[coldtea]

No, but people wanting a stable no-fuss desktop with everything (from laptop sleep to device drivers) working, access to proprietary software and all kinds of 3rd party drivers available, will.

I use OS X mostly because of the UNIX underpinnings. I could not care less for Linux of the desktop, despite having used it since 1997 (and having a history with UNIX going back to Sun OS and HP-UX).

If Windows gets good enough with its basic unix userland support, and has a decent shell, I'll be very tempted to try it.

After all, any actual deployment etc, I do on Linux servers and VMs (vagrant etc) -- no reason to pollute one's base desktop system with development libs and setups.

[cyphar]

> No, but people wanting a stable no-fuss desktop with everything (from laptop sleep to device drivers) working, access to proprietary software and all kinds of 3rd party drivers available, will.

Have you used a recent Linux distro? They are mainly stable and no fuss, and they don't require you to run proprietary software.

[coldtea]

>and they don't require you to run proprietary software.

Only I specifically asked the inverse: to be able to run all the proprietary software I want.

Besides, that's always the case -- "a recent Linux distro" is always supposed to fix all of these problems, I've been hearing that (and trying in vain) ever since 2000 or so. And I use Linux on the server side just fine (and actually have several desktop Linux installations too, since 1997 and RedHat 5.3 IIRC, just not as my basic everyday work/fun desktop, because they're dreadful still).

[qplex]

I must say you are quite delusional to argue that Linux desktop is still in the same state as it was in 1997.

[coldtea]

I must say it is quite delusional to argue that I wrote that the "Linux desktop is still in the same state as it was in 1997".

I never wrote that, and it is indeed much improved.

What I wrote is another thing: that the total parity with proprietary desktop OSes (Windows, OS X) "just works-iness" is always "in another distro" or "a release away".

And there's another problem: proprietary desktop OSs haven't stood still in their 1997 state either. They are a moving target.

[qplex]

Perhaps not, but that was the core of your argument, wasnt it? That Linux is still in the sorry state it was back then, in the way that still, in 2016 Linux is behind the proprietary OSes?

Sorry to break it to you, but this is simply false.

In fact Linux offers far superior hardware support to OS X or Windows. Also the actual "desktop software" provided on Linux is far superior (WMs and such).

But don't let the facts hit you on your way out.