2014-The year of the Linux desktop?

[FirebirdTN]

This is gonna be long, but I just wanted to get my thoughts out there, and see what other user's opinions are...

To skip my backstory and get right to the point of my post, read beginning with the 6th paragraph below:

Catchy thread title, eh? I know they have been saying that for what 20 years now, and its never happened. For me anway, I'm not a fanboi. I've been along time Windows user since about 1998. I "dabbled" in Linux I forgot when...about the time that Beryl was the rage, and I had it running in a dual boot under Fedora Core at the time. As "cool" as it was, I just never got that "gut feeling" that is was gong to gain in popularity. Now admittedly, I put together a Samba server at work for file shares, since we didn't want to spend the money on a Windows server with per user licensing and all that, and I needed more than 10 concurrent user connections at the time. Saying I put together a Linux Samba server is by now means an attribute of my technical abilities-it was more along the lines of researching how I wanted to do 'x', then type the commands in a terminal without really understanding what the commands were doing. So that was the extent of my Linux experience. Two machines out of roughly 100.

A few years later, I decided to give Linux another go. I wanted to make sure I was using the most common disto for the widest range of support. I did my homework and found Unbuntu. I actually liked what I saw. But my time is precious, so I didn't have the time to commit to it like I wanted (and I am glad that was the case). A while later when I decided to get serious about it, I noticed a new LTS version came out, so I decided to grab it since the preceeding one I was tinkering with was kind of old. I installed it, and was instantly dissapointed...In a word: Unity. I wanted a Desktop, not a tablet OS. That put such a damper on my spirits, I decided I would just stick with XP.

Fast forward to today...I have been hanging on to XP with a death grip. Although not my favoirite OS (Win2K pro was), underneath the extra polish and features, it might has well been Win2K. Then along came Vista. YUCK. And from what I have read Win7 was actually considered a very good OS by the masses, to me it just feels like a completely different animal. Now I understand that there was a fundamental difference between the old Win9x line, and WinNT line. But it seems to me, Mircrosoft did a *fair* job of cross-compatibility with applications between the Win9x and WinNT line. Also, from the pure "interface" perspective, there was very little different beween the two. What I mean is, looking at a Win98SE and Win2K desktop, there wasn't much difference.

For me personally however, somthing about Windows Vista and beyond just feels RADICALLY different. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it feels like relearning things all over again. To be blunt, I just don't like any of them. And with the arrival of Windows 8, it is clear the direction that Microsoft is going is tablets. Which is fine. I can't blame them. Desktop PC sales are down, and I don't think they are coming back. Microsoft is a business, and business has to go where the money is. I cannot fault them for that.

So, I decided that I was going to give Linux another go. I was considering Ubuntu again with the fallback session, but it just didn't feel right forcing an OS in a direction that the creator really doesn't want it to go. Obviously Canonical want's to capture the tablet/smart phone market as well. Good on them, I say. I cannot fault them either for that. Like it or not, that is where the future is going. But I do fear for us "power users". Not sure which way to turn, I found MINT.

I've been on mint only about two weeks, but I have to say...I am here to stay.

I really am not trying to make this needlessly long, but I did want to give some backstory about me and my experiences.

THE REAL POINT of my post here is this: I am concerned about the future of business desktop computing. Does it have one?

I am sure you can do most anything on a tablet that you can on a PC. But in my mind, there are just some things that just can't be accomplished by a tablet, or some things that are just eaiser on a traditional Desktop/Workstation.

I have read that Microsoft is going to bring the start menu back. Maybe they will turn around and go back to their roots...but I have lost faith at this point. Plus, I have found even under windows when I need to do something, I always search out open source alternatives before puchasing any software. So when I switched to Mint, I was already accusmted to using Firefox, Thunderbird, Putty, and although I used OpenOffice, LibreOffice feels right at home.

Since the Desktop market is a shrinking market, I can't help but wonder what kind of future it has. Obvously part of the reason I like Mint is because to me, it feels more like traditional "Windows" operating systems than the newest versions of the real Windows OSes.

