Sign in / up

back to article How Microsoft shattered Gnome's unity with Windows 95

There never will be a year when Linux conquers the desktop, because desktop computers are going to merge into tablet-style touch-driven devices and disappear. But desktop Linux was getting close, until Microsoft derailed it a few years back. The GNOME project’s recent release, GNOME 3.8, served to remind me of the significance …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Richard Wharram

    To be fair to MS...

    I think the Linux devs were only too happy to create a series of desktops. Without a chain of command led by a control-freak, the people who make Linux desktops will happily split off into groups with different visions. That's often a good thing as well as a bad one.

    41 2
    1. Erwin Hofmann
      Reply Icon
      Linux

      You are mistaken …

      … Linux dev's (Kernel developers) are rarely concerned with a GUI (graphical user interface) and happily prefer the command line over any GUI … and, very important, Linux and GUI's are not the same. Linux-GUI's are only playgrounds, using the most widely used operating system in the world (Linux) to emulate and/or excel know GUI's like Windows, Android or Mac OSX. Oh, and another mistake (in the article) is the assumption Microsoft (Windows 95) invented the Taskbar. As I remember (being that old) Arthur 1.20 (later RISC OS), an Operating system from 1987, had that feature years earlier, called "the icon bar". Sure, Microsoft invented the "Start Button" ... wow … but that was merely an exercise to declutter the "the icon bar" (er, sorry, "the task bar") …

      16 14
      1. Richard Wharram
        Reply Icon

        Re: You are mistaken …

        I was using the term 'Linux devs' in a generic, non-anal sense obviously :)

        16 2
      2. J.G.Harston Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: You are mistaken …

        And the RISC OS desktop had a application launcher (Start Button-alike) if you chose to install something like Director. And what do you mean by "window switching". You do that by clicking on the window's title bar to bring it to the front, or just click in it's edit area to give it the input focus without the brain-dead MSWin lobotomy of bringing the whole window with it.

        8 0
      3. "Dead Eye"
        Reply Icon

        Re: You are mistaken …

        Actually, RISCOS (the Acorn one, that is) had all of:

        1) the "Icon Bar" with two types of icon that worked in from both ends

        2) Window "Title Bars" with icons in them to expand and collapse the window, &c

        3) A "Start" buttin, called the"Apps" icon (on the icon bar) that contained applications is the ROM

        as a starting point but also applications from the boot disc that were added to this set.

        This last bit is the one that differed a nit form Window because it wasn't at either end of the icon bar, and it didn't support a menu structure for the applications -- but it was there.

        4 0
    2. DanDanDan
      Reply Icon

      Re: To be fair to MS...

      This article is saying much the same as I said in the comments to an article back in February:

      "Unfortunately, as well as eating itself, it also splits and forks itself. Web servers has always been a FOSS stronghold. Everywhere else that counts is full of crap competition: KDE vs Gnome - developer show-offs leading to no winners. LibreOffice vs OpenOffice - no winners due to diluted development.

      Yes it's one of the best things that you can fork a project if it heads in the wrong direction, but it also dilutes development effort trying to do 10 things at once."

      That comment received 6 thumbs up and 16 down. Diluting the developer effort is, according to this article, Microsoft's strategy. Funny that.

      5 11
      1. Wayland Sothcott 1
        Reply Icon

        Re: To be fair to MS...

        I don't see that Linux has to be number one. It's actually doing very well because of all the variety. However cloning stuff from Microsoft is simply following a company who makes good popular software. It's not innovating and producing something better. Honestly by now there should be one document format that can be worked on by one application which combines all the features of MS Office. Linux is not going to produce this first whilst it's Office is a copy of MS Office.

        7 8
        1. 1Rafayal
          Reply Icon

          Re: To be fair to MS...

          Ohh, you are going to get a lot of downvotes for that one....

          0 0
        2. JEDIDIAH
          Reply Icon
          Mushroom

          You've got to be kidding.

