I'm really interested in making GNU/Linux to be a general desktop OS.

And I've thought about where we're lagging.
So, the small private research results are coming below.

1. We need 'only Linux' triple-A Game.

This means cross-distro, cross-user-type, cross-user-land collaboration.

First, we need to drag more general users to Linux. And the most effective way seems to be a Triple-A game. And that means we should collaborate for that game. Don't expect just one company appears to make that, and do that for us. We can collaborate to make that and also develop on Open-Source. Not only making the Triple-A game but also we need help from twitch and youtube side support(Not Linux streamers, but major game streamers). They should play that game and drag more users to Linux World.

Recently, Korean company launched 4-years developed MMORPG named 'LostArk'. And with the failure of Diablo-M, western gamers showed interest in this Korean game, and even live-streamed learning Korean to play this game. This phenomenon struck me. If there's good enough game, but cannot play in their current environment, game-enthusiasts tend to learn what they should learn to play that game. Fortunately, recent major distros are not that hard to install and use. Plus, considering that game-enthusiasts also tend to enjoy configurations, our DEs and even WMs are perfectly fulfill their needs.

We do not suck at the system, BUT we suck at dragging them to here. I mean, in the way of Marketing. We analyzed it's causing from Pre-installed OS, and that's true also, but can't change it right away. I'm saying that we have other ways to drag more people to Linux.

2. We need more Regional support.

The language problem is bigger than I thought. Majority of Linux users are comforted with English, but the globe needs more language support. And now we have distro-specific forums or not even have them. We need a Linux layer of global support. Not from bottom-to-top, but top-to-bottom. I want the Linux foundation or GNU spread regional foundations to support users from there. Also, distros should have more interest in foreign languages. LEAF(Linux East Asia Foundation/Forum) and LEUF(EU), LAF(Afreeca), LSAF(South America) is good to start.

Smaller population countries tend to have less or no gatherings at all. We need to fix that, but that small population cannot self-make those gatherings. We need to support them to stand up. And if enough numbers are fulfilled, they can walk alone from that point. I think we should nurture them to first stand up.


3. Final thoughts.

I wonder, are we really want to make GNU/Linux a major OS? I think some of us act like hipsters that they use some OS which is not popular between general people.

We have a lot of choices, and from that point, we have a lot of channels to discuss some general Linux things. That's where this lagging comes from. We should have a centralized channel ALSO, to discuss general things. All distros can have a link to that channel so they can move some topics to.

This was just A User's thought.
Thanks for reading my Humble Opinion, and Please, share your thoughts about these.

The only time Linux will becoem a general usage OS (that is, an OS used amongst the general population) is when persons can go a store that sells computers to the general population--in the US, think, for example, Target or Best Buy--and easily buy a computer with some flavor of Linux already installed on it.

Most computer users have never and will never install an operating system. They don't know how easy it is and fear doing it. However adept they may be at using individual applications, for most persons a computer is still a magic box that does magick things magickally.

4 members found this post helpful.

I agree with you. But I mean there's certain steps to finally being there. They don't just suddenly make their product ship with Linux. They should have demand for it. We can't just sit and wait for them. We definitely make users want Linux at some point. And I think a decent game will be one way.

Every year since the early 2000s was the year Linux would break through to become a mainstream desktop OS. For some reason these predictions have always proved wrong.

You think the main obstacle is the lack of games? Really? I spend all my work day in front of a screen. I occasionally play Sudoku on my ipad and my Android phone (which, as you know, is based on a Linux kernel). I use Windows because I need the full feature set of Powerpoint and Camtasia, and I don't want to spend extra money on a Mac.

I also have a Fedora PC that I mainly use as a virtual machine host, and after updating it to Fedora 28 from 26, I spent an entire day trying to fix the mess caused by NetworkManager. Just saying that "open-source" or "free/libre software" is not a guarantee for success.

3 members found this post helpful.

I understand. And I just think it could be another way. Not only that. Thanks for your idea.

Linux has been my only system, apart from occasionally running (Open)BSD, so why aren't there more people like us?!

It's because of having so much choice! Newbies just don't know where to start, & if they ask for advise, we all tell them that our distro is the best.

Manufacturers need to get together & decide on just one version of Linux to install on their machines, that should be more encouraging for Joe Public to buy, shop staff should also then be knowledgeable about that distro, so that they can advise the general public on accessories, etc.

Will it happen? I doubt it! But that is why Windows is on nearly ever computer you see for sale!

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't think we need just one distro. Many people come to this site and ask what distro to run (or worse yet, say "I just downloaded Kali...") We need to point them to sites like this:

https://distrochooser.de/en

1 members found this post helpful.

I guess you have a certain technical insight. Most people don’t. They don’t want to install the OS, let alone configure it. They want to chat, email, use Facebook, edit videos, create documents and share photos.

What is a manufacturer’s incentive to bundle a Linux or BSD distro with their PC? What is the incentive for Windows? It’s an honest question, I don’t know the answer. Perhaps it’s the entire ecosystem including (lack of) drivers. Fact is, you need a microscope to find PCs bundled with anything but Windows or MacOS.

1 members found this post helpful.

The incentive is that in two years time there will be a new version of Windows that won't run on that machine. So all the users will have to buy new computers.