But if Microsoft does concentrate all their efforts onto the tablet market, I can't help but wonder what business desktop users are going to do in the future. Although no one can predict the future, my "gut" is now telling me, NOW is the time to make the switch, as Linux I *think* is what business will turn to in the future unless Microsoft does an about-face.

Last point I want to make is...it seems to be the explosion of the internet and computing was started in part by geeks. A good share of geeks are probably gamers. And now with steam running under linux, gog annoucing they intend to support linux, and I see other articles about other developers embracing on Linux, I seem to think that if your gamers change their platforms, then it won't be too long before the masses will follow.

So is 2014 going to finally be the year of the Linux Desktop, even though desktops are a rapidly shrinking market {but still a necessity for some computing needs]?

Again, I apologize for the length of this. I just had to get this off my chest. So what is YOUR take on the future of business computing? I am interested in reading your opinions.

Thanks,

-Alan

[Eggnog]

We were talking about this at work earlier in the week. Enterprise will probably hang on until the bitter end, if there ever is an end. And if there is an end, it's decades away. Enterprise is not about jumping on the newest bandwagon where consumers want tablets to consume content. IT departments can have a lot of machines, sometimes hundreds or thousands, most likely running Windows 7 by now, with some XP machines still running. They have vital applications that will only run on Windows. They aren't just going run out and buy tablets for everyone. Heck, they'd want them to run Windows and no one I know even thinks about Win 8. They either run Win 7 or Linux or both.

I think the Linux desktop is still a long ways off, for various reasons, but it's getting better and people are actually looking at it now as a serious alternative. Too, Microsoft is not doing themselves any favors by trying to make a hybrid operating system rather than one for mobile and one for business desktops. Enterprise is who they need to woo. If they lose the enterprise market, they are toast.

[FirebirdTN]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I think maybe my initial post is just too long, but to sum it up-I just fear for the future of the Desktop. Maybe consumers can get by without them since the market is headed towards a "mobile" market, but I just can't see business making due with exclusively mobile devices. Unfortunately as it stands right now, that seems the direction that Microsoft (and Canonical) are wanting to take.

I just wonder who is going to fill that void in the business power computing sector. Apple? Linux? Or will Microsoft turn things around...

I guess for the first time ever, I've got my money on Linux.

-Alan

[skywolfblue]

Aside from say, newly starting companies, businesses tend to prefer to stay with what they've already been using, the system that their software was programmed for. This is particularly evident in how many companies still hold on to XP because their software was written for it.

I think Windows 7 is going to stay popular for quite a while as well.

Linux has certainly made huge strides forward these past few years and been in a better position then ever. But it's still a long way from mainstream. Maybe one day, one glorious day in the far future, all the software will be rewritten in linux, drivers will be abundant and well-written, and people will bask in the gloriousness of being able to ~choose~ what Operating System and Desktop Environment they like best, instead of having to be slaves to monopoly!!!

[Previous1]

Red Hat made $178 million profit last year - so Linux is already on the desktop. In confined corporate environments. For Joe "Unix" Average there's always OS X.

[wanderer7]

If the major hardware manufacturers start paying more attention to GNU/Linux users, I'd call it "the year of the Linux desktop". In my opinion, we don't necessarily need to ever reach the 50-80% market share, 10-20% would be good enough already. At the moment, everything is made for windows - hardware, drivers, games etc. Users don't even have a choice - computers come with windows preinstalled and if you want to install another OS, then the UEFI comes into play...
Talking about businesses, 2 words come to mind: cloud computing. This is both good and bad. Good side: with cloud computing, at least the servers will be (and are already) running GNU/Linux. On the other hand, using desktop PC-es becomes less and less popular unfortunately.
I guess, in the future, only gamers and people like me (I'm old-fashioned a bit ) will keep using desktops/laptops. The majority of the users will be happy with smartphones and tablets, at least for personal use - less powerfull and cheaper CPU-s and RAM-s, less and cheaper HDD space and all the files stored somewhere in the cloud. People want mobility and portability these days.
But this could be the end of windows era too. Android, Chromium/Chrome OS, Ubuntu they are all much better OS-es than win8 and they are all based on Linux.

