Isn't Chrome OS "the Linux Desktop" for most non-developer people?
90% of the people I know don't need any software that isn't either delivered via the Web, or limited for purely business reasons to an 'APP™' for mobile phones only.
The remainder of the possible uses of a "computer" are mainly video editing and non-casual gaming.
So if Windows and macOS continue to drag their reputations through the mud, Chrome OS, the Linux Desktop, is the most likely beneficiary.
> The remainder of the possible uses of a "computer" are mainly video editing and non-casual gaming.
You're overlooking a whole universe of business users. With the proliferation of tablets, smart TVs and phones, I'll bet many of those users ONLY user a computer at work. The vast majority of (mature) small-to-medium sized businesses lack the technical agility, expertise, time, money and/or initiative to switch from their existing legacy system of Windows file shares, outlook calendars, etc. and likely don't see a need to try. I'll bet most of those companies haven't even had a serious technical strategy conversation about the new ai features/changes in windows beyond "Phyllis in accounting discovered if you change setting X, then the stupid copilot thing won't get in the way when you're trying to run the TPS report macro." Even if they can do whatever they need to do in a browser, getting everybody in the company on board with the change and then figuring out what parts of their business break by doing so isn't something they generally feel compelled to investigate.
I don't work in the software business anymore-- it's easy to forget that technical expertise isn't built-in to your workforce in the overwhelming majority of businesses, and most of them are way too ingrained in their procedures to jump ship to the latest SaaS solution that would do it 100x better once they figured it out.
I don't think I disagree with you at all. Older businesses that have a significant investment in Windows-based, non-web-based applications will keep on keeping on, and it would take a lot of degradation of the platform to convince them to "modernize" (scare quotes because I don't actually think shiny web-based everything is automatically better than native Windows apps built for a certain niche purpose).
That said, it's still a threat to Microsoft that no company founded today or in the last 5 years will have such a tight coupling to Windows on the Desktop, not even if the founding IT person is a big fan of Windows and deploys a Windows laptop to every desk. They may use Microsoft platforms, but things like Outlook, SharePoint and the tools a new company would subscribe to are perfectly usable on the Web for a large group of non-software-developer users. If one optimistically predicts that Apple sorts their stuff out, the Mac provides a non-web alternative to worry about too (as long as you don't need Excel to perform worth a damn!)
Note: I deliberately drew a distinction with "on the Desktop" as I feel like things like Outlook, SharePoint, and especially Azure and what used to be called Active Directory, those things are still both popular and very sticky (hard to "just" migrate off of) even with brand new businesses. I suppose this is how Microsoft has hedged, since they could lose the desktop OS market and still do all right if they can keep businesses using those products. A Microsoft without Desktop Windows, looks to me kind of like Oracle.
::sigh:: Windows is an AI slop hellhole, and MacOS is way more interested in being flashy than being good. It should be Linux's time to shine as a general-audience desktop OS... but the usability just isn't there.
As everyone points out when talking about Linux usability, it's fine for your grampa who just uses the email client and browser, but those users are switching to tablets, en masse, anyway. It's obviously fine for technically savvy users who are willing to deal with the periodic breakage or other hassle.
Importantly, It's just a bad experience for users who require hardware, software or something else that tablets don't facilitate, but aren't interested in looking through stack overflow posts and reddit threads to see why the 6 year old tutorial for getting their video editing software to work doesn't apply to the distro they just installed because they couldn't figure out how to install their video card drivers on the other distro. And why does that program they used to use to control their firewall not change anything anymore (which to them just looks like the firewall doesn't work, so they can never research their way out of the problem?) And how do I [insert the bazillion other problems that are non-issues for people with the background knowledge, but for everyone else, frustrating, time-wasting brick walls that probably cost them more in lost billable time than multiple copies of Windows 11 Pro.]
I've been using Linux since the 90s but I still don't use it for a lot of my media work. It's just too much of a PITA when I just need to satisfy my use case, which has nothing to do with the OS.
Even the commercial distros like RHEL are just, comparatively... janky. I really wish it was easier to integrate more interface design expertise into FOSS development. The workflows are just super different. This is why commercial products have product managers that can objectively balance and coordinate the efforts between design and development. I think we've gotten to a point where more of the FOSS crowd sees the benefit of competent expert UI designers, but making that practically useful is a tough nut to crack.
At this point I think Linux's market share in desktop market will keep rising. But mostly due to Windows and MacOS users leaving desktop completely and becoming mobile-only in their private time.
I also believe that's the future both Microsoft and Apple bet on. Otherwise they wouldn't have let their (once) flagship products became what they are now.
Isn't Chrome OS "the Linux Desktop" for most non-developer people?
90% of the people I know don't need any software that isn't either delivered via the Web, or limited for purely business reasons to an 'APP™' for mobile phones only.
