Does Linux Lack a Killer App?

[HardOCP News]

I don't know that Linux "lacks a killer app" but I will say it is a mystery that, after all these years, a free operating system can't gain more ground on one that costs hundreds of dollars.

What Linux needs most is games, said Hyperlogos blogger Martin Espinoza. However, "if you were trying to narrow it down to one app, it would probably still be Photoshop. For all the talk of how great GIMP has become, usability is still an abject nightmare, and in spite of the OSS community's self-back-patting regarding documentation, there is no documentation for GIMP which is not pathetic."

 

[k1pp3r]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

 

[TwiceOver]

It just needs solid versions of what it has. There's 400 apps for each and every thing because they are so open that if someone doesn't like the color of a box they'll fork it and do their own thing. There's no focus to make any one particular app in any given field to be GREAT. Everything hobbles along getting marginally better until all support is given up in favor of some other app. It's like this perpetual "Almost There" with every application.

It's hard to say this, but open is almost a bad thing.

Speaking strictly of "Desktop" environment. Love my servers.

 

[TwiceOver]

And Excel.

Forgot about that.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

Yup, this is more fundamental than anything the article really talks about aside from overall polish (which is also a problem, but not nearly as huge of one as in the past). GIMP is a giant wreck of awful and lacking games aren't gonna matter as much to everyone as an installer/uninstaller.

 

[nusse]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

It's easy to install and uninstall things in Linux too. If my nearly blind 70 year old mother can do it, anyone can.

 

[nusse]

And Excel.

Forgot about that.

Open/Libre office has you covered.

 

[Farkle]

"...The real issue is that on the desktop, Linux has generally lost out to OS X, while it is increasingly dominating the server market..." -- that made me laugh out loud.

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

What's wrong with Synaptic, and RPM (yum -- or now DFN, zypper/YaST2, etc)? They have great dependency resolution libraries and have decent front-ends depending on the distribution.

I personally only have three issues with Linux:

1. Development is all over the map, pulling in hundreds of directions at once with no set goal, just people contributing source code as they need it

2. Lack of firmware for a lot of hardware because ODM don't see dollar signs, forcing the community to reverse engineer things and make an inferior kernel driver

3. The now wide-spread adoption of systemd is great for the desktop user, absolutely horrible for people that manage servers -- SysV doesn't depend on anything other than inittab. now suddenly we have to rely on FreeDesktop's implementation and all of the peculiarities ? pass.

Linux isn't missing a killer app, what it is missing is a unified user experience that can translate across distributions without a learning curve.

 

[Ultima99]

Open/Libre office has you covered.

Yeah.... About that.....

 

[TwiceOver]

Yeah.... About that.....

Exactly. The people that "Need" Excel, NEED Excel. So basically business is out. I've tried them all OpenOffice Sheets, Libre Office Sheets, Google Sheets, Bed Sheets, none even come close.

 

[GaryJohnson]

What's wrong with Synaptic, and RPM (yum -- or now DFN, zypper/YaST2, etc)? They have great dependency resolution libraries and have decent front-ends depending on the distribution.

The package management tools themselves are not bad, but the repos are confusing labyrinths of esoterically named packages that don't follow any common sense method or even any sort of technical standard of naming and documentation.

 

[LurkerLito]

Killer app is only applicable to a exclusive app available no where else that everyone wants that can make lots of money for the creator of the app, and Linux will never get one of those. In essence it's a catch-22, Linux lacks a large enough Desktop user base for a Killer App to be made for it, but to get a large enough user base it needs someone to make a killer app.

What Linux is missing as a desktop replacement, is basically all (ok at least a majority of) Windows versions of programs being available at the same time on Linux. Till that happens Linux has zero chance of ever becoming a desktop replacement. I have used Linux on and off over the years, and functionally I find it better than windows, but significantly more unfriendly even if it has gotten better in recent times. Though that said, it doesn't matter, it cannot be a desktop replacement for me. All of my purchased software, my work software, all future software purchases, will all have windows version but almost all of them will not have a Linux version, and if it does have a linux version, it'll often be released at a much later time. That is essentially the biggest hurdle Linux has to get over, but it's also the same hurdle MacOS has to get over also. MacOS is essentially in the same boat as Linux as far as desktop replacements go. While they are in a better position than Linux, the same argument applies. Unless all third party titles are available at the same time on PC and Mac, Mac can never beat PCs on the desktop.