[wheeledgoat]

I think the tablet & phone precedent is going to be hard to shake; wanderer is right - the line between hardware / software / firmware is getting real blurry with these portable devices, and is already gone in many cases.

I, too, prefer to sit down at a full-sized keyboard and mouse, in my comfy office chair, with a full-sized monitor. But I've got a growing feeling that I'm in a shrinking minority. That's OK - at least the hardware to build my boxes is even cheaper now, as premium prices swing to the portable electronics. And with Linux? booyeah.

[JosephM]

I think people over estimate the death of the desktop computer. Phones and tablets are great for some things. But what happens when you need to type up a document for school/work, use a 3d/CAD app, code up a website, or develop all those apps people use on their phones/tablets? I think the drop in desktop sales probably has a lot more to do with just how fast computers are now. Even low end machines are blazing fast compared to machines from 5 years ago. If you do basic computing tasks you no longer have anything to gain by buying a new PC every year or two. Just look at the number of users still on Windows XP.

Imho, linux has some hurdles to overcome to be popular on the desktop. Until I can walk into my local Best Buy or other computer superstore and buy a Dell or Hp (insert popular brand name here) machine with Linux pre-installed it's going to remain a niche market. Look at the Chromebook. Machines with a pre-installed Linux based OS and those sell. Why do you think Android is so popular? Not because it's Linux. Most people have no idea of that fact. It's because thats what their phone or tablet came with.

[EmpireITtech]

In my experience, the number 1 thing holding many companies back from exploring the possiblity of using Linux as a Enterprise Desktop OS is the lack of MS Office and/or an Exchange capable email client other than Outlook. I know this is true at my company, I work in the IT depatment, and we'd have already deployed Linux if we could get Office running reliably (and yes I know about Wine and Codeweavers, but it's not perfect).
I know there's been some speculation that MS might put out a Linux version of Office like they do for Mac and Android/Mobile, but don't know if it's true. Office is their cash cow anyhow, and they'd make good money with it on more OS's imo...but I'm just biased

[InkKnife]

I think we worry to much about this issue.
Look at the state of Linux. Things have never been better. There are many great projects going on, seems like we have more developers everyday. The last year has had win after win for serious improvements all over the place.
Linux does not need to grow in the same way a commercial OS has to. All Linux needs is steady growth and a large talented developer community. We already have that.
Market share does not matter.

[xerion567]

OP: I agree with the general direction of your thought process- the world of desktop computing is now on the decline. With the widespread popularity of simple computing devices, the user base is changing, and so are the interfaces, language, and uses of the computing devices.

To put it simply: the geeks-per-million (GPM) ratio is falling. The average user is not excited by the internals of technology- they are so inundated with marketing noise there is no room left to indulge in quests of curiosity. Ask the average user what they want and they will regurgitate what they've been sold, time and again: "I want Office and Outlook and the Web, and I want it to sync to my mobile devices" (or cloud sharing, or Skydrive, or whatever the hell they're calling it now). The thought of "what are my choices" really hasn't even occurred to them; they have been conditioned to want whatever the latest offering is, usually a re-branding of some feature that was already there if you just made the effort to find it.

I'm excited by Linux Mint, an offering to the masses that says "Hey, come check this out! It's like what you're used to but different. Different can be good!" The timing is great right now- Microsoft has made a marketing blunder- trying (once again) to force a polished turd upon it's customers. A handful of those disenfranchised customers are stepping out of their comfortable bubbles to look around at what is really out there, but lets get serious, Linux doesn't do marketing- companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Google know that if you throw enough advertising money around you're going to get more customers regardless of the quality of your product.

I think Linux and open software has never looked better in terms of features, innovation, and polish. I think the new Gnome Shell is truly the user interface of the future. Linux certainly still has plenty of problems to work out also, like the newly introduced anti-competitive SecureBoot "feature". But until someone wants to put up the same kind of marketing schemes employed by the competition, Linux will remain the domain of those who are willing to venture outside their bubble, no matter how well polished and problem free we can make it. And there are also, of course, those who would prefer that it remained that way.