The remainder of the possible uses of a "computer" are mainly video editing and non-casual gaming.
So if Windows and macOS continue to drag their reputations through the mud, Chrome OS, the Linux Desktop, is the most likely beneficiary.
> The remainder of the possible uses of a "computer" are mainly video editing and non-casual gaming.
You're overlooking a whole universe of business users. With the proliferation of tablets, smart TVs and phones, I'll bet many of those users ONLY user a computer at work. The vast majority of (mature) small-to-medium sized businesses lack the technical agility, expertise, time, money and/or initiative to switch from their existing legacy system of Windows file shares, outlook calendars, etc. and likely don't see a need to try. I'll bet most of those companies haven't even had a serious technical strategy conversation about the new ai features/changes in windows beyond "Phyllis in accounting discovered if you change setting X, then the stupid copilot thing won't get in the way when you're trying to run the TPS report macro." Even if they can do whatever they need to do in a browser, getting everybody in the company on board with the change and then figuring out what parts of their business break by doing so isn't something they generally feel compelled to investigate.
I don't work in the software business anymore-- it's easy to forget that technical expertise isn't built-in to your workforce in the overwhelming majority of businesses, and most of them are way too ingrained in their procedures to jump ship to the latest SaaS solution that would do it 100x better once they figured it out.
I don't think I disagree with you at all. Older businesses that have a significant investment in Windows-based, non-web-based applications will keep on keeping on, and it would take a lot of degradation of the platform to convince them to "modernize" (scare quotes because I don't actually think shiny web-based everything is automatically better than native Windows apps built for a certain niche purpose).
That said, it's still a threat to Microsoft that no company founded today or in the last 5 years will have such a tight coupling to Windows on the Desktop, not even if the founding IT person is a big fan of Windows and deploys a Windows laptop to every desk. They may use Microsoft platforms, but things like Outlook, SharePoint and the tools a new company would subscribe to are perfectly usable on the Web for a large group of non-software-developer users. If one optimistically predicts that Apple sorts their stuff out, the Mac provides a non-web alternative to worry about too (as long as you don't need Excel to perform worth a damn!)
Note: I deliberately drew a distinction with "on the Desktop" as I feel like things like Outlook, SharePoint, and especially Azure and what used to be called Active Directory, those things are still both popular and very sticky (hard to "just" migrate off of) even with brand new businesses. I suppose this is how Microsoft has hedged, since they could lose the desktop OS market and still do all right if they can keep businesses using those products. A Microsoft without Desktop Windows, looks to me kind of like Oracle.
Well, with the help of Microsoft and Apple, who knows? This might just be the years of the Linux desktop!
Valve has made Linux gaming a thing. So, even normies are trying it…
I support your notion but my take is it will be a "slowly and then suddenly" thing.
Do you declare "Year of the Linux Desktop" when market share is more than 50% or when the rate of conversion is 2%/month due to some market mechanism?
Hey wait...there are...er...dozens of us!
::sigh:: Windows is an AI slop hellhole, and MacOS is way more interested in being flashy than being good. It should be Linux's time to shine as a general-audience desktop OS... but the usability just isn't there.
As everyone points out when talking about Linux usability, it's fine for your grampa who just uses the email client and browser, but those users are switching to tablets, en masse, anyway. It's obviously fine for technically savvy users who are willing to deal with the periodic breakage or other hassle.
Importantly, It's just a bad experience for users who require hardware, software or something else that tablets don't facilitate, but aren't interested in looking through stack overflow posts and reddit threads to see why the 6 year old tutorial for getting their video editing software to work doesn't apply to the distro they just installed because they couldn't figure out how to install their video card drivers on the other distro. And why does that program they used to use to control their firewall not change anything anymore (which to them just looks like the firewall doesn't work, so they can never research their way out of the problem?) And how do I [insert the bazillion other problems that are non-issues for people with the background knowledge, but for everyone else, frustrating, time-wasting brick walls that probably cost them more in lost billable time than multiple copies of Windows 11 Pro.]
I've been using Linux since the 90s but I still don't use it for a lot of my media work. It's just too much of a PITA when I just need to satisfy my use case, which has nothing to do with the OS.
Even the commercial distros like RHEL are just, comparatively... janky. I really wish it was easier to integrate more interface design expertise into FOSS development. The workflows are just super different. This is why commercial products have product managers that can objectively balance and coordinate the efforts between design and development. I think we've gotten to a point where more of the FOSS crowd sees the benefit of competent expert UI designers, but making that practically useful is a tough nut to crack.
At this point I think Linux's market share in desktop market will keep rising. But mostly due to Windows and MacOS users leaving desktop completely and becoming mobile-only in their private time.
I also believe that's the future both Microsoft and Apple bet on. Otherwise they wouldn't have let their (once) flagship products became what they are now.