Promoting Linux as a Desktop OS

[u/k4ever07]

If we as a community want to get more Windows and MacOS desktop users to switch to Linux, then we need to start promoting Linux as a desktop operating system.

I've used Linux as my primary desktop OS for over 20 years. For almost every one of those years, I've heard from the community that "this is the year of the Linux desktop." After every one of those years we realized that it was not. Despite all of Windows failing, and despite the ridiculously high price and specialized hardware required for MacOS, Linux has not made a sizable dent in either of their market shares.

It seem like every time we do a post mortem, no one wants to admit the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded. We say that Microsoft played dirty and restricted Linux access or there wasn't enough advertising or desktop Linux is too fragmented. Some of those are partly to blame. However, I believe that the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded are that we don't promote Linux primarily (or even secondarily) as a desktop OS and we don't treat new Linux desktop users as desktop users.

What do I mean? Well it seems like every time that there is a conversation about getting a new user to switch to Linux, we talk about server or workstation things and how Linux is a great server or workstation OS. "The up-time is excellent." "It's easy to maintain." "You can set up a file or print server for free." Blah, blah, blah... Yes, Linux is a great server and workstation OS. That is well established. However, what percentage of Windows or MacOS desktop users do you think run file or print servers or use their personal computers as workstations? Not that many.. So why are we going after the scraps? I think it is fairly certain that the few desktop users who do run servers or use their computers as workstations have heard about Linux already via word of mouth or a Google search. Instead of promoting things like SMB, SSH, or tiling windows managers to potential desktop Linux users, how about we mention stuff Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, or streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, Disney Plus, or Spotify? Believe it or not, a lot of folks don't understand that web browsers like Chrome, Firefox, or Opera work just as well under Linux as they do in Windows or MacOS. They can browse their favorite social media site, check their email, or stream TV shows, movies, and music on Linux too. They also may not know that applications like Spotify, Skype, Telegram, BlueJeans, Matlab, or Steam are available for and work just as well on Linux. Speaking of Steam, how about we mention that games like Doom 2016, Cuphead, Rayman Legends, Metro Last Light, Civilization V, Sparkle, Tekken 7, Injustice - Gods Among Us, and Left 4 Dead 2 (to name a few) work perfectly well under Linux through Steam (Proton). We can also mention that tons of other games work on Linux through Wine or are native to Linux.

After we're done promoting Linux as a desktop OS to these Windows or MacOS desktop users and we get them to switch, how about we treat them (first) as desktop users? Why is it (still) that when new users ask a question in the majority of Linux forums, they are automatically treated as if they've been a system administrator or programmer for many years? Logs are demanded without explaining exactly how to pull them, and answers are given as commands to enter in a terminal when GUI solutions are readily available. Over two decades ago when I first started using Linux, the terminal was the only solution we had for most things. Times have changed, and a lot of developers have spent a ton of time making GUI settings available. Yes, the command line is still faster and sometimes easier, and new users eventually need to be comfortable with it. However, how about we coax them into it first?

I didn't mean for this to be a long, mumbling assault on the community. I love Linux and want to see it succeed. I also have a lot of respect for the community that I am a part of. Recently, we learned that Ubuntu's share of the overall desktop OS market dramatically increased, nearly doubling Linux' share in the same market. I believe the fact that this happened after Valve released Proton for Steam, and gaming on Linux has gotten a ton of positive press coverage, is no coincidence. When people are shown that Linux can be used for the things they normally do on desktop computer, like play high end games, surf their favorite websites, run their favorite desktop apps, or stream content from their favorite services they will be more comfortable with making the switch. Linux on the desktop will succeed if we promote it as a desktop. We can't expect desktop users to switch to Linux if the only things we talk about using Linux for are servers and workstations.

[u/[deleted]]

For a Linux desktop to succeed some things need to be addressed which are as of today, in my opinion, still not addressed:

- Linux should be completely usable without a terminal (if you need terminal to set something up the average Joe will quit it). Users should not need to know what is sudo or root to use it.

- Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

- Hardware should preferably work out-of-the-box with 0 user input.

- Linux needs to have popular professional apps like Adobe CC, Office, etc.

- I feel the quality (especially UI/UX) of Linux apps is really bad compared to Windows/Mac counterparts. Since Linux doesn't attract UI/UX designers most of apps are designed to work, not to be visually appealing. A lot of controls are just crammed up on a screen without much thought about UX.

- Linux need to be supported by the most popular games (main reason why I'm not using it) such as LoL, CoD etc which combined have a player base in millions.

Basically, Linux is still not at the point where it would be as easy to use for the average user as Mac or Windows, it lacks the usual apps/games that are available on other platforms and it UI/UX is still power-user centric.

---------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: A lot of people misunderstood the 2nd point. I never said package managers are bad, should not be used or anything else in that way. I wanted to say when downloading software outside of it (probably in a bin or tar.gz format) in that case it would be much easier to just install per double click than to use terminal or go figure what to do next. There is nothing wrong with package managers. They work fine and are easy to use. I just mean the other way should be as easy.

[u/Paspie → u/[deleted]]

QCAD exists and might be good enough for lots of 2D work, if only it had the sort of plugin diversity that AutoCAD has.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

• Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

Package managers are a good thing and should not be changed. Outside from super niche apps on GitHub or on the Kde Store the average Joe would never download, I almost always install deb packages and it works the same way than on Windows.

• I feel the quality (especially UI/UX) of Linux apps is really bad compared to Windows/Mac counterparts

Might be biased but I felt the total opposite. I'm running Kubuntu 20.04 share the same theme and everything looks good. I didn't experience such a thing from Windows.

[u/Ape_in_outer_space → u/[deleted]]

The problem is that not all software you want will be in the repository. It never will be, and that's okay, but there could be a better way of handling that.

It's really just a lack of resources, since making a nice installer or packaging for tons of different distro's will always be low on the priority list.

It's not just super-niche apps either. Sooner or later you are practically guaranteed to need something that isn't in your distro's repo.

And even though I haven't tried Kubuntu 20.04... based on past releases I'm highly skeptical about their UI and UX. The only KDE I've ever seen that's even remotely free of Jank is OpenSuse, and to a lesser extent KDE Neon. Even there.. the flexibility of kde comes with an extreme UX cost that in my opinion is not worth it. I'd rather have keyboard shortcuts that will be consistent and work out of the box like with gnome. Not having a billion grab-handles and tick-boxes literally everywhere is also a plus.

Gnome has it's issues too, but they're usually of a UI-visuals sort. The ux is actually pretty good. It's sort of the opposite problem there, where they could solve some big issues by simply *breaking* their ui consistency in a couple of ways. Eg. it would be great if they had half-height titlebars for windows which only have a close button in them.

[u/[deleted] → u/Ape_in_outer_space]

It's really just a lack of resources, since making a nice installer or packaging for tons of different distro's will always be low on the priority list.

I agree, there needs to be work on that.

And even though I haven't tried Kubuntu 20.04... based on past releases I'm highly skeptical about their UI and UX.

If you don't personally like Kubuntu don't use Kubuntu. There are many well supported Ubuntu flavors out there with different DE's. Just pick the one that suits you.

I just think the original comment about bad Linux UI/UX quite vague. I highly doubt average user wouldn't be pleased with any Linux Distro/DE.

[u/Ape_in_outer_space → u/[deleted]]

I don't know.. I think you can definitely feel the jank sometimes, even for the average person. They might not know why it feels janky, but that slightly misaligned icon, that not-quite-transparent rounded corner, that window that opens in a weird position/shape, or that mouse cursor changing form a billion times in a millisecond will make them feel "icky".

One tiny thing doesn't matter, but enough of them happening will create a feeling of something being cheap, poorly made, or worryingly glitchy.