For years now it has been the case that everyone who wants a computer already has one. Those who don't have a computer by now are a lost cause. So the OEMs need to sell their computers to people who already have computers if they are to stay in business.

A computer with Linux on it will last until the user himself decides that it is too slow and that he needs a more powerful one. He may keep the same machine for several years and that's a bad lookout for the computer trade. But as long as they go on supplying computers with Windows on them, they have a captive market.

3 members found this post helpful.

OP, I really applaud your tenacity in wanting to make this happen. Your idea of pulling people in via a game is an interesting one. People would have to be convinced that this game is so good, so stupendous and so unlike anything else before that they just had to play it. But, they have to change operating system. That seems like something of a flaw to me rather than a benefit.

Linus Torvalds has already addressed the point on why Linux is not successful on the desktop. But, I feel, there is not one reason, but an overarching complexity of reasons at the basis of which is Microsoft's understanding of human nature and their resultant control of it.

At the heart of this are negative, unproductive but harnessable human qualities: lethargy, ignorance and indifference. Most people [including many on these forums] see an OS as nothing more than an application launcher. The majority of people do not know what an OS is, neither are they interested. And Microsoft know this. Their entire business model is based on keeping the average user in the dark and making them feel comfortable with it, essentially turning them into agoraphobic prisoners.

You have to understand the extend to which people don't care about changing their OS. These are the same kinds of people who know that their data is logged and sent to Microsoft, the same kinds of people who know that their phone camera is accessed at random, the same kinds of people who will pay to have a device in their home that listens to everything they do and then sends that information to a major corporation who then sells it on. But they do it anyway because of the convenience it provides. And they will stay with Windows 10 even if it annoys the hell out of them because of its general ease-of-use, familiarity and compatibility. People tend to feel more comfortable when there is a major corporation behind something - they feel more looked after, more stable - it is a major psychological benefit.

Computer uses act in communities. Linux users are still seen as weird and geeky. Most people use Windows, their friends use Windows, it's been going on for generations. It's safe and comfortable. There are downsides to Windows but users are used to them and put up with them. They are happier enduring those issues than making the mental leap to change the entire edifice their worklife runs on. It's like staying in an abusive relationship because you're scared that the next will be even worse. It's about the unknown. Better the devil you know.

In order to change things, there would have to be a widespread revolution in mindset and attitude in the wider user community: one that cares about ethics, control, one that isn't afraid to experiment, one that isn't daunted by trying new things. There would have to be an internal sea-change within each psyche.

You are on this forum because you are enthusiastic about computers. Unfortunately, most users are not.

Any OS that goes mainstream also becomes a target-rich environment for bad guys. Do we really want that for the linux community?

That said, I think most of the world's serious computing -- scientific and financial -- is mostly done on linux-based computing farms or mainframes. Those machines are only of interest to the worst of the bad guys, i.e., the ones employed by corrupt governments (but, of course, "corrupt" is redundant here). These guys dream of crashing power grids, launching missiles, collapsing economies, etc. In this computing sector, which is small by machine count (10**6 rather than 10**9 machines), linux is already mainstream. The danger is that their break-in procedures will get into the wild, which would surely happen if linux were widely used by the general population.

I doubt that we really want linux to become "Linux".

Porting everything from Windows and Mac to Linux will help get it ahead.

for 2 decades, the "year of Linux" or "the year of the Linux desktop" has been called in or predicted every year.
i recently saw a nice post that listed 10 articles throughout those last 2 decades.
sobering, informative.

in other words: i don't give a wet cough about "we" should this and that.
Linux is fine.
It's happening all the time.
But I don't want it to become the nr. 1 OS. why, for heaven's sake? i see no increase in quality.
linux works for me because it is different and more "niche". another million users can only destroy that.

2 members found this post helpful.

That's never going to happen. I don't think it's about "porting everything" from one system to another - if it were that simple; I'd think in that case Linux would already be at the top of the desktop market. There's also very good software available for Linux already - some of which already has been "ported" to other systems, including Windows.

This is the reason:

Note what I've highlighted and underlined in bold.

1 members found this post helpful.

Hi,

By increasing the games available will likely move some gamer to Linux. But most will stay where the crowds are not implement something totaling alien to what they are accustomed too.

Some business models will possibly move to Linux but they too depend on communicating with clients and vendors who will likely remain with what they are used too using.

I have seen many posts in my time here at LQ about theories for Year of Linux or Year of the Linux Desktop. I just continue to use it since it works for me. No need to try to drive people into something they may not wish my meddling about. I have people ask me what I am using and I tell them Slackware. Slackware, what's that? Then I proceed to tell them it's Linux. What's that? I try to explain it to them as they look glassy eyed at me and I realize it's a waste of time.

I do keep a LiveDVD to show someone what can be done with Linux on their equipment. Sure, sometimes their hardware may require a tweak or two but I tell them they could never work at this level with the current OS. Usually Microsoft and also include the issues they experience with malware, virus and whatever and that I do not have those experiences when using Linux.

Go ahead and evangelize Linux usage but let me warn you it will be a up hill battle. Loads of glassy eyes and skepticism along with lingering doubts.
Hope this helps.
Have fun & enjoy!

1 members found this post helpful.