the market, low price, is the way Linux will break in.
Two other points to ponder.
1) Game consoles are powerful enough and wow enough, PCs with Windows will feel the heat from them.
2) Photoshop is not that much of a golden handcuff, I know of few general users who have it. Honestly, the biggest handcuff I see is iPod and DRM infected music thereof.
TripleII
February 4th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
As long as vendors lose their corporate identity by merging, we cannot speak of a lead vendor. Take a look at Linspire for example. Take a look at the Mandriva and Turbolinux merger then remember how the Debian Core Consortium utterly failed years ago. If I would have to choose one it would be either Canonical, either Novell.
Market growth for Linux on the desktop? There IS a market and it HAS been growing, but sadly, not fast enough. People tend to get excited that this year, Linux growth rose 5 percent, but they forget to take into account the fact that the global PC market grows 100 times faster. So what happens to the rest of the PCs? I’ll tell you what: they get Windows installed. In two years they’ll get OS X installed alongside.
The Linux training that exists is insignifiant.
Suppose a network admin gets a memo from his boss, telling him to install Linux on all corporate servers because he read somewhere it would be cheaper. Two days of head-scratching later, the same admin sends a reply asking for license money - he needs his Windows Server back. He simply doesn’t have the time to learn a NEW operating system. He knows his Windows and that’s all that matters. It’s a sad fact, but I had several encounters with such people. It doesn’t matter if you can tweak your IPTABLES to the bone or manage your bandwidth with HTB-Tools in such a way that even a fly coudn’t get past that 3Mb limitation - if there’s no simple GUI for these tools, it doesn’t matter. A new, untrained eye will shed a suspisious look at all those config files. Remember that it’s human nature to fear the unknown. This is the lesson that most Linux and OSS companies haven’t learned yet.
February 4th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
I find one fact wrong. I live in the US and I pay for commercial software for Linux when possible. I pay for SUSE, to help support its development. I want things to just work. I pay for VMWare when things dont quite work. I subscribe to Transgaming/Cedega and CodeWeavers/Crossover. I buy games for Linux like Unreal Tournament. I donate money to projects I use. Just because you are trifty (cheap) with your money does not mean everyone in the entire world is. I donated to Tux500 project. I bet you didn’t. So as you spittle out words that you think everyone else in this world thinks, try using those words to support the usage and operation of Linux. The easier it is to use, the more users you will get. Oh BTW, Mandrake 6.5 is when I started using Linux, and that was due to ability to buy it as BestBuy.
February 4th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
@i-pay-for-linux.
You said you live in the US. I don’t. Might I ask what your salary is? Because where I live, the average monthly salary a person gets is about 220$. Donate those. I know system administrators that don’t earn more than 400$ per month and they do have a heavy technical background. So PLEASE don’t speak to me about buying software or donating. For a server admin with three kids and a 300$ rent, buying software is not an option. Give me something else, not “trifty”. Ask a Russian, a South African, an Indian how much he’s saving by using Linux. You’d be surprised how many Linux users would trade a Cedega subscription for three consecutive trips to their local supermarket. Get out of your American shell for a little bit. No, I didn’t donate money to ANY open-source project. Now you know why.
February 4th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Much as i’d like to disagree, I can’t. Ultimately I started using Linux because I couldn’t reinstall windows on my, (ironically because there was no easy way to get hold of the video card driver and i’d lost my existing backup.)
So in essence I persisted with Linux because, short of buying a newer system, I really had no choice. Having said all that, I’m a very happy Linux user now. It was just the impetus I lacked. I needed a push.
February 4th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
The only people who care at all about linux are geeks like us. We want to understand how/why things work. We don’t want to be told just send Uncle Billy your cash and all will be good and we certainly don’t want to be told that someone else owns EVERYTHING and you merely have the privilege of using it how you’re told.
The cost is an issue to many people, too. Nothing is more annoying than paying exorbitant sums for something that you won’t make any money on and may not even enjoy using. If there is a way for some companies to make a buck….good for them. They’re entitled, but there are some people who just want to share some knowledge and provide a useful product to those who care.
I strted using linux with Fedora 2 and converted all of my Windows machines in 2006. I’m another one of those disgurntled, anti-Redmond folks who believes that a “free market” should have more than one REAL choice. Even though there is a lisence involved it’s nice to see a product that allows the lattitude of most linux distros.
I do agree that there will probably never be a “year of the Linux desktop”. I will say, however, that we’re long overdue for “the year to end the monopoly”. Linux may not be perfect, but we can actually try to contribute and make it what we want. If basic end-users convert along the way, all the better for us in the end.