 

[c3141hf]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

Is this a joke?

 

[Disposed]

The package management tools themselves are not bad, but the repos are confusing labyrinths of esoterically named packages that don't follow any common sense method or even any sort of technical standard of naming and documentation.

You clearly have but actually used it have you? Fire up synaptic and actually use it.

 

[k1pp3r]

It's easy to install and uninstall things in Linux too. If my nearly blind 70 year old mother can do it, anyone can.

When you 70 year old mother can install and configure cacti on centos I will give in.

 

[Disposed]

Is this a joke?

No just typical Linux ignorance. The Windows uninstaller is god awful and leaves so much shit behind... It's so far behind things like synaptic that it's not even a comparison.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

Is this a joke?

I don't think it ought to be taken as a joke. If you're trying to install something outside of the little walled garden of programs like say outside the Software Manager for Mint, it can really quickly get kinda annoying and frustrating. Adobe Reader was easy to install, but I've run across some stuff that just is time consuming to mess with.

 

[fs123]

Linux can be a real pain when installing some stuff which should be simple. Java for example needs manual symbolic linking of a file after the main 'install' just to get it working in firefox, etc. Just trying to find the correct file to link to is another issue altogether. Windows just installs and your done.

Many drivers need compiling from source before they can be installed. Plenty of faffing around with missing libraries, etc. Any non technical user would be lost within minutes.

 

[drescherjm]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

I consider package management on Linux significantly better than on windows because you you use 1 application to download, install, uninstall and upgrade all of the software available for your distribution instead manually doing this and having each application have its own updater application that runs all the time checking for updates. Although I admit the windows store concept is an attempt to bring windows closer to the install experience linux has had for more than a decade.

 

[BreezeDM]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

If my computer crashed when I developed on Windows, I would want to kill myself. I would have to download all these little tools, go through installer for anything that isn't on the image preinstalled. It was a nightmare.

Now that I develop on Linux, all I have to do is keep a txt file with a few apt commands and I am good to go. Copy and paste, done.

I do not know how you can get any easier than

apt-get install firefox
apt-get remove firefox

 

[Dwango]

The main downfall of Linux in the public sphere is also one of the greatest strengths from a pure longevity standpoint and that is that no one owns it. There are hundreds of distros that require widely varying levels of expertise to properly install and configure and all of them have their own special desktop GUI flavor that you'll have to learn to use all over again whenever you decide to switch (going from one Linux distro to another is akin to moving from Windows to MacOS X or vice versa except that all your software will still run). That's what keeps Linux on the sidelines. It's not one "killer app" that everyone thinks they need. If that's all that it was Linux would've blown up huge years ago because it's got pretty much everything anyone really needs or wants at this point.

 

[ecktt]

It just needs solid versions of what it has. There's 400 apps for each and every thing because they are so open that if someone doesn't like the color of a box they'll fork it and do their own thing. There's no focus to make any one particular app in any given field to be GREAT. Everything hobbles along getting marginally better until all support is given up in favor of some other app. It's like this perpetual "Almost There" with every application.

It's hard to say this, but open is almost a bad thing.

Speaking strictly of "Desktop" environment. Love my servers.

You sir, hit the nail on the head.

Whoever wrote that article can't see the forest thru the trees.

 

[NeghVar]

I believe a potential candidate is Steam. If support grows for hardware and games, then I believe many gamers will move to linux.

 

[Drudenhaus]

I would say the one app its missing is a comprehensive installer and uninstaller program.

One thing Windows does well is make it easy to install and uninstall crap. . . . .except bitlocker

Really? This is my complaint about Windows not Linux. I hate having to reinstall Windows because I have to go to e^342 different places to download and install programs. After I do that, many of them do not have built in update functionality so I never end up updating them (who knows what old version of 7-zip I have installed on my gaming partition). Linux package managers resolve 99% of that for you. What is the "comprehensive" installer in Windows? Ninite and npackd are third party and still not nearly as comprehensive as Linux package managers.

