With the announcement of WSL2, I am really concerned for linux DEs.

I use linux distros not just for the kernel but because most linux DEs do a far better job that windows ever will.

But the next gen programmers probably will never leave their shit systems for any distro because guess what... thay can just use WSLs.

I would probably have done the same.
You need to use a linux DE (Gnone/KDE/etc.) for at least a couple days to understand how great it is but people won't do it because windows is good enough and they can achieve most tasks in wsl.

Linux Foundation already doesn't care about DEs. (And why would they... Microsoft is filling their pockets).

I hope people still find wsl crap and have enough reasons to give any linux DE at least a few days try.

Wrote from my Manjaro KDE :(

  • 5
    I still find WSL crappy :)
  • 3
    @kescherRant It really is. It's a disgrace for linux
  • 5
    If WSL does the job, good for them.
  • 2
    I still see win for linux

    DE are like material things. They help you but they aren't *the thing*.

    WSL may instead bring love in non linux people towards linux. And knowing more beauty of linux that is free of windows, they may leave that prison
  • 7
    I feel a big ole nix fanboy circle jerk forming on this one lmao.

    Why do you care what other people use if it's not affecting you? That's wack chief.

    Y'all act like everyone who's a dev or in tech has to enjoy the nix experience. It's not for everyone, and so what? Y'all sure don't mind people not enjoying the "WiNbLoWs" experience.
  • 11
    Shouldn't this incentivise Linux to get even better instead? Competition is always great, the better Windows gets the better it is for Linux.

    Also, like @Stuxnet said. People don't have to like Linux, if Windows gets superior somehow then they should use Windows and that's totally okay.
  • 1
    @Stuxnet , @RememberMe I don't care about what other people use. I just want them to give DEs a try. If they don't like it, move to Windows.
    My issue is that they won't even give it a try because they will have wsl to take care of their needs.

    People like me who switched to Ubuntu from Windows initially just because of kernel will stop existing.

    And I don't give a damn about what others use. But fewer people would mean fewer contributors and maintainers in the future which would eventually take down the project
  • 6
    @Konsole Is that really so bad though? If something becomes superfluous it *should* die out. There's no particular reason why Linux DEs should enjoy support without being more relevant for users. And besides, I think the major DEs have enough support already, the Linux community is fairly dedicated, and stuff like i3 and full customizability isn't going to come to Windows anytime soon. Running a GUI through WSL is a major pain and rather pointless anyway so you'll still have people installing baremetal.

    A better WSL will de-incentivise people from switching to full Linux, sure. The proper response to that should be to make Linux environments better to add more incentive, not to mourn that MS outmanoeuvred them.

    Also I think the reason LF doesn't care about DEs is that it's not a core Linux thing, the market is tiny and its resources are better spent maintaining core projects like the kernel.
  • 0
    @RememberMe That's the point I am making. People would be content with using wsl without UI and would not even give DEs a try as Windows gui would be good enough for them.

    Without trying they would never know the customizability and flexibility that a Linux DE provides.
  • 3
    "Embrace Extend Extinguish"

    Though microsoft knows that linux servers will still run the world, so they can't completely replace it.
  • 1
    The new wsl should be much faster and you can run all sorts of gui apps and even a desktop environment like i3 if you use a local windows x server. X410 in the windows store is ridiculously quick.
  • 1
    Should probably add by new wsl i don’t mean the latest update but wsl2 where windows gets a full blown open source Linux kernel and I don’t think they are doing this to extinguish Linux they have a lot that runs on Linux for good reason and they are like the fifth largest contributor to the kernel. Wsl is more for getting the Mac book users to switch
  • 2
    @spacemarshall this is the main reason I'm using a hackintosh.