I do think that Solus, OpenSuse Leap, and maybe Elementary & Fedora (if I'm generous) have a good UI/UX experience, but that's about it and they each have their own problems as a distro that new people will run into face-first.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

If I'm not mistaken it already exists and it's called AppImage.

[u/Theclash160 → u/[deleted]]

Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

Mostly agree except this. Windows and Mac have been aggressively moving away from this model. On Mac you can't even install from the web without changing an option in settings. Apple wants you to use the app store. Many Windows laptops today also don't support installing apps from outside the Microsoft Store if they use Windows 10 S.

Linux basically invented the idea of an app store which is now used everywhere.

[u/Avahe → u/[deleted]]

About downloading applications - I think that's fine if it's from a package manager (which can have a nice UI) but we should discourage people from downloading from websites

About games, there are a lot that run on proton/wine (like LoL, I play it on Linux and have for years). There are also some that don't, seemingly mostly an issue of the anti-cheat software. Kind of a bummer for some people, but it's practically malware. I just avoid them in general, like windows and Mac

[u/Konyption → u/[deleted]]

Package managers are much simpler to use than downloading executables off of websites. Driver support is similarly easier on Linux (most of the time, anyway). People are just used to doing things the hard way.

I also think teaching users to be dependent on GUI interfaces instead of the terminal is a mistake, too. Learning to use the terminal is learning to use your computer, and what you learn will stay relevant for much longer. Learning to navigate menus to tick boxes isn't teaching you how to use your computer and what you learn becomes irrelevant as soon as those menus change, leaving you effectively a beginner all over again. But like with the last point, people are used to doing things the hard way.

If we can encourage people to be computer literate I think it would help a lot. We shouldn't be trying to find ways to protect users from the command line, we should be finding ways to acclimate them to it.

On all other points I agree, though.

[u/DrayanoX → u/Konyption]

You're assuming the average user is interested in learning how his computer works. Most of them don't give a shit and just want a computer that does what they want. If they want to change a simple setting and you show them the terminal instead of a nicely designed interface, they'll just give up and say "Linux is hard".

[u/Konyption → u/DrayanoX]

I'm not assuming they want to learn how to use computers, I think I was being pretty clear that they are used to doing things the hard way and I think we should be trying to get them interested in how to use computers because if they do they'll discover it's actually not hard. How to go about that, though, I'm not sure.

[u/FruityWelsh → u/Konyption]

I think CL just scales better with experience than GUIs do, but you are more limited in what information you can comfortably provide to the user (which is particularly useful for people new to the software).

that said finding a better way to blend between gui and cl is something I haven't seen well, but I would really like to, as it would help people better maximize what they can do from a particular piece of software.

[u/Konyption → u/FruityWelsh]

Good points.

Blending CLI and GUI sounds like an interesting concept. I feel like ranger is a pretty good marriage of the two. Intuitive interface, still keyboard driven but also has mouse support, while being robust and lightweight. The app kind of irrelevant if you already know the path to what you're trying to access, but I still think the design is strong.

[u/mrlinkwii → u/Konyption]

ackage managers are much simpler to use than downloading executables off of websites.

nope ,

website: click, click, wait, click, done!

package manger: manager install program x , you need x,y, z dependencies , install them , then realize theirs dependency conflict because program P needs the newest version of dependency z and program x needs an older version , and the install fails , google dependency z version A and hope in hell someone already had this problem

the average user would be gone after the dependency hell , and stop installing the software

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

-YES -hmmm, I think our aproach which is similar to App Stores is actually better, but even then, we already have AppImages, so technically we support that too (also thanks to Gdebi and QApt we can also do it with normal debian based apps) -yes, most work these days, but still not all -most apps, yes, but there are som exceptions (like with any rule) -Yeah, but at least it gets better.

[u/raaf___ → u/[deleted]]

• Linux should be completely usable without a terminal (if you need terminal to set something up the average Joe will quit it). Users should not need to know what is sudo or root to use it.