February 4th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
You said that there is no mainstream support for linux, what do you call dell offering desktops and laptops, including one of their high end xps models with ubuntu preinstalled? this is not to say that this year or next is the year of the linux desktop but give credit where it is due.
February 4th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Some of us use Linux because of its implied socio-political nature rather than because we can get at the code and fiddle with it. It’s about openness and sharing and being free rather than getting for free. It’s about not using Microsoft because I hate the way they do business - it’s about not using OSX where pretty much everything is dictated. It’s about choice - KDE, Enlightenment, Gnome, XFCE etc. It’s about applications being integrated logically as opposed to commercially. It’s about advert free interfaces and control over what does what. It’s about the choice to say I disagree with Novells pact with Microsoft but I can still use more or less the same code in another distro rather than having to swallow it and hurt. It’s very much about the freedom to share the whole OS without worrying about being a criminal in the process.
The year of the Linux Desktop for me was the first time I successfully installed Linux (2002). It’s the same for everyone. We don’t need to have a “year of the Linux desktop” we just need to carry on spreading the word and let each person, in their own time, have their own “year of the Linux desktop”.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
No year of the Linux desktop…
The Linux Rant has a nice commentary of why there will never be a “year of the Linux desktop.”
From the article: “Newsflash people. There is no ?Year of the Linux Desktop?. There will never be one…But one thing bothers me and drives me nuts e…
February 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
“Take a look at the Mandriva and Turbolinux merger..”"
Mandriva and TurboLinux did not merge, they created a development workshop where they cooperate on developing common GPLed System Level modules.
They are and will continue to be separate companies.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
@slap harrys dice:
[The year of the Linux Desktop for me was the first time I successfully installed Linux (2002). It’s the same for everyone. We don’t need to have a “year of the Linux desktop” we just need to carry on spreading the word and let each person, in their own time, have their own “year of the Linux desktop”.]
Very nicely said!
February 4th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Its about time somebody pointed this out. I think Linux needs some advertising as well. Right now its just word of the mouth. It is a seemingly endless circle, but there are a few ways out. If Linux gets more adoption, I’m sure companies will start showing Tux some love.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
I could care less about having the source code. That’s not why I use linux. (But it’s sure nice to know that code is there if support is ever dropped somehow.)
I use linux because I don’t have to live in fear of getting busted for running pirated software like I once did, years ago.
I use linux because I want to work WITH my computer, not ON my computer.
I use linux because when I scrimp and save $320 to build the entire system in the first place (minus monitor), I sure as heck will not shell out another $200 for a Windows license, let alone all the other software required to actually DO something with the machine once it’s running.
I use linux because when a friend’s WINDOWS machine dies and becomes unbootable, I can fire up a linux livecd and fix it for them.
I use linux because it supports all of my hardware without having to hunt for or download a single driver.
I use linux because it offers an unsurpassed out of the box experience.
I use linux because the desktop environments can be tailored to my workflow, and don’t force me to adapt to the way it wants me to work.
I use linux because it is simply BETTER than Windows.
(And no, I didn’t even START on things like viruses and malware!)
My year of the linux desktop was officially 2004, when Windows left my house for good. But I’d been ‘testing’ it since I ordered a copy of Mandrake 6.0 on CD.
The world is catching on far, FAR faster than the US is. And one day, they’ll be worshipping their Microsoft stock, while the rest of the world will have mostly moved on. No, Microsoft will never die entirely … it will ALWAYS be there, as will some form of Windows. But that’s good … it helps push linux to be that much better. Who knows … maybe one day Google will buy out Microsoft. LOL
February 4th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
This article is retarded to put it bluntly.
ZOMG there’s no games for Linux. Fact: PC Gaming as we know it is dying out fast as consoles add more and more of the features found in PC gaming. 5 years from now a huge percentage of “PC Gaming” will be casual games playing with your browser. Stuff that linux will do no problems.
ZOMG there’s no commercial software. Fact: The only people that pay for commercial software anyways are professionals who need it for their day job. So this argument that Linux people wont pay is meaningless because Windows and OSX users wouldnt pay either. The difference is Linux users are used to getting legal free software where as everyone else pirates it. Photoshop will come to Linux just as soon as theirs enough media professionals using Linux, the fact every day linux users dont want to pay for software is beside the point.
What this article also fails to take into account is the places where Linux is being adopted. Schools all around the world are starting to realise that you dont need to pay M$ tax in order to teach kids how to word process. A few years from now when every kid at school is using Linux in Russia do you really believe that Linux wouldn’t became a mainstream alternative for the kids computers at home as well? If you dont then you are stupid.