    Proper unix + commercial software such as ms office, lightroom, Photoshop, etc.
  • 2
    In fact XFCE4 works great too
  • 1
    I can't wait for WSL2 (as well as the new Windows Terminal). And I say that as someone who primarily uses Linux. I have to use a Windows laptop at work and I hate it, so WSL2 will make it much less painful.
  • 3
    *completely innocent look*

    What does all of that even have to do with DEs? "Real Linux Geeks"(tm) don't use DEs anyway because they live in the terminal, right?
  • 1
    @EmberQuill I updated to 1903 today so I could build the new terminal, even WSL in this seems quicker and the file support is much better
  • 2
    @Fast-Nop here you go - i3 on wsl
  • 3
    WSL2 is great news for Linux and it's DEs!

    It uses an ACTUAL Linux kernel, which means that Windows users who may use WSL for specific solutions will be invested in the Linux community and may even contribute.

    Many Windows users will discover that they enjoy Linux and may dual boot or install it on one of their laptops or something.

    Plus, if you're using Linux for the DEs, the argument could me made that you're using Linux wrong.

    Don't get me wrong... I love DEs on Linux, but the graphical environment on Linux surely comes second. In my day-to-day, I only tend to use the DE for web browsing. Everything else is quicker and (more importantly) more stable in text mode, as I have found.

    And even if WSL2, by some stretch, totally kills graphical Linux environment projects, then I guess it was bound to die anyways. Just as the wooden sailing ship was replaced by the steel, engine-powered ship, Linux DEs may just never get to the level of stability and usability they need to.
  • 2
    @gruff I tried building the new terminal but couldn't launch it afterwards. Probably did it wrong since I have absolutely no experience with the language and rarely even touch Visual Studio.
  • 0
    @EmberQuill did you upgrade windows? you need the 1903 update to be able to build it. I had to update my OS using the windows dvd from Msdn as it isnt generally available yet
  • 1
    @gruff I could have sworn I'd updated but I just checked and I'm still on 1809. So that's why it was broken.
  • 1
    @EmberQuill Me too, I could swear I was on 1809 having run the upgrade assistant and all, but about a month later I discovered I was still on 1802 (or 1803?)
  • 0
    I think if someone would try Linux, they would give it a try anyway, and those who not? Well they wouldn't anyway
  • 2
    Aaaand I can't upgrade to 1903 because the 1089 2019-05 cumulative update keeps failing for unknown reasons. So much for the new terminal. I've had enough of this nonsense. I'm switching back to Linux.
  • 0
    @EmberQuill I don’t think you can install it through windows update yet, you need the iso for 1903 then you can upgrade your OS in place using that
  • 1
    @dontbeevil The people who say "Windows sucks and move to Linux" have very good and valid reasons unlike the other way round
  • 0
    @Konsole lol fucking up windows and them blaming MS isn't valid (and that's half of what you see as reasoning these days), but sure man.

    Just use whatever piece of shit software you want, and let people use whatever shitty software they want.
  • 1
    @Stuxnet we don't need to fuck up Windows . It's enough fucked up on it's own. Sure Linux is not better. But at least in Linux you can always find a few commands that will fix most ur issues.

    I can tell at least 10 different things that a Linux DE can do which Windows can't. And like ways maybe u can too. It's just that for me a few benefits that Windows offers above Linux DEs isn't enough to compensate 4 the advantages that a Linux DE Offers.

    My only point is that don't say Windows is better without giving Linux DEs a try. (If you haven't give KDE (plasma5) a try I would recommend u to. It comes closest to match most good features that Windows has while also offering tons of features of it's own.)
    If you still prefer Windows after that, sure go ahead. Whatever suits you.
  • 1
    @Konsole most nix fanboys tend to have ego problems when it comes to acknowledging a lot of their issues are their own fault, but they'll be the first tell you they screwed up their distro lol

    I use linux almost everyday, and it's only going to get more usage as time goes on. (I even made a 99 on my exam for what was basically the intro to Linux class 🤷🏻‍♂️)

    It's shit. Windows is shit. Everything is shit.