          Most of the basic UI elements from Win95 were not invented by Microsoft. They were cobbled together from a wide range of sources including CDE and other ancient window managers. A lot of the apparent missing prior art is MIA primarily because the author refused to really acknowledge the state of X before 1995.

          The the first "clone" of Windows95 was nothing more than a theme for an existing window manager (fvwm).

          A start menu is nothing more than an anchored app menu from any of the early window managers.

          6 0
      2. TheOtherHobbes
        Reply Icon

        Re: To be fair to MS...

        What's depressing is that there's been very little OS development since almost forever.

        Apparently no one can imagine anything more original than a desktop with menus and icons over a pre-emptive multitasking system based on ideas from the 1960s.

        And then you get Win 8, which takes half of that and breaks it.

        Forking doesn't make something interesting if all you get are twenty variations on the same ideas.

        What would a completely original take on interface design, networked file system design and data type sharing, Internet integration and distributed processing look like?

        Nothing like Linux, OS X, or Windows, I'd bet.

        5 0
      3. Richard Plinston
        Reply Icon

        Re: To be fair to MS...

        > LibreOffice vs OpenOffice - no winners due to diluted development.

        Actually not. Developments in either could be included in the other. They can be somewhat competitive in trying to outdo each other and that is a good thing, but in the end the code is available.

        Same with desktop environments. It doesn't matter which one I use because applications will run in any of them (given I load the required libraries from the distro).

        With, say, MacOS vs. Windows the choice must be made and stuck with. With KDE, Mint, LXDE, I can switch between them and not worry.

        1 0
    3. Erwin Hofmann
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Down

      You are mistaken …

      ... how can someone give a "thumb down" for this post (except for the spelling mistake in: "known") ... seriously, what's wrong with it. There is noting emotional, non factual or irrational in it.

      And for the endless pro and contra topic of variety, which is exactly the strength of Linux and its distributions (like it, or hate it) ... Linux makes a good operating system for your telly, the space station, mobile phones and pads, the Google search infrastructure as well as your desktop etc. etc. ... and if you don't like it, buy a Mac ... fair enough ...

      2 0
  2. fishdog
    Linux

    My head hurts ...

    3 0
    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Pint

      Re: fishdog

      "My head hurts ..." I gave up trying to track all the forks in the Linux desktop years ago, so I can only sympathise with yourself and applaud Mr Poven's efforts! The only suggestion I can make is fuggedaboudit for today, it's actually sunny here in the UK, so I shall be scheduling a "team meeting" down the local watering hole instead.

      5 8
    2. h3
      Reply Icon

      Windows 95

      Windows 95 broke one of the most useful conventions. (Being able to type in a window without it being on top).

      The RiscOS / X11 ways of doing it are different but still just as useful.

      The Xmouse powertoy was never very good. (Funny thing is the reg hack for Windows 7 / 8 works really well.)

      Don't think a task bar is that necessary. The middle mouse button is pretty much never used in Windows so using that to list the open programs would work fine.

      If the start button never existed people would just hit the windows key (Or use ctrl-escape on an older keyboard).

      2 2
      1. Philip Lewis
        Reply Icon
        FAIL

        Re: Windows 95

        .. and introduced the abominable and terminally braindead concept of windows suddenly taking context and popping up at inopportune times. Keep typing and the next thing you know you have hit the "Y" key and something quite bad has happened.

        1 0
      2. Ian 55
        Reply Icon

        Re: Windows 95

        Is being able to type into 'beneath' windows that useful?

        Here (MATE, but also with most other window managers, including MS's) it's easy to see what window will get my keystrokes - it's the one on top (and with a different coloured outline, the way I have it set up). It is trivial to give another window focus.

        I'd hate to have start looking for where a mouse was before knowing what would happen when I started typing.

        1 1
        1. Vic
          Reply Icon

          Re: Windows 95

          > Is being able to type into 'beneath' windows that useful?

          Yes. Massively so.

