New Linux GUIs Are Missing The Point 2

Posted by JD 04/07/2011 at 04:00

With the release of Gnome 3 and pending next version of Ubuntu running Unity, there are many things changing in the Linux GUI world.

Migration, Not Revolution

I’m not against change, but for change to be accepted, it should be phased in, slowly, allowing users to try out new ideas, gain excitement, but return to their old methods if they like. This is how new ideas are tried, gain backers, or fail gracefully. Revolution can alienate your current user base. Fortunately, with FLOSS we can always fork the older GUI if we like.

3D Graphics Required?

One thing that jumped out at me with the new GUIs is the requirement for 3D accelerated graphic capabilities. Certainly, modern PCs will have this ability, but Linux is used by older machines all the time. This is a major feature for Linux use. I own a Via C7 CPU with built-in graphics which does not support 3D acceleration, but does support older OpenGL capabilities. This machine will always fall back to the lesser graphics. There are other similar systems around here with no 3D graphics abilities and I’ve installed Linux on Pentium 4 systems at homes of relatives. They are very happy.

I can appreciate the desire to take advantage of new GPU hardware and capabilities. It is sensible for new 3D capabilities to be added and available, but less sensible to force their use.

Virtualization

I run a single desktop Linux system directly on hardware. The other 15+ systems here are run inside virtual machines. My daily use Linux desktop runs inside a virtual machine. Why? I like the ability to have a completely portable OS and the ability to drop that desktop onto completely different physical machines without concern over the hardware compatibility.

More and more corporations are deploying 100% virtualized desktops as a way to save money, reduce deployment effort and reduce future upgrade costs.

That is my concern for the new GUIs – lack of virtualization support.

Remote Desktops

Another concern for me, is how well will remote GUI programs run when X/Windows isn’t included with built-in network GUI capabilities? I don’t know whether Gnome 3 or Unity will be impact the network ability of running GUI programs remotely. It is a real concern.

Final Judgment

What happens to people and companies like me who use older, cheaper hardware or run their desktops in virtual machines with these new GUI releases?
I guess that is the real question that only trying these new GUIs out will answer.

My final judgment about this path forward?

  1. I’m optimistic that is will bring more users, greater capabilities and fantastic software to the Linux platform.
  2. I’m concerned that Linux is following into the Microsoft hardware upgrade treadmill. This is a terrible thing, IMHO.
  3. I’m really worried that the GPU drivers for Linux are not up to this task. Stability has been an issue with proprietary graphics drivers. Demanding GUIs will cause a few issues that will be resolved one way or another.
    • Crash and burn
    • Crash and the graphics drivers will be fixed to deal with all the memory issues they currently display, at least on my systems.

I’ve tried Gnome3. It turned out badly.

Trackbacks

Use the following link to trackback from your own site:
https://blog.jdpfu.com/trackbacks?article_id=1057

  1. William 04/21/2011 at 01:31

    Just to be honest and frank, there are many GUI’s out there to chose from. Many of them support old hardware just fine. Xfce4 takes a semi light approach. If you want even lighter, use lxde. My point is that nobody is forcing people to upgrade to these new GUI. On the other hand, if Linux is to keep up with the technological world, it needs to innovate and grow with the world, including enhancing GUIs with all the things users expect from computers these days. Think of it this way, if you have an old computer running windows xp just fine, then you don’t really need windows 7. You also can’t expect an old machine to play Crysis 3. What you propose and worry about is having your cake and eating it too. Unfortunately, you are asking the dog without legs to run a mile, it just can’t do it unless it’s upgraded. The Linux world still writes programs that can be run on older machines and I don’t think that will change; however, to say people should stop progress for machines that can’t do the task is just absurd.

  2. Marco Centurion 07/05/2011 at 11:47

    I believe that you are right in certain aspects and not so right (not wrong, either) on others.
    I strongly believe that this trend linux GUIs have to be as cutting edge as possible and using all the power of modern GPU technologies is necessary to bring new people to the linux world. If we settle with the old and proven gnome 2.x, KDE 3.x DEs, people wont come to the “light side” as I like to call it. Eyecandy is fundamental in making people thin “Oh! what’s that? linux? I’ve never heard of that…I might give it a shot” (I have a system set up just to show off to those who haven’t tried linux, and all the eyecandy is what gets them), without it, to them, it’s just an old and ugly OS, akin of windows 95.
    On the other hand, I also strongly believe that all this “let’s require 3D-acceleration” fad is NOT going to be good for the main DEs (Gnome and KDE) just because they’ll lose old users who are accostumed to use them in older systems.
    I myself am using KDE for the time being as it does not (at least no signs popped up) 3D acceleration, whereas gnome3 wouldn’t even load properly. I like having, if not the lastest of the latest versions, at least a relatively new one, and as Gnome moves to gnome-shell and unity not going with my sensibilities, KDE is pretty much the only mainstream alternative I’ve got. XFCE is also a very nice environment and i have it as a backup for when (if) KDE crashes on me, but I’m postponing the switch for when I have a bit of time available.
    But as I said, Linux has a reputation (and a fanbase, me included, based on that reputation) of being able to run on older machines, and being quite fast, even on those old PIII systems, and throwing all of that away for some eyecandy is just not worth it.
    The solution seems to be to keep two different branches of the main GUIs, one for the newer machines and on for the older ones, but that doesn’t seem plausible, so we’ll see which one wins.
    On the meantime, I’m experimentating with haiku and freeBSD, just to have a fallback plan if all goes wrong ;)