[Eggnog]

In my experience, the number 1 thing holding many companies back from exploring the possiblity of using Linux as a Enterprise Desktop OS is the lack of MS Office and/or an Exchange capable email client other than Outlook. I know this is true at my company, I work in the IT depatment, and we'd have already deployed Linux if we could get Office running reliably (and yes I know about Wine and Codeweavers, but it's not perfect).
I know there's been some speculation that MS might put out a Linux version of Office like they do for Mac and Android/Mobile, but don't know if it's true. Office is their cash cow anyhow, and they'd make good money with it on more OS's imo...but I'm just biased

In my office, we make fairly extensive use of MS Access. One thing holding us back, according to our resident programmers and IT guys, is that the Access-like alternatives in LibreOffice/OpenOffice are not completely compatible with our existing Access applications. Another thing is that we run a vital (to our organization) application that pulls in, and renders with fields, documents created with Word. That, in itself, is not really an issue. The issue for us is that the Word usage is hard-coded and not changeable by the user, and the vendor is not inclined to try to make it work with anything else. Until these sorts of things can be overcome, and I think they eventually will be, Windows will likely remain the dominant desktop in the workplace, especially in large organizations that use vital applications that only run in Windows or make use of various Windows capabilities.

[fraxinus_63]

In my experience, the number 1 thing holding many companies back from exploring the possiblity of using Linux as a Enterprise Desktop OS is the lack of MS Office and/or an Exchange capable email client other than Outlook.

MS Outlook/Exchange compatibility is a huge issue - also reliable, stable, hack-free connections to corporate VPNs. There has been another thread here recently dealing with these subjects.

My brother is a geek and a die-hard Linux lover, working for a large concern (a university), but he's recently switched to Outlook from Thunderbird as he can no longer find the time to deal with the "issues" and breakages that arise every time the Lightning calendar is updated.

If only there were solutions to these compatibility problems that we could pay for if we needed them!

[EmpireITtech]

I think we worry to much about this issue.
Look at the state of Linux. Things have never been better. There are many great projects going on, seems like we have more developers everyday. The last year has had win after win for serious improvements all over the place.
Linux does not need to grow in the same way a commercial OS has to. All Linux needs is steady growth and a large talented developer community. We already have that.
Market share does not matter.

Oh without a doubt, many of us on here are not "worried" about Linux and where it stacks up vs other commercial OS's. Most of us are avid Linux users that love what it provides and will use it regardless of whether it's "Enterprise Grade". I know I'm just trying to point out why I see some companies, especailly mine, not consider using Linux as their main OS. We love Open Source Software - we use OwnCloud, Spark, OS Ticket, LibreOffice on non-essential personnel - and would love to have Linux as an option. It's just the lack of MS Office support is really the only thing holding us back. That's really all, you are right, it's probably the most exciting time to be a Linux User right now and I think it's only gonna get better

[FirebirdTN]

I have been reading all the replies. Good info.

I know from our own personal perspective, office compatibility isn't that big of a deal. *Most* of the time OpenOffice suffices, and we don't use exchange. All our hosted services are off site provided by 3rd party vendors.

When I made the thread, I was just thinking along the lines of business computing. Although microsoft may change direction, now they seem to be concentrating on the latest gadget OS, and I just don't see that as very productive when needing a traditional workstation/desktop OS.

After a pretty good evaluation of Mint (plus my limited experience in other Distros), I have told them probably the best upgrade path for our company from XP is 7. I REALLY hate to do that. Personally, I am keeping Mint. The *only* reason I suggested Win7 is because I don't have enough knowledge of Linux (yet) to support it.

Plus our specialized applications, which I *might* be able to make work with DOSBOX or wine, but I might not be.

It sucks, I really want to see Linux dominate on the business Desktop, but I am part of the problem by suggesting staying on the proprietary route. Maybe I will get proficient enough to make the switch one day. I still have hopes though for it if microsoft doesn't turn things around.