Linux can be a real pain when installing some stuff which should be simple. Java for example needs manual symbolic linking of a file after the main 'install' just to get it working in firefox, etc. Just trying to find the correct file to link to is another issue altogether. Windows just installs and your done.

Many drivers need compiling from source before they can be installed. Plenty of faffing around with missing libraries, etc. Any non technical user would be lost within minutes.

These issues are largely dependant upon the distro you use. I have never had to do any symlinking to get java working in Gentoo, but I've heard lots of complaining from coworkers running Ubuntu when they need to use java (I always figure they're just doing it wrong, haha). I do find this amusing since Gentoo is all about manual control whereas Ubuntu tries to do it al lfor user automatically... Most drivers are available in the kernel. Most drivers that are not included in the kernel are binary blobs such as the NVidia and AMD video drivers or part of another driver stack like the xorg driver stack (e.g. see below) in which case the installer should take care of that for you.

sean@sean-laptop ~ $ eix xf86-video-intel
[I] x11-drivers/xf86-video-intel
     Available versions:  ~*2.9.1 2.19.0 2.20.13 2.21.15 ~2.99.903 ~2.99.905-r1 ~2.99.906 ~2.99.907-r1 ~2.99.909 ~2.99.910 ~2.99.911-r1 ~2.99.912 {debug dri glamor (+)sna +udev uxa xvmc}
     Installed versions:  2.21.15(10:11:03 AM 06/10/2014)(dri sna udev uxa -glamor -xvmc)
     Homepage:            http://xorg.freedesktop.org/
     Description:         X.Org driver for Intel cards

The most common exception to this is if you're using an old kernel that doesn't support some new piece of hardware (e.g. installing Ubuntu 10.04 on a system using an Adaptec 8405). You would then need to compile the latest aacraid driver to use the Adaptec card (or install a precompiled driver if one is available). The problem then is the use of an old kernel and not necessarily anything to do with Linux itself.

tl;dr: These are distribution problems, not really Linux problems. YMMV (greatly) depending on the distro you use.

 

[dandragonrage]

What an idiot. The problem with Linux is not apps; it's accessibility and the fact that installing stuff, especially drivers, is way too complex for most users.

Sure, Photoshop beats GIMP, but a VERY small percentage of computer users have any interest in either program.

 

[dergreg]

There are two problem that will continue to confound the widespread adoption of Linux.

The first of which is simplicity. It needs to 'just work' and have an interface that is not only attractive, but also usable. It needs to have everything needed to be shoved in the user's face and ready to go. My mom/dad/uncle needs to be able to turn on the computer, poke a button that looks like it might be the internet(who knows if they'll even read the text) and away they go.

Point one even bleeds slightly into point two, which is marketing. Linux's complexity and open source nature has led to an over-abundance of same-task applications that are irrelevant to the average user. They want to know what will work and they want to know by having marketed it to them. Whether that's a pretty icon, a nice website, or a decent-ish review: it doesn't matter. But it needs to be centralized and easily searchable.

For Linux to move into living rooms and laptops around the world, it needs to be available and accessible to the lowest common denominator as well as the advanced user. ChromeOS *almost* has it right. Make it big, pretty, and give people fancy icons for the software they think they want.

The average person will never want to understand anything about software repos or kernel updates. They want to turn on and tune out. If they want to add hardware they want to plug it in to their USB port, drop in a CD, and call it a day. If they want a new application they want a pretty icon, a four and a half star review, and an install button. If they want to get online, they want to push the button that looks the most like Internet Explorer.

 

[heatlesssun]

The problem with desktop Linux is the same problem that Microsoft has with it's mobile OSes, small market share and thus small ecosystems. x86 Windows has an incredible array of 3rd party hardware and software support and it's just tough to get traction when desktop Windows is 90% of that market and has been around that number for decades now.

And desktop Linux and Windows both have a common foe now. Mobile. And no, Android isn't at all the same thing as desktop Linux, especially when Android apps can't run natively on desktop Linux. However, doing that might be a way to for desktop Linux to gain some traction.

 

[Ur_Mom]

No, it's got plenty of killer apps. Finding them and getting them is a different story.