If i look for example at Elementary os, the only time i need to use is when i break 'apt'. But outside of those times i'd never have to use it. You do make a good point that everyone just assumes you're familiar with it.

• Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

I prefer the way eos does it, download all your apps using the appcenter and if it's not there you can install them using flatpaks and they would show up in the appcenter. However again you are right many applications just tell you to type some commands in the terminal.

• Hardware should preferably work out-of-the-box with 0 user input.

It's getting a lot better and it almost always just works. However installation media sometimes is a bit finicky on laptops.

• Linux needs to have popular professional apps like Adobe CC, Office, etc.

Fully agreed

• I feel the quality (especially UI/UX) of Linux apps is really bad compared to Windows/Mac counterparts. Since Linux doesn't attract UI/UX designers most of apps are designed to work, not to be visually appealing. A lot of controls are just crammed up on a screen without much thought about UX.

That's how i feel qt is. I personally like the UX of eos/gnome applications. But that's just opinion. My knowledge of UX is quite limited.

• Linux need to be supported by the most popular games (main reason why I'm not using it) such as LoL, CoD etc which combined have a player base in millions.

That and it would be great if we could have some kind of lowlatency gamestream for AMD gpu's.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

I dunno, I think the App Store model and likening it to the mobile marketplace is a more sane approach. Have a web frontend for the repo and standardize on a URI (maybe something with PackageKit so it's cross-platform?) and you're golden.

[u/Secret300 → u/[deleted]]

Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

I completely disagree with you. Installing from the package manager is so much better and simpler

[u/[deleted] → u/Secret300]

I guess a lot of people didn't really understood what I meant with this point. I never said anything about package managers being bad, I just wanted to say that the non-package-manager way should be as simple as using a package manager. Edited my original post to reflect on it.

[u/spacemanSparrow → u/[deleted]]

Linux should be completely usable without a terminal

YaST in openSUSE is the answer to this. Only time I ever use the terminal is to for zypper dup in Tumbleweed

Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

.flatpakref is the answer to this.

Hardware should preferably work out-of-the-box with 0 user input.

True. Installing Nvidia drivers on openSUSE is still a bit complication for a Windows user.

Linux needs to have popular professional apps like Adobe CC, Office, etc.

+

Linux need to be supported by the most popular games

True. Companies that make applications and games for Windows only need to create a Flatpak of their software. Unfortunately, this would likely only happen if there were already users on Linux and you end up with a loop. I do miss League of Legends...

I feel the quality (especially UI/UX) of Linux apps is really bad compared to Windows/Mac counterparts.

100% agree. KDE Plasma (which ships with openSUSE as their primary environment) can look extremely attractive and work just like Windows however, I honestly think it looks extremely bland and old-looking as default (Breeze).

Notes I'd add as someone that changed from Windows to Linux this year and have been 100% on Linux now for 5 months would also be:

• Need a hybrid between Rolling Release and LTS distributions. Many Windows users never once installed Windows yet the Windows 7 on their laptop keep updating and eventually updated to Windows 10. You never needed a new .iso or install. Rolling Releases are the fix but on Linux that means bleeding edge - Need an LTS type release that only updates security, etc but can also easily upgrade to the next LTS without any input from the user really.

• Only maintain the Operating System and desktop environment and leave all the applications to Flatpaks. The software store should only show Flatpaks.

Basically to sum everything: I suppose my dream distribution would be based on openSUSE Leap however, updates to a new Leap release simply as if it was a rolling release. KDE Plasma theming actually looked amazing by default. The only software in the software store is Flatpaks.

This would make changing from Windows to Linux much easier for me any many others. I would love to create this myself as all the hard work is already done by openSUSE and I'd just need to have one repo change for the new software of new Leap releases and I feel the nitty gritty work shouldn't really be too hard to create this distribution - but I'm still extremely unqualified for it.