          It allows you to control machines without having to dedicate much screen real estate to the control window (which, at that point, you're not that interested in, so long as you can get a command to it). That leaves your screen displaying other bits of the system that you *do* need to monitor closely.

          > it's easy to see what window will get my keystrokes - it's the one on top

          If that's the way you want to work, then that's just fine. Choice is good. Imposing decisions on other people is bad...

          Vic.

          0 0

  3. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Bill the Sys Admin
      Reply Icon
      Pint

      Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

      MATE is no where near stable enough to be appearing in RHEL. They still use a solid version of Gnome2 in RHEL. Why would you bother with MATE which is very new and unstable if you ask me. Certainly not suited to a enterprise environment currently.

      3 3
      1. Random K
        Reply Icon
        Thumb Up

        Re: Bill the Sys Admin

        Have an upvote on me. RHEL/CentOS with any GUI is bordering on silly. Having a new and largely untested desktop environment is just outright craziness. I would venture that MATE would stand a decent chance of fizzling out before Red Hat got through with the necessary evaluations. That said, in 3-5 years who knows. RHEL turns slowly but it does move.

        2 1
        1. AJ MacLeod
          Reply Icon

          Re: Bill the Sys Admin

          CentOS with a GUI is anything but silly - it provides a stable desktop setup designed with system-wide configuration in mind and is supported for a very decent length of time after release (which almost nothing else is.)

          Funnily enough that's exactly what most businesses need and want, not stupid and almost entirely useless desktop effects, not the very latest version of this or that application. CentOS 6 is pretty close to ideal for this use case, not silly at all.

          2 0
        2. h3
          Reply Icon

          Re: Bill the Sys Admin

          So what if you are using any of the Applications that are GUI apps and really expensive.

          Normally you can have them on Solaris / RHEL / Suse Enterprise.

          (Seems like more and more of it prefers RHEL as well. Used to be mainly on real UNIX).

          (i.e the people who the Nvidia Linux driver is actually written for : 3d / CAD / CAM / EDA)

          Forget CentOS that should be no concern to Redhat.

          Those type of apps (I know of EDA) are like £125000 a seat and they are run on fully paid for and supported RHEL. (And use the most expensive Nvidia cards). Wasting 50% of the 3d performance isn't going to sit well.

          I would say that is pretty much all the people who pay for RHEL at a decent price who actually use it as a desktop.

          They are going to have a new and largely untested environment gnome 3 and annoy massively the paid desktop users.

          That combined with Oracle licensing being slightly more reasonable using Oracle's Linux variant.

          So what are people running on RHEL headless ? (Not Oracle - DB2 might as well have it on AIX).

          For decent support from Redhat you will need to be giving them lots of money.

          No great advantage over CentOS unless there is something you are running on it that needs to be run on RHEL to not invalidate the support contract on the 3rd party app.

          I think Redhat might have realised this a bit so we don't even have a RHEL7 beta yet.

          2 1
          1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: Bill the Sys Admin

            I would say that is pretty much all the people who pay for RHEL at a decent price who actually use it as a desktop.

            And I would say you're wrong. We have plenty of customers who run RHEL headless, typically doing back-office processing, running migrated mainframe applications, etc. Hell, my teams run a number of headless RHEL VMs just for CI and testing.

            And since all of the RHEL GUIs are X11 window managers, it's entirely possible to run RHEL headless and use X11 servers running on other machines for the UI. You can even use Cygwin-X or one of the other Windows X11 server implementations if you like.

            1 0

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. Yet Another Commentard
          Reply Icon

          Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          I think the premise of the article was that we have reached "peak desktop", so a "victory in the desktop" would be hollow as it will be a declining market as we head towards slates and other non-desktop things. In that market, as things stand a form of Linux is very, very likely to "win".

          You may disagree with that premise of course

          7 2
          1. Wayland Sothcott 1
            Reply Icon
            Linux

            Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

            Like most people I using various computing platforms. Certainly the smartphone is the most available since you don't need a desk or even a lap. However if you want to do some serious sit down work then you want a big desk and a big screen or screens, a proper keyboard and mouse or something even better and loads of computer power and storage and a decent printer. There will always be an advantage in having a better tool for the job than your competitors. If you can sit down to do the job then sit in front of the most powerful machine you can afford, not some dinky hand held.