There are a dozen different programs that can do X. Which one is best? Which one can I just download and install without compiling or having to add a repository? The average user wants to search Google, find a popular one, click and install. That's what makes Windows so easy.

Linux is extremely powerful, but it's so huge. There are people creating so much for it. Hell, there are dozens and dozens of window managers. Even hundreds (thousands?) of different distros. And some apps work on Debian, but not on Red Hat (without recompiling or something).

That's where I see the difference. Linux is awesome, and it can be simple. But, when I have so many different options, I can't ask my friend for advice. They have no idea what Linux is. I would have to do my own research. With Windows, when you need Word, you go buy Word. There are alternatives, but the majority of people don't know that. With Linux, the 'big name' program isn't really advertised.

 

[gathagan]

I think that a number of the issues mentioned in these comments have more to do with perception than what actually occurs.

Note that I'm only referring to the OS itself, not any of the program-related issues.

For the average user (very important part of my point), there is the perception that the installation/uninstallation process in Windows is better; you just keep clicking on through the process and it's done.

What that ignores is how much detritus is left behind in the registry, as well as the files/folders that are not removed.
It also ignores how many times you have to click on "Next", :"OK", "Yes", etc.., as well as any UAC warnings that may pop up.

On the other side, apt-get install firefox and apt-get remove firefox are very simple, but they require several things:
1) Opening a terminal window and typing
2) The knowledge of what commands to type

Both are simple to do, and take fewer discrete steps to accomplish, but again, there's the perception that a half-dozen to ten mouse clicks take less effort than opening a terminal session and racking your brain or scouring the intrawebs for the correct syntax.

Along with that is the lack of uniformity across the various distros.
The apt-get commands are Debian/Ubuntu specific, whereas RPM commands are need for Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS/SUSE distros, which goes back to the point others have made about the lack of uniformity across the entire Linux spectrum.

The package dependency stuff has improved, but again, the lack of uniformity results in a perception that it's more difficult to deal with than in Windows.

Within the context of choosing a particular flavor of Linux and sticking with it, the learning curve for Linux isn't any worse than Windows.

 

[Drudenhaus]

I think that a number of the issues mentioned in these comments have more to do with perception than what actually occurs.

Note that I'm only referring to the OS itself, not any of the program-related issues.

For the average user (very important part of my point), there is the perception that the installation/uninstallation process in Windows is better; you just keep clicking on through the process and it's done.

What that ignores is how much detritus is left behind in the registry, as well as the files/folders that are not removed.
It also ignores how many times you have to click on "Next", :"OK", "Yes", etc.., as well as any UAC warnings that may pop up.

On the other side, apt-get install firefox and apt-get remove firefox are very simple, but they require several things:
1) Opening a terminal window and typing
2) The knowledge of what commands to type

Both are simple to do, and take fewer discrete steps to accomplish, but again, there's the perception that a half-dozen to ten mouse clicks take less effort than opening a terminal session and racking your brain or scouring the intrawebs for the correct syntax.

Along with that is the lack of uniformity across the various distros.
The apt-get commands are Debian/Ubuntu specific, whereas RPM commands are need for Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS/SUSE distros, which goes back to the point others have made about the lack of uniformity across the entire Linux spectrum.

The package dependency stuff has improved, but again, the lack of uniformity results in a perception that it's more difficult to deal with than in Windows.

Within the context of choosing a particular flavor of Linux and sticking with it, the learning curve for Linux isn't any worse than Windows.

Doesn't Ubuntu have a GUI frontend for aptitude (software-center)? Pretty sure many distros do, in fact. Is Ubuntu's software center harder to use than going on the web, finding the program, downloading it, installing it, and then removing the installer?

 

[ShadowVlican]

Here's a major barrier for widespread Linux adoption:

When i buy computer hardware (like printers, USB DACs, colorimeters, ethernet cards, RAID expansions, etc) I don't have to check whether they are compatible with Windows, because it's expected they are. And they are.

With Linux? not so much.

I don't blame Linux devs for this though. The fault lies with manufacturers and consumers. There's no point devoting resources to create drivers for an OS that the minority use. I see the same problem with iOS vs. Android... there are so many products for iOS/iPhone vs. Android devices.

Majority wins.