-Alan

[fraxinus_63]

Thanks for your latest post, Alan. I don't blame you for your decision. It pains me to say this but I am now cooler than I was at recommending business colleagues of mine to switch to Linux, although this is largely because of Exchange/VPN perils.

Plus our specialized applications, which I *might* be able to make work with DOSBOX or wine, but I might not be.

For running these applications, would you consider running Windows in VirtualBox? You need a Win licence and install media, it is true.

The only Win programmes I need to run (all the time) are Adobe Acrobat and Creative Suite. I have been running them for years in a virtual Windows install with no problems at all. In may ways it is an ideal solution, as I can deny my virtual copy of Windows all access to the Internet and I then don't have to worry about updating it religiously. Once you have VirtualBox set up the way you need it, it will work and work and work for you without issues. Or that's my experience anyway. I haven't even looked at WINE for about six years now.

[FirebirdTN]

...For running these applications, would you consider running Windows in VirtualBox? You need a Win licence and install media, it is true. ...

Actually I just tried that yesterday, and YES it works!!! We have an XP corporate license, so we are good. Without the boring technical details, our production systems are MS-DOS based. Therefore all of our needs revolve around NetBeui. Although DOS can use TCP/IP, our systems cannot due to the amount of conventional ram occupied by it.

So I got my XP installed in VB yesterday. Although "NAT" doesn't appear to work right now, bridged does, and that is exactly what I needed. My XP VM is able to communicate successfully using NetBeui to our production systems! So for our big proprietary apps, we *could* move to either 7 or Linux. More stability testing is needed of course, but amazingly it works!!!

I am really just blown away by what all can be accomplished in Linux.

-Alan

[fraxinus_63]

Actually I just tried that yesterday, and YES it works!!! We have an XP corporate license, so we are good.

Alan - that's really good news. I'd be interested to hear how your testing and evaluation goes. If you have a success going down the Linux/VB route, it deserves to be publicised.

VirtualBox is one of these things that really IS too good to be true. It took me an hour or two to get it working, to decide on the networking options, to get USB working properly (guest additions ...) and to work out that everyone using the virtual machine needed to be added to the vboxusers group - but that was years ago, and now it just goes on working for me.

Apart from occasional version updates VB itself seems maintenance free, and a virtual WIndows install is far less hassle than one on bare metal.

[xenopeek]

Smartphones are the real winner, not tablets. With the arrival of "phablets", tablet sales are likely to take a hit or at least stunted growth. Desktop sales are stable.

Click to enlarge:


"the year of the Linux desktop" as you are meaning it will arrive when computers are sold preloaded with Linux. People for whom computers aren't a hobby don't install operating systems; they see buying a computer as buying an appliance. Just unbox it (perhaps capture that for Youtube ), connect it to power, and done. They might be perfectly fine with using Linux, but they won't find out if they have to install it themselves.

[Jedinovice]

Having tried and failed to get Indonesians to go Linux, I have reached some basic conclusions on what it will take to get Linux accepted on the desktop.

1) Users TRUST Windows. This fact cannot be understated. Even with the problems Windows has the average Joe knows if they buy a laptop or need software it will run Windows, period. Linux they do not trust for compatibility. This trust goes beyond rationality. Users are emotionally invested in what they know.

2) Linux may be free but users will happily pay money just not to worry about tech problems. Joe public is quietly terrified of computers and live in terror of a system error. Heck, they are scared of anything unexpected and cannot change on setting in the OS or an application. Linux is perceived as a techie OS and that scares them off EVEN WHEN THEY ARE SHOWN HOW EASY it is to use! I have repeatedly proven to people here that Linux is fast, easy to use and compatible. Still, even when my claims are accepted, people do not switch – even when they cannot afford SW in Windows – because they are too afraid there will be software they want to run that Linux will not handle. Also, their emotional investment in Windows is deep. Windows is "their OS." For many it has literally been their OS from birth. BTW, I have had users stare at me in utter awe because I could open 'Preferences' and set a single config open by click on a tick box. Complete AWE!