            4 0
      3. itzman
        Reply Icon

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        Mate is stable enough here. Its a lot more stable than W95 ever was :-)

        9 0
      4. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        WTF?

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        > MATE is no where near stable enough to be appearing in RHEL.

        Unstable? WTF?

        I've been using Mint/MATE practically since it came out both at home and at work (as a systems programmer).

        So far, I've had not a single problem.

        What stability problems?

        4 0
      5. eulampios
        Reply Icon

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        Mate seems to be as stable as Gnome2x has ever been, if not more. Try it out for yourself.

        0 0
      6. JEDIDIAH
        Reply Icon
        Linux

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        MATE not stable? You could have fooled me. Been using it since I upgraded all of my Ubuntu boxes to 12.04.

        "Stability" is not something I would knock it for.

        1 0
    2. TheVogon
      Reply Icon
      Mushroom

      Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

      There is nothing much wrong with Windows 8 - it is rock solid and faster in key benchmarks like graphics and large file transfers than any other desktop OS.

      The few things that some of the public are finding hard to cope with like no start button, and having to start in Metro mode are already fixed in V8.1 - public preview due out later this month!

      10 27

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. Dave 126 Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          >Windows 8 is a toy.

          but some of the applications that run it are not.

          1 3
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

            ">Windows 8 is a toy.

            >Windows 8 is a toy.

            but some of the applications that run it are not.."

            If by that you actually mean "but some of the applications that run on it are not" that equally well applies to Windows 7.

            2 0
        2. RISC OS
          Reply Icon

          Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          I use windows 8 for work, and there is nothing wrong with it.

          0 1
          1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
            Reply Icon

            @RISC OS

            Then you have an easy job. The kind robots will be doing soon.

            1 1
      2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        8.11 for Workgroups does not fix any bloody issues. A Start button that brings up the Start Screen? *bzzzzzzt* Wrong answer! Explorer (and so much else) still has Ribbon bars? *Bzzzzzzzzt* I could go on - at length - but 8.11 for Workgroups doesn't actually address any of the concerns that the general public raised. It was a shitty token gesture designed to seem like outreach without doing a goddamned thing to change the real issues.

        8.11 for Workgroups is Microsoft's way of "doing something" that is in fact nothing so that they can get on their horse a month later and scream "but we did what you want!" They'll claim "persecution" and will start a P.R. war whereby they blame their opponents (Google, Amazon, etc) for "fighting dirty" by funding (or arranging airtime for) people who continue to highlight legitimate grievances with Windows 8, or the general "trustability" of Microsoft.

        8.11 for Workgroups is a mirage. A handwave to befuddle the gullible and give them justification for a protracted campaign aimed at silencing dissent. Microsoft has thrown power users under a bus and done so on purpose. They've done it for the same reasons Apple has. It will come back to bit both of them in the ass in short order; on that day, I will give out free popcorn. Until then, well, Windows 7 doesn't end support until 2020 and Cinnamon works just fine for me...

        25 9
        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Facepalm

          Re: Trevor Pott Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          ".....Microsoft has thrown power users under a bus....." Yes, and the market for real "power users" is how big compared to the masses of average desktop lusers and home users....? I used to hear the same shrieking from self-proclaimed "gurus" with win95 and when Linux and the various commercial UNIX flavours got desktops - "REAL users do it on the command line!" Seriously, there was very little chance Redmond or the FOSS brigade could make one OS interface to please all users.

          6 17
          1. Roland6 Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: Trevor Pott I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

            "and the market for real "power users" is how big compared to the masses of average desktop lusers and home users....?"

            Whilst I know it has been trendy for many years now to focus on mass market share and/or total numbers of users, we shouldn't forget that companies such as MS still need to make money.