 

[cyclone3d]

If my computer crashed when I developed on Windows, I would want to kill myself. I would have to download all these little tools, go through installer for anything that isn't on the image preinstalled. It was a nightmare.

Now that I develop on Linux, all I have to do is keep a txt file with a few apt commands and I am good to go. Copy and paste, done.

I do not know how you can get any easier than

apt-get install firefox
apt-get remove firefox

Developement on Linux makes me want to punch my monitor.

To top it off.. the disconnect between programming the same simple thing between Windows and Linux is huge.

Having to completely rewrite functions and even super basic things when porting is so stupidly insane.

I develope for Windows, and when I was cross developing stuff, it was a huge pain to get both versions working the same because certain things are completly missing in Linux.

And don't get me started on timing functions.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

It might be more that perception. If someone is unfamiliar with something, then it really is more difficult to understand and use than the thing they're comfortable with already.

Also, Windows programs really do install pretty cleanly these days. There might be a couple registry entries that reference nothing and really don't hurt anything either or a folder someplace that can just be deleted, but that's about it. It's not a big deal at all and it's easy (remember that perception thingey?) to just type in regedit on the run line and then search and delete the keys related to a program if you're really worried about what's in the registry.

Also, apt-get xxxx doesn't work if you're trying to load something that isn't out there already. I've had to install junk in Mint outside of the Software Manager by downloading binaries and running installs. Even with apt-get, you do need to know the package name which isn't always apparent.

I love Linux and I'm really happy to have switched mostly over to it at home to get ahead of the crappy stuff Microsoft is doing with their current and upcoming OS releases (like the whole linking my hotmail account to my OS login and moving to a subscription model for Office or making a UI that's missing a lot of context clues) but I think we also should be more fair. The MS uninstall process in the last 7 years is effective and doesn't really leave a lot of junk files and corrupted registry keys.

 

[dergreg]

For the average user

It doesn't matter what gets left behind. Out of sight, out of mind. If it ends up causing problems they'll blame whatever software they were trying to use at the time. Not the software they uninstalled 6 months ago.

They don't know what to look for, let alone where to look when they need help.

The average user is willfully ignorant and has no intention of spending time learning about something they have never needed to know before. It cuts into Real Housewives or Hardcore Pawn time.

 

[Soopy]

If my computer crashed when I developed on Windows, I would want to kill myself. I would have to download all these little tools, go through installer for anything that isn't on the image preinstalled. It was a nightmare.

Now that I develop on Linux, all I have to do is keep a txt file with a few apt commands and I am good to go. Copy and paste, done.

I do not know how you can get any easier than

apt-get install firefox
apt-get remove firefox

ninite.com is pretty useful for windows users.

 

[DrezKill]

I consider package management on Linux significantly better than on windows because you you use 1 application to download, install, uninstall and upgrade all of the software available for your distribution instead manually doing this and having each application have its own updater application that runs all the time checking for updates. Although I admit the windows store concept is an attempt to bring windows closer to the install experience linux has had for more than a decade.

I'm a big fan of Arch Linux's pacman myself.

 

[heatlesssun]

No, it's got plenty of killer apps. Finding them and getting them is a different story.

There are a dozen different programs that can do X. Which one is best? Which one can I just download and install without compiling or having to add a repository? The average user wants to search Google, find a popular one, click and install. That's what makes Windows so easy.

Name the killer apps that only run on Linux. Now name the killer apps that only run on Windows.

 

[Kranium]

When I see an article titled "A Beginner's Guide to the Linux Command Line" on the [H]ard front page I just think "nope". I'm a power user just as much as most people around here, but I don't have the patience to deal with Linux....or how I perceive Linux. That's probably the core of the issue, Linux has a terrible image problem. I hear Linux, I think "too much work".

 

[drescherjm]

Linux has a terrible image problem. I hear Linux, I think "too much work".

Linux is no more work (actually quite a bit less work) than windows once you understand what you are doing.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

Name the killer apps that only run on Linux. Now name the killer apps that only run on Windows.

It'd be nice if you wouldn't try to turn this into another "heatlesssun compliments and argues in favor of Windows" thread, thanks. I don't wanna have to make you feel silly again in front of all these other forum members.