The reason there hasnt been a year of desktop is because frankly Linux has never been ready for it. It’s only been in the last few months that its finally made it acceptably straight forward to get media codecs for your distro. Do you honestly believe Linux is ready to take over with problems like this?
But on the other side of the coin, look how far Windows came in the five years between Vista and XP and now look at how far Linux has come in the same period with far less resources. Are you really telling me that Linux is never going to go mainsteam? It’s never gunna becaome as easy to use as Windows and be as well supported? Sorry but as obvious as it is to me that Linux frankly isnt ready to be mainstream yet its also plainly obvious to me that Linux is the future and nothing is going to stop that. You cant stop something that is cheaper and works better.
February 4th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
There are 4 things wrong with your analysis. Money, money, money, and money.
First, money. Linux _is_ cheaper. You make only 10 cents profit on each dollar of sales, but you make $1 profit for every dollar cut in expenses. There are always going to be some companies that need to save a buck. Once they move to Linux they won’t be going back.
Second, fear of the unknown. There was talk back in, when, 1999?, about a number of major companies wanting to make the big switch. They’d used Linux on their servers and although the bosses couldn’t figure out how it was that Linux continued to exist, it obviously did and they wanted a piece of free. Then, Red Hat started charging money. This freaked everybody out and the bosses took a giant step back, breathing a sigh of relief at having dodged the bullet. Fast forward to today and, if you’re paying attention, there’s Centos, but more importantly to the bosses their’s big deployments like the French Police department, the classrooms of the state of Indiana, and Peugeot Citroen, all major players using Linux on the desktop. Linux is _still_here, has only gotten bigger and better, and is now endorsed for desktop use by IBM. North American companies devote 10%(ish) of revenue to IT. An awful lot of this is spent on the desktop. The bosses have had time to put their 1999 decision in the past and clearly there’s money to be saved.
Third, the consumer market demands low cost above all things. There’s the ultra-mobile market. They can’t afford even Microsoft’s OEM prices. MS may cut their prices to avoid ceding the market entirely, but there’s still no getting around the flexibility of Linux when it comes to tweaking to support a lightweight environment, or any other environment for that matter. These folk, and the embedded market, need overhead that’s as low as possible. Microsoft is all about getting a piece of the money and everybody knows it.
Finally, there’s commoditization of the software development marketplace. This is the supply side the drive of software into the consumer market, and more. What do we hear now? That 56% of all programmers use Open Source? (Citation: Evans Data) Why is this? Transparency is one reason. Programmers like to be able to find out just what is going on, and there’s no substitute for having the source code, all the source code, when it comes to debugging. But there are also strong economic factors at work. 75% (+- 10%) of all software development is done in-house and never sold. This means it’s either customization, where Linux shines, or there’s just no commercial product with the right combination of features. Almost every program shares features with another, similar, program. With FOSS the developer can take the code they need and add (or subtract) the required features. The thing about Open Source software is that once changes are accepted back into a project ongoing maintenance is outsourced, for free. About 70% of all software development cost is maintenance, so a huge reduction in software development overhead is available right there. These factors all point to a huge impetus for and drive to the commoditization of software development. Sharing software development costs is simply more efficient. It makes sense for almost all development. Everything that’s not differentiating a company in the marketplace, which is most software that _any_ company uses. Software development is notoriously high priced. FOSS development, in which all the momentum is behind Linux, is simply much cheaper.
These things take time. The IBM PC was released in 1981. Microsoft didn’t soar, and IBM tank, until the mid 1990s. when did Linux get “good enough” on the desktop? Pick a date and figure that Linux will make major inroads 10 or 15 years later, unless the world moves faster today than it did 25 years ago. Sure, switching costs money. But there are clear signs that the overhead is not too much for some. These folks are not going back, and as time goes on it’s clear that more will join them; if only because their example will prove that Linux does work on the desktop. We all know that once the floodgates are open, the movement will be hard to stop. Economics do win out, eventually.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
“A person that chooses Linux is a person that has to make some sacrifices, and you know it.”
What!!
A beatiful, powerfull, table, multimedia desktop … no. Windows users make sacrificies, we enjoy linux. Have a work session on linux is a real, deep pleasure.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Numbers are the key. The low-end PCs are starting to swing towards FLOSS because their price does not warrant investing more for the functionality. There are about 1000 million people now equipped with PCs. There are 5000 million who may become involved in the PC market if the price is low enough. That cuts out that other OS completely. Even if no users of that other OS ever migrated to GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux will be a big hit on the desktop really soon. I think 2008 will make the changes obvious starting with ASUS barely being able to keep up with demand for the eee. The new PC users will not be locked-in to some favourite app from M$, or Adobe. They want something that works.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
I found this rant rather naive, and - not to put too fine a point on it - spoken like an outsider. Your ideas on the “ideology” of linux are clueless, sorry. I don’t know *anyone* that uses linux for financial reasons. I do know a lot of people that use linux for the power and stability, and many that use it for the freedom and flexibility. I know of non-technical people who use linux because they prefer it; speaking for myself, I make enough money to use whatever OS I want to, and I choose Linux.
