I don't understand why people insist on this shoehorning either.
It's like some obscene tribal topos that refuses to die.
KDE 1.0 came out in 1998 - 23 years ago (O god I'm old).
The discussion of "Linux to replace windows desktop" is over two decades old.
In computer age this is something geological. It's like... well, Macintosh came out in 1984. Xerox Alto came 1973. If we go back 5 years we reach Englebart's Mother of All Demos in 1968 which I think can be considered the intellectual precursor of those.
So there is 5 years from a tech demo on high-end research platform to a (more or less) commoditized consumer offering - even though Xerox had no idea what to do with it. Steve Jobs visits Xerox 1979 and five years later they deliver Macintosh.
So, with engineering talent PLUS business drive they copy the idea, implement their own hardware and software stack and are instant hit (well, let's say for the sake of this discussion they are a hit).
In FIVE years.
Linux is trying to copy the software stack, of an existing platform, and has been "attempting" this for two decades.
This is not an engineering problem. This is not a community problem. It's a "lack of business interest problem".
Honestly, the Linux desktop is quite usable. I'm quite sure two decades are enough for the open source software stack to find some local optimum for the desktop offering.
But really, copying and supporting a continuously moving target needs real capital and real business drive to sustain the boring, mind numbing support work that is needed to actually sustain an industrial quality platform.
Linux is fantastic in lots of things.
I'm not sure reverse engineering Windows stack on Linux is very effective way of spending our civilizations engineering resources.
I appreciate masochistic Rude Goldbergish feats of engineering as much as the next geek, but I just don't see the value of individuals detached from the corporations that are implementing the master stack trying to reverse engineer everything on top of a third party platform.
Native Linux support? That would be nice. Native drivers and all? That would be nice.
If it works for someone that's very cool and satisfying - but I still think reverse engineering based gaming stacks for modern platforms that are alive and well are not perhaps the best way to spend engineering effort.
Games push an OS's limits. So a compatibility layer like Wine is more like trying to implement a browser that implements all of Chrome's API without forking it.
> I'm not sure reverse engineering Windows stack on Linux is very effective way of spending our civilizations engineering resources.
I don't think it is a question of a pool of resource that can be reallocated, however, as in a business.
The people who work on reverse engineering Windows presumably do so, because they are interested in doing so. They might not be interested in building something new.
The choice might therefore not be between doing this, and doing something new, but between doing this and not doing anything at all.
We don't collectively own engineers time, we are not under full blown socialism, yet and people are free to do what they want.
If individuals enjoy reverse engineering windows and making it work on Linux, that's great, actually I really need that. I wouldn't spend my time on it, but I'm sure I have equally suboptimal hobbies (from a "civilisation" point of view).
You don't get to spend someone else engineering effort.
Fully agreed. My intention was not to signal any entitled presumption of ownership of said resources - just that they are not maybe applied with maximum impact, which does not imply I presume to benefit from them anyway.
It's like some obscene tribal topos that refuses to die.
KDE 1.0 came out in 1998 - 23 years ago (O god I'm old).
The discussion of "Linux to replace windows desktop" is over two decades old.
In computer age this is something geological. It's like... well, Macintosh came out in 1984. Xerox Alto came 1973. If we go back 5 years we reach Englebart's Mother of All Demos in 1968 which I think can be considered the intellectual precursor of those.
So there is 5 years from a tech demo on high-end research platform to a (more or less) commoditized consumer offering - even though Xerox had no idea what to do with it. Steve Jobs visits Xerox 1979 and five years later they deliver Macintosh.
So, with engineering talent PLUS business drive they copy the idea, implement their own hardware and software stack and are instant hit (well, let's say for the sake of this discussion they are a hit).
In FIVE years.
Linux is trying to copy the software stack, of an existing platform, and has been "attempting" this for two decades.
This is not an engineering problem. This is not a community problem. It's a "lack of business interest problem".
Honestly, the Linux desktop is quite usable. I'm quite sure two decades are enough for the open source software stack to find some local optimum for the desktop offering.
But really, copying and supporting a continuously moving target needs real capital and real business drive to sustain the boring, mind numbing support work that is needed to actually sustain an industrial quality platform.
Linux is fantastic in lots of things.
I'm not sure reverse engineering Windows stack on Linux is very effective way of spending our civilizations engineering resources.
I appreciate masochistic Rude Goldbergish feats of engineering as much as the next geek, but I just don't see the value of individuals detached from the corporations that are implementing the master stack trying to reverse engineer everything on top of a third party platform.
Native Linux support? That would be nice. Native drivers and all? That would be nice.
If it works for someone that's very cool and satisfying - but I still think reverse engineering based gaming stacks for modern platforms that are alive and well are not perhaps the best way to spend engineering effort.