Linux on the Desktop

[Jonathan Hutchins]

On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 09:28 am, Brian Kelsay wrote:

> Interesting article about Linux on the desktop.  The barriers to doing so
> and how to be constructive about making this happen sooner rather than
> later.

<WORDY RANT>
 
One of the things I really value about Linux is that it's not a 
lowest-common-denominator, one-size-fits-all system.  It's a system for 
"power users", those people who enjoy understanding at least some of what is 
going on with their systems, who enjoy putting some serious time into getting 
them set up the way they like best.

Yes, I have a working desktop system.  I've been messing with it and tweaking 
it for a couple of months now, and to tell the truth I probably couldn't go 
back and tell you everything I had to do to get it to be a usable, workable 
system.  It would be especially hard to sort out the steps I took to make it 
usable from the ones I took that were pure customization for my own 
preferences.

I use the system - so far - for basic Internet services (mail, IRC, Usenet, 
and browsing), for basic office tasks like sending letters (printing) and 
tracking expenses, managing a photo collection, working on web sites, and 
managing a growing music collection including digitizing vinyl albums.  It 
does all of the above well, and without the headaches I had with my windows 
systems.

I know for certain though that two or three of the things I had to do required 
a fairly advanced knowledge of PC architecture, Operating Systems, and some 
knowledge of programming.  Solving the problem with CUPS security on SuSE was 
tough, even though I found it well documented  AFTER I'd solved it on my own.  
Issues connecting with the NT network were probably on a par with common 
Windows networking problems.  I _could_ have used a separate NIC instead of 
tracking down and compiling the driver (thanks again, Gerald).

In my opinion, that's what keeps linux from being "ready for the desktop".  
It's certainly ready, and in use, for those of us with the knowledge to make 
it work.  For those who, like my father, are not willing, ready, or able to 
learn that level of computer skills I still can't send them a CD and say 
"here, solve your Windows problems by installing Linux".  

There aren't that many stumbling blocks left, and not every user will hit 
them.   The same applies to adding new functionality to the system, whether 
it's new hardware or new software.  Much of it will work just fine, but it 
was about forty-five minutes into figuring out how to mount a USB smart card 
reader before I realized that the system had automatically recognized and 
mounted it.

Linux is still slow too.  I've heard the many excuses that it's not Linux, 
it's not X, and it's true.  You can tune Linux to be fast, and with some 
sacrifice of admittedly decorative features you can make it faster than 
Windows.  Still, it wasn't until I upgraded to a fast Athalon 2.4 with plenty 
of RAM and a 7200 RPM UDMA 133 hard drive that I really felt comfortable with 
the response time for most tasks.  I'm sure the current Windows XP is just as 
lumbering, if not perhaps worse, but I can still use a 500MHz system with 
Windows 95 and be happier with it's performance than I would be with Linux on 
the same system.

I don't really feel like our goal should be to put Linux on every desk top.  
I'm happy to cede Bill Gates the bottom of the heap, the cheap businessmen, 
the idiot home users, the ones who really should be using Windows, not Linux.  
For the evangelists out there though, the need for expert support is still 
the stumbling block.

</WORDY RANT>