3) Users are addicted to Office. Even though I have greater success reading up to date Office docs than (say) office 2007 people want Office because they assume compatibility = office. Period.

4) People generally hate change. This has gone against Microsoft as users hang into XP and 7 for grim death and go pirate just to keep them running. Trying to sell an all new OS is all but impossible.

5) Like it or not, games count for a LOT! Steam is getting user attention far more here than Libreoffice. [In terms of personality the vast majority of the population of the world are primarily pleasure seekers. Marketing Linux in terms of recreation is the way to go.]

6) Users will happily pay techies serious money to solve problems so they do not have to touch the computer. Rather than learn users will pay for someone else to do it for them. Windows has 100 techies around to fix the laptop when it goes wrong. Depending on where you live there may be no techie Linux user to fix it when it goes wrong. See point 1 – trust. "Going wrong" can be as simple as "How I save a file as PDF?"

However, Germany and China have standardised on Linux successfully and even Indonesia is standardising with the Government imposing Linux on all Government offices. I believe this is in part to spying by Australia which was discovered last year. In Government offices Linux is becoming not only used but popular. When people are FORCED to use Linux they end up liking it but it is hell's own job to get them to spend any really time with it.

So, my conclusion? Trying to get the average man on the street to invest in Linux is a pointless waste of time. Even when I demo how capable Linux – on USER'S OWN TERMS they are not interested or switch back to Windows (at cost) the minute there is the slightest problem. That thing about trust. I have seen laptops where Windows LITERALLY crashes every five minutes due to virsuses but the user will not consider any alternative. I have learnt the hard way that Linux adoption will not come from the ground up. It must be from the top down. [Now I am just the 'arrogant' Linux user who can open any file whatever the format and can do all the stuff Windows cannot as I have free software and leave my fellow Windows users stuck with slow, broken laptops. Right now I have a coworker with an utterly broken Windows installation and no re-install media but he would rather eat his own arm than go Linux FOR FREE. He is saving for a new laptop when all he needs is a re-install. But he will not hear me.]

There are only two ways Linux will gain traction on the 'desktop.'

1) Gaming. Steam is getting a lot of interest. Gaming is different to general laptop use. If the game will run the user does not give a sod about the underlying tech – just that the game is cool. With Steam flying and Gog adopting Linux this is going to push Linux in a big way. Steam boxes could be a real winner. Until Linux runs Office natively then it is pointless showing the productivity advantages of Linux to Joe public but gaming makes heads turn.

2) The only way to break through the general public's fear of the unknown and untrusted is imposition from the top. Where business and Governments TELL staff "That's it, we're going Linux" then people will step into line. If a business is running Libreoffice then users will want Libreoffice on their laptop "so it is the same as work." Office sells because it is what Industry uses and open source alternative share remains static. People spend serious money on the next version of Office just for 100% compatibility out of fear. But where businesses and Government *insist* then people will switch. The average user does not the difference between application and data. I have put a manager in total shock by explaining that you do not need a Mac to read 'Mac data.' The IT guy had to confirm I was not lying. So, the average user will standardise on what is used at work for fear that one day they cannot read a critical file. In a way it has to be benevolent dictatorship.

The good news is that security scares, interface concerns with Windows 8 and success stories from Germany and China is paving the way for top down deployment. There is actually a major open source community here in Surabaya. Now, who does the community provide information, resources and support for? Government and business. The average Joe is JUST NOT INTERESTED. But major commercial and security interests are and the word is spreading even here in Indonesia where skills are low. Where money and security count Linux is being adopted.

Thus, there is a quiet movement of shoving Windows off workstations in business and this, in turn, will force Joe to go to IT and meekly ask that their laptop "can be set up the same as it is as work." Also, when a Linux user can show a souped up laptop running the LATEST COOLEST game under steam then the user is likely to ask "Where can I get a laptop just like that?"

But... Joe will not invest in Linux until he is running Linux enterprise at work and he can take his laptop to internal IT when he cannot find out how to save a file in '.docx' format in Libreoffice. That day is still a while off but it going to happen. Industry and Governments are losing faith in Microsoft.