    Just stop giving a damn if someone uses your preference of shitty software and life will be better, I guarantee it. Like I don't give a rats ass if person x likes Windows or not. I don't give a rats ass is person y likes linux. All that matters is they do their job and do it efficiently, which could involve either one.
  • 0
    @Stuxnet I dont give a shit either. But I will sure as hell get triggered if someone says windows is better without trying a good linux DE
  • 0
    @dontbeevil have you tried Linux?
  • 1
    @dontbeevil you're not alone with that - I had Linux already in the 90s, that was really shitty. Modelines anyone? Could destroy the monitor. But OK, Win95/98 was also shit.

    In 2001, I changed to Linux as only OS. I've never had XP at home, only at work. In 2010, I've had enough of Linux (so: 9 years of Linux) and switched to Win7 - hands down the best desktop OS I've ever had, including Atari ST's TOS.

    The amount of maintenance Win7 requires is insanely low compared to Linux. Mostly because the initial setup is annoying with both, but Win7 has proper LTS.

    AND it doesn't bundle OS and applications so that I don't have the hassle of OS reinstall with ever new bugs just to have up to date applications. The packet manager is good for system and close programs, but abysmal for application deployment. I agree with Torvalds on that one.

    Dunno yet what to do with Win10 because I can't decline updates, and MS has cut down on their QA so that they deliver forced shitty updates.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop The recent versions of some distros and many DEs are quite stable. Frankly I have faced a lot more bugs and crashes in win 7 and win 10 cpared to my Manjaro-KDE setup. Plus protection from viruses without paying a dime (which I have to in Windows).
    Agreed that Linux DEs a few years ago were shit and can understand why you would prefer win 7 over them. But recent DEs are fabulous. Both plasma5 and gnome3 are amazing. Plasma5 really kills it.
  • 0
    @Konsole the only crashes I've had in Win7 were because I have an AMD card, and AMD is not only technologically backwards with their graphics stuff (e.g. CUDA), they also have shitty drivers. However, I've had the luck to get a stable packager finally and havn't updated that for many years. Virus issue is exaggerated, never had any.

    I wouldn't touch KDE because these guys are fond of way more complex things than their coding skills allow, and I'd avoid Gnome also because it has alsway been shit and disregading the users. Xfce would be OK. Something like Windows 20 years ago, but at least stable and simple enough that the coders can get it right.

    And then you have BASIC shit like the fonts which cause eye cancer. Doesn't matter under Linux because nobody uses it on desktop, and servers don't even have monitors.
  • 0
    @dontbeevil Ha Ha. Chk it out online. Win10 regularly has BSODs
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop The KDE u r talking is long time ago. It has evolved into a fantastic DE now. Trust me, try plasma5. Also you can install any font you want. I personally like Ubuntu mono but it's everyone's preference.
    And since you r talking about fonts, let's also talk about the shit that cmd prompt and powershell are. Both look horrible and are much more horrible feature wise compared to Linux terminal on any DE.
  • 0
    @Konsole it's not just about installing fonts, it's that the font rendering itself is a broken piece of shit under Linux. Well that's because servers don't even have monitors, and there's no serious money involved in desktop because there's no business case. If you don't have an eye for that, be glad (and stay away from anything related to design and looks).

    Under Windows, I don't need the command shell. Partly because I don't use it in the backend, but as desktop. And partly because Windows is GUI first. Not GUI as an afterthought and tack-on like under Linux where this dev process forcefully leads to bad GUIs.

    And yeah I've always heard how great and desktop Linux is. Even when I had it on my PC and knew first-hand that it wasn't, so I don't beliebe these claims anymore. Also my live Linux tests don't support that.
  • 0
    Anyway, desktop Linux is a broken piece of shit, but at the very least, it doesn't fuck up itself more than it already is through uncontrolled updates.

    That can't be said of Win10.

    Progress is over, we've had peak-desktop. These days, it's just about damage control and trying to keep the decline somewhat limited.
  • 0
    Btw., my measures for horrible rendering: I think that already browsers are shit in this regard, no matter which OS. We've had better technology 40 years ago that still didn't make it into browsers, that being TeX.

    Browsers are powerful enough to execute megabytes of stupid and useless JS shit, but can't even get basic typography right.
Add Comment