You must log in or # to comment.
It’s probably countered by the “year of the Linux desktop” claims. Keeps it in a limbo.
ayo this the bigger than sign
ok came back im stupid
Does anyone even use desktops anymore?
Anyone that wants power and more than a couple screens.
What? yes?
Do you mean as opposed to using phones/tablets, or do you mean like having a tower computer and peripherals? People still use laptops and stationary computers for work, like office work and computer related hobbies and anything like it. For doomscrolling and simple games, phones are more popular though.
We’ll, I mean as in desktop PCs. I’m assuming the “Year of the Linux desktop” thing is a joke that it’s been that long coming that people were still using desktops when people first started saying it.
Some people include laptops in “desktop” since it’s the same paradigm of the interface, especially if you hook up an external mouse and have a regular screen and keyboard. Laptops are still widely used. Some people use the term workstation. If 90% of people used linux on laptops for browsing, writing, programming, editing media, spread sheets, etc, I’d say that was the year of Linux on the Desktop, even if they don’t have a Compaq with a CRT screen sitting on their desk.
Maybe some people do that, but they’re literally called “laptops” to distinguish them from desktops.
Yes, well, such is language. What word better describes the combination of devices where you carry out typical desktop computer tasks in a desktop manner? I’m open for using a different word.
Fuck it, we CLI
According to this data, desktop devices still make well over 50% with over 75% in Europe.
That’s for desktops and laptops combined though, so doesn’t really answer. I’m curious as everywhere I work transitioned to laptops and tablets since COVID.
Oh, translation mistake on my side. Is the word “desktop” really still in use for tower computers? 🤔 I only know it for the kind of computing, not the device type.
Anyway, can’t quickly find proper statistics for that. I once read an estimate done by what I think was Valve, that’s obviously scewed towards the gaming bubble though. Still, I think it “only” was about 50-60% desktops over laptops and “other”. They won’t vanish anytime soon though, you can’t squeeze highest performance into a laptop and game streaming only works very selectively.
I’m really curious how it will shift in the future given Linux becomes more and more popular, and that ecosystem is already offering a synergy approach (not just the way SteamDeck does, but also with both GTK and Qt apps able to shift depending on display size and touch capabilities).
Who said Wayland was going to be the death? (Excluding canonical) Everyone knew X needed to be replaced and that the transition will be slow until its not.
And systemd is not that bad these days. I do think it’s more complex than it needs to be and startup is a bit slow, but that’s about it.
GNOME making the huge changes inspired the refugees to build Cinnamon and injected some sense into KDE development. Now even GNOME is getting more sensible.
systemd is not that bad these days
It never was bad, in fact it was better than the alternatives even in it’s beta releases.
I sure as f don’t miss x, but for the fing love of God can I get some access at the shell level to my input devices? The death of Autohotkey is killing me slowly.
I saw someone giving a talk either about Wayland and they said someone told them they “don’t like Wayland because it violates the Unix philosophy.” (Do one thing and do it well.) The speaker said they responded by asking “What one thing does X do well?”
I don’t quite get why massive Gnome changes would imply a death of Desktop Linux. There are so many great alternatives to it. It’s been many years that Gnome has been considered bad by many, and that many have used alternatives. I just think it’s positive that Gnome continue to get worse, because like that more distros may default to better alternatives to begin with.
I hated Gnome 3 when it came out, but it got better over the years. If you want to use it as a traditional KDE-style DE, you’re going to fight it and have a bad time. If you use it as intended, and that works for you, it’s good.
Kde is not traditional. It looks like disgusting microshit garbage. Same as cinnamon.
I don’t know why people would want to sue desktop environments that like that like garbage product made by billy gats
I like systemd
OOL: what’s the beef with systemd?
it does too many things, thus going against the unix philosopy of “do one thing and do it well”
See also: the Linux Kernel
Systemd does one thing, it manages services, and does so reliably, without messing around with spagettified shell scripts, with a fuckload of options, and all of that easily is configurable by dropping in files without editing stuff that arrived from the package manager. Seems pretti “do one (complex) thing and do it well”
If you add other things built around it, it can do more. For example, if you install systemd-nspawn it can start and stop containers like it starts and stops services.
Other things that you think of as systemd are entirely separate things (like systemd-networkd) that are just built around systemd. You don’t have to use them if you don’t like.
On the other hand, you know what does not follow the Unix philosophy? The Xserver, which manages screens, graphic acceleration, input devices, printers, remoting, etc. And it doesn’t even do it well
There is no such philosophy and it was never practiced.
It’s definitely a thing.
I don’t disagree that term itself exists of course. But it was and is bullshit that those philosophers themselves never actually followed.
It’s impressive how much hatred linux gets, by people who generally try to say it’s insignificant and unnoticeable.
But eh, better them say that it’s going to die, than with Windows where everyone agreed to say that it was dead after 7 and stopped having any expectations.
It’s even more impressive how much hate Linux gets from people that love it
We call that “Star Wars Syndrome.”
