Why Linux Desktop 'Failed': A discussion with Mark Shuttleworth

We discussed the fate of Linux desktop.

[mr_beezlebub]

Honestly, I think Linux desktop is successful. Not in terms of market share, but in terms of how it is has so many good desktop options that the Linux community is happy with. Linux may never have the market share of Windows on desktop, but it has a very passionate community behind it for a reason.

[NoahStewart]

Good direct questions, clear and to the point. The antagonism in open source is definitely real but Mark Shuttleworth is missing that Unity itself was additional fragmentation. I know that's not how he sees it but that was definitely my impression. I was a Mac user when they made the big transition from 68K processors to PowerPC, and classic MacOS to OS X. Apple succeeded with these difficult transitions because they made interoperability a priority. Unity never achieved this and the project seemed to distract the team from more issues more important to the end user, like ensuring graphics cards and peripherals work, improving compatibility with Microsoft and Apple products that make up the majority of systems.

[mathieubordas]

I agree with Mark Shuttleworth. I switched from Windows to Linux with Ubuntu/Unity and I found Unity really great immediately. I'm not a desktop customization adept, and in my opinion Unity was way better than Gnome "out of the box". It was so easy to manage windows with keayboards shortcuts (screen split by quarters) and Gnome has so many windowing bugs.

[Xeno_Bardock]

If all desktop Linux distros supported all packing formats and package managers out of the box so it doesn't matter what package format or package manager you use, then the fragmentation problem disappears. What destkop Linux distro you use already doesn't matter in most cases as almost all desktop Linux distros function pretty much the same.

[akcjaxd]

Linux needs one dominant operating system, one dominant desktop environment and one dominant app distribution system - without it, no major company will want to write proprietary software on LInux - too much fragmentation. Canonical tried to do this, but the community didn't gave them support they needed.

[andreaszautner]

At Unity I always had the problem that the labels/captions/fonts didn't fit in certain menus etc. it often looked ugly. With Gnome and KDE this is much better today. But the "Unity Lenses" were a very good idea. Ubuntu should port the Unity Lenses to Gnome.

[Techonsapevole]

Currently Manjaro Deepin did a better job than Ubuntu as Desktop. Linux format wars is so stupid

[mi-c]

Are they really interested in the everyday user, that could be an interesting question, because i look at the Ubuntu website and I see their target audience are enterprises first, big focus on those, developers second while the general consumer is basically not even mentioned. I don't know if the "Ubuntu as Linux for human beings" still stands today, cause it is getting more and more an operating system for servers, not for the people.

[candidob]

The idea behind Unity was not to further fragment but to bring technologies, applications, user interface, and user experience together. That unified experience is in Mac already. However a unified experience does not mean being locked in to freedom of choice. If the experience was indeed successful in unifying the experience, I have no doubt the issues of compatibility and interoperability would have been addressed later on. After all is that not how Apple started? It was a long road but worth it in the end. Their success shows that. To have that experience in the Linux world be amazing. I hope that Canonical/Ubuntu will revisit this idea again, if not them, someone else.

[gmilitaru]

I am not an engineer user of desktop Linux. This is why I install whatever installs without additional tweaks on a particular piece of software (because this simplifies things when I need to reinstall for whatever reason. I use Debian and KDE on my desktop, because it is flexible and starts from the Windows vision of the desktop - I was familiar with - and lets me improve on it. I use Pop_OS! with tweaked Gnome (which is odd and does not allow me to change a lot) because it gives me easy access to my laptop hardware.

What ultimately matters is what software I get to use on my computers, the kernel and the gui/console are just tools in the service of my real work (or my fun) on the device.

[Shivamkumarjha]

Failure/success of a linux desktop experience ( for users switching from windows ) depends mostly on how usable the software center or appcenter is on the distribution they switched to. And Ubuntu's appcenter was pretty crashy back in old days.

[arxaaron]

The title is totally misleading clickbait, but I ignored that so I could hear Mark speak. The interviewer is spewing completely unsupportable assertions, since the Linux desktop is stronger now than than it has ever been, and the potential is infinite for anyone with a creative mind who wants to use their computer for substantive work. Fortunately, Shuttleworth is a clear, constructive, and positive communicator who disarms hyperbolic ranting with the flair of an international ambassador. The only thing holding the Linux desktop back is the expectation of familiarity with, and thus acceptance, of the extremely broken and user abusive windows environment that has been established through criminal monopoly practices.

[photoniccannon]

I honestly really liked Unity, and wish it were still officially maintained as an option by Canonical. It was a fantastic desktop and I don't consider it a mistake. (Yes, it still exists unofficially, but these don't have the same stability as the official Unity desktop did back when it was maintained and developed by Canonical). My only two gripes with it were 1) the dash wasn't as useful as the Gnome one, and 2) there was no ability to isolate workspaces on the dock, making them rather weird to use once a lot of windows got opened.

Unity was otherwise one of the better linux desktops ever created in my opinion. Gnome has come a LONG way in the years since (and is actually quite nice to use nowadays), but there are some things I still miss from Unity. The global menu and the HUD, to name just a few.

Unity's big mistake was that it wasn't nearly as extensible as Gnome, which I think put the nail in the coffin and prevented it from being very appealing to distros outside of Ubuntu. Gnome may have a very controversial (although remarkably efficient and forward thinking) take on the desktop with stock settings, but with extensions, you can change it and mostly make it how you like. Unity didn't really have that option.

[emilie]

Not support pro software Adobe suite CC (Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Indesign), CAD Autodesk Autocad, 3d Sketchup, 3dstudiomax, BIM Revit, Archicad, Allplan, ... etc.

[sscarlett]

So...uh....I just thought someone should mention that pureOS GNU/Linux is convergent.

[anttinormi]

Hey, Mark, I can not find any free software prompt from /etc/apt/source
List.. Thanks for canonical the Ubuntu now canan be run as WSL on proprietary platform. May I assume the Big brother will not record the BUS and ports and kernel behaviors? May I asumme I am Free?

[mohammedaitlaarebi]

ubuntu had a very good desktop (unity), sadly they didn't develop it how it deserved

[rrobastojr]

Linux for desktop? Ugh... That's what happen when too many engineers and no business people who point it to the right direction

[pamus]

Mark Shuttleworth came before Elon Musk on the scene.
And his company/career got destroyed(almost) by Unity and Mir.


For some reason, well for obvious reasons, I love the whole locked down approach of Gnome-shell.

[mitchelvalentino]

“The community wouldn’t let us do it.” Really, Mark? It’s the fault of the community? Once again, you blame Linux users.