You had the gall to yell at one poster for having money to spend, as if to say, people in the real world have no money to spend. You can’t have it both ways - if they have money to spend on software, why can’t they spend it on linux? If they don’t have money to spend on software, how do you expect them to buy microsoft products?
February 5th, 2008 at 2:31 am
I’m in the process of reading the book “Wikinomics”. It sheds some light on the making of money in an open source environment.
February 5th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Noob article
February 5th, 2008 at 7:31 am
[…] LinuxRant has a post entitled ‘There is no Year of the Linux Desktop’, in which the author […]
February 5th, 2008 at 11:24 am
[…] Nifty(”div#wrapper”, “tl tr normal”); 0+shareThere is no year of the linux desktopNewsflash people. There is no â??Year of the Linux Desktopâ??. There will never be one. […]
February 5th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
So apparently you would rather flame instead of discuss your point of view in a manner that better defends your position. I moved far from my home to get a job that allows me to support something I use. I was defending my point of view (which was different than yours) by showing there are many professional *nix users that pay for software. There are also many companies that pay for software. There are also manu non-professional users that pay for software. Just to show a bit more that there could be a day of the Linux Desktop (when, who knows) how many RedHat Workstation or SuSE Desktop licenses were sold last year compared to the year before? Also, why is Dell offering Linux workstations? Now for the US side, why is Walmart selling a Linux desktop? You tell me to get out of my US Shell, I would suggest you take a look at global sales of Linux software. If you are not happy with your current situation, work to improve it. Don’t place your point of view for all to read and when someone disagrees with it turn and flame. Start a proper discussion to show a different point of view.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Those who assert that there will or won’t be a “Year of the Linux Desktop” generally do so for the sensationalism. Operating systems aren’t like snowfall on a mountain slope; there will be no avalanche of Linux desktop usage. Rather, Linux is more like the spring thaw, bringing new and burgeoning life that will gradually overwhelm those who oppose it. It is that which Steve Ballmer fears, not a “Year of the Linux Desktop.”
February 5th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
@I-pay-for-linux:
some of us have families, you know. Moving away is not an option for everyone. I’m not complaining, I’m just stating facts. I’m really sorry I offended you, but it really pisses me off when someone assumes that everyone can afford to buy software. But supporting Linux can be done by other means, not just by donating. And - believe me - I did my share tenfold.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
I agree and disagree, but I see it on the other side.
GNU/Linux is a Free Software operating system, designed to work with Free Software. As long as users demand non-free software, GNU/Linux is cornered at a low market share. And why should users care? Mac and Windows are the restrictive operating systems, GNU/Linux and BSD are the liberating ones - demanding Photoshop on GNU/Linux is as stupid as demanding the Windows source from Microsoft.
Use the right tool for the right job and you won’t be disappointed. I choose to use GNU/Linux to NOT be at the mercy of restrictive software pushers and it works quite well for that.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:13 am
ZOMG there’s no Photoshop and Adobe won’t make it! Adobe doesn’t actually need to port the entire Photoshop to Linux. Photoshop CS2 runs in Wine, so all Adobe needs is a couple of people to make Photoshop CS3 “Wine-clean”, and afterwards just one person to work with the Wine project to ensure compatibility with all versions of Wine.
Most people who try Linux and then complain that The Gimp is no substitute for Photoshop, don’t actually have a legal copy of Photoshop anyway.
February 8th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Jessie…
Love the blog and have added youtomydigg account…
April 25th, 2008 at 3:52 am
You make some excellent points. And it’s easy to see who has the blinkers on, with some of the “oh so predictable” comments on here. Standard responses from the rabid fanbois. To them I say grow the hell up.
Linux is just a tool, like any other OS/software, so people should use it because it suits them and their needs, not due to any rabid ideaology. Linux will stand on it’s own merits, and those who choose to use will do so at their own pace. There is no “Year of the Linux Desktop”, because people don’t just wake up and decide “I’m going to run Linux today”. They decide to use it due to any number of reasons, and they do it in their own time, not on some schedule. People won’t choose to use linux just to make you happy and have wet dreams, they’ll do it because they decide they want to, or can’t afford to upgrade to the next version of windows, or for any one many other reasons. It’s about choice remember? And people will run linux when/if they choose to, not before.