Webreakstuff's blog on design, development and strategy. Click here to subscribe.

What linux needs: unification and effort

Fred Oliveira on October 18, 2005

Linux Usability I don’t like to preach to the choir - and trust me, I know the choir - but again and again I come back to thinking (and talking, like today at lunch with Gabe) about this topic and feel like I should post about it. No more holding back, the post is here.

In all the years - even with the highs and lows - I’ve been involved with the open-source and linux communities, which I love, I’ve always been frustrated with the endless discussion about linux on the desktop and the little to no real effort to actually do it properly. Since talking about it is again, just talking about it, I won’t do much of it. Instead, since I have a lot of smart people in my audience, I’ll point out the problem, some of the proposed solutions, and how you can help out too:

The problem

For linux to be widely accepted as a desktop-oriented operating system it needs a unification effort of some sort. Ever since the real competition between KDE and Gnome began some years ago, a lot of people argued that having multiple desktop solutions was an unsolvable problem - it is. Now the solution isn’t to merge the projects (like that would ever happen), but to find a way for both to interoperate as much as possible.

And Gnome and KDE aren’t the only projects out there. Many other desktop environments and window managers exist for the platform: each targetting a kind of user or environment. While different kinds of users have different ways to view their operating system, a unified behaviour would ultimately result in a consistent and joyful experience for everyone.

Some proposed solutions

Currently, there’s two approaches to fight the problem, one of them very recently announced:

  • Freedesktop, that has been around since 2000, proposes a software and standards layer on which development for open-source platforms should be based upon so consistency between windowing environments is maintained.
  • Tango, recently announced (post) at the Gnome boston summit, proposes a set of guidelines for user experience for the linux platform. This encompasses a base icon library by the awesome Jimmac, a style guide and a icon naming standard. It isn’t much yet, but it’s a start.

How you can help

This wouldn’t be a call to action without, well, a real call to action. If you feel the pain of the inconsistent experience on linux, there’s always something you can do to help - trust me, I plan to help too or I wouldn’t be writing about it.

The guys at Freedesktop have their mission statement up, that should guide you in what they do - if you’re a software developer, this is where you go. If you have the user experience and usability eye, Tango needs you, so drop by and help out.

This being said, get out there and help build a better free operating system!


Comments on this post

Jim

> For linux to be widely accepted as a desktop-oriented operating system…

There’s the fallacy. Linux is just a kernel. It powers set-top boxes, desktops, mobile phones - you’re telling me they should all work the same way?

Nobody complains when Mac OS X doesn’t work exactly like FreeBSD. The problem is that “Linux” has become a buzzword, so people expect things that buzzword is applied to to act in the same way. In reality, different Linux distributions are different operating systems in their own right, and it makes as much sense to complain that they should work the same way because they share code as it does to complain that Windows and FreeBSD should work the same way because they share code (they do, BTW).

To make a convincing point, you need to explain why different operating systems should be treated as if they are not different.

Fred

I’ve been using linux since slackware versions were still numbered after the kernel version (pre 1.0), and I never saw distributions as different operating systems. They’re different views on the same concept: different packages for the same ideal product. I’m not posting on linux because it’s a buzzword, don’t make that assumption.

Mac OSX is based on FreeBSD, but doesn’t share the graphical platform (aqua), just the base. Thus, it doesn’t make sense to complain about different behaviours because they’re different things from a user perspective.

You cannot make the same distinction between linux distributions on - to counter your platform point - for example, the x86 architecture. Distributions usually make the choice of supporting a set of applications, windowing environment and kernel configuration. However, they loosely abide to the same conditions.

That being said, it makes sense to have guidelines to help people use all the distributions, window managers and desktop environments without having to relearn everything or reinvent the wheel. If this isn’t convincing enough, I guess you haven’t been using linux that much - arguing that, say, fedora and ubuntu or slackware and gentoo are different operating systems is a big stretch.

Roland

>> For linux to be widely accepted as a desktop-oriented operating system…

>There’s the fallacy. Linux is just a kernel. It powers set-top boxes, desktops, mobile phones - you’re telling me they should all work the same way?

It’s clear that a mobile phone should not work (and can’t) as a server or a desktop system. But, as you’ve quoted it, Jim, Fred talks here about the Desktop.

In my opinion, it is important that the different applications under linux start to get similar experiences to the user (as in windows or on the mac) to gain acceptance. This is not limited to graphics/icons, as it may look in the tango project, but includes also behaviour and look of menus, (file) dialogs, order of buttons etc.

It is in my oppinion not even necessary (but of course desirable) that the different distribution have the same look, but a distribution should have for all its applications the same look.

Simon

Excuse me. But that’s what’s linux about. About choices, about use what you think what’s better. Not about using some project that pretend to make us use some kiddy guidelines. If you like KDE than Gnome, use KDE, and viceversa. And for the folks that doesn’t like KDE or Gnome, there’s a lot of choices, like xfce, fluxbox, etc.

As someone said, it is just differents points of view of the same concept.

Fred

Actually, it is the elitist attitude of some people that makes it so linux doesn’t evolve as a desktop OS. Usability isn’t about “kiddy guidelines” - in fact, many of the guys who are working on these “kiddy guidelines” are the same guys who made the window managers and desktop environments you mention in your comment: and I don’t assume you use a “kiddy operating system” or a “kiddy window manager”.

I did say different views over the same concept. I do also defend, though, that a unified look and feel, that accomodates all kinds of users (or at least more users than it does now), that will propel linux into more desktops - something the whole community should thrive for.

Different users have different notions of acomplishment when using an operating system. I spent years working exclusively on console, but love when a desktop environment is productive (thats why I have an apple powerbook). It’s not about supporting “kiddy guidelines” but about acomplishing things. Proper guidelines that software developers can use to make a better OS. For TTY guys, gnome guys, kde guys and even those who still believe enlightenment 17 will ever be released before duke nukem forever.

WeBreakStuff » Flock? Okay, but wait a second

[...] Unification plays, for me, a major role in evolution of a product (or group of products) - in fact, I posted about this when this week I talked about Linux desktop efforts. It follows that a branch of a browser that’s just getting the right momentum (Firefox had their 100th million download just a couple of days ago) may not be the best way to get people to actually use any of the two. [...]

leehord.com » Blog Archive » What linux needs: unification and effort

[...] read more | digg story [...]

Something to say?