            I suspect that whilst the OEM consumer market sales account for the biggest in number, I suspect that the enterprise market accounts for a significant proportion of revenue - remember enterprise licensing is an annual license and not a for life license. So if you want to run those old systems on XP and W2K VM's you still need to keep paying the annual fee...

            The question is whether MS can make the right noises to pacify the enterprise market - remember they've got until 2020 (when Win7 extended support ends)...

            1 0
          2. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Stop

            Re: Trevor Pott I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

            > Yes, and the market for real "power users" is how big compared to the masses of average desktop lusers and home users....?

            That "masses of average desktop users" is shrinking rapidly to swell the coffers of Apple and Samsung. Didn't you get the memo?

            As a proportion of desktop users, the "power" user is becoming more and more significant.

            Which is one of the reasons why a lot of people are wondering why Microsoft are in such a hurry to foist a touch screen mobile experience onto desktop users that decidedly don't want it.

            2 0
          3. JEDIDIAH
            Reply Icon
            Linux

            Re: Trevor Pott I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

            > and the market for real "power users" is how big compared to the masses of average desktop lusers and home user

            The IBM PC clone is turning back into what it originally was: a business machine. That may not mean "power users" but it does mean people that need to get stuff done. Given the number of PCs in corporations, that is no trivial number.

            As the "toaster" users flee to tablets, the relative share of power users will INCREASE among PC users rather than go down.

            0 0
          4. Jess
            Reply Icon

            the market for real "power users" is how big compared to the masses

            If we eliminate those who can fulfill their needs with an iPad or similar, pretty significant, I'd say. (Especially since those have actually started to wise up to the fact, in their purchasing decisions.)

            0 1
        2. Wayland Sothcott 1
          Reply Icon

          Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          It does seem that Microsoft has thrown power users under the bus. I can't get on with Win8 and my stepfather gave his new laptop to my son and getting an Android machine instead. I still wonder if I just need more time to get good at Windows 8. You say they have done this deliberately but for what purpose?

          When Labour appointed the wrong Milliband bro I saw parallels with Microsoft and Windows Vista and again with Win8. Some sort of deliberate concession to your competitors.

          0 0
        3. craigj
          Reply Icon

          Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

          "8.11 for Workgroups"

          ROFL - You are so clever. That was such a good joke, you felt it needed saying 4 times!

          4 3
      3. Ottman001
        Reply Icon
        Paris Hilton

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        Can't help noticing that Richto, the formerly dominant pro-MS shill on these forums hasn't posted since TheVogon started posting in January. Both always use the "Eat This" icon and both have a similarly skewed pro-MS take on reality. Coincidence?

        14 2
      4. Roland6 Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        "There is nothing much wrong with Windows 8"

        Well having installed Classic Shell and ModernMix, plus done some additional configuration, I would tend to agree the Win8 desktop is very similar to Win7 albeit at times some weirdness does occur eg. I installed a Flip camera last night and Win7 didn't need a reboot whereas Win8 did...

        0 0
      5. Richard Plinston
        Reply Icon

        Re: I'm not sure Microsoft *has* won.

        > The few things that some of the public are finding hard to cope with like no start button, and having to start in Metro mode are already fixed in V8.1 - public preview due out later this month!

        It isn't actually the 'start button' that people complained about the lack of, it was the _consequences_ of the start button, ie the start menu.

        8.1 may have a button now, but it merely drops one into Metro, which is the cause of the problem. They want to avoid Metro and want the menu back.

        MS on the other hand want to force Metro down users throats until they love it - or die!

        0 0
    3. Shagbag
      Reply Icon

      Microsoft *has* NOT won. AT ALL.

      The article is disappointing for its lack of balance. It's framed on the underlying assumption that MSFT's patents have some legal basis. This is fundamentally wrong. It is up to the patent holder to prove their patents, not for the accused to dissprove them.

      The analysis should be one of "tell us which patents you allege have been infringed and then we can start talking about them".

      It is an undisputable, historical fact that MSFT HAS NEVER

      (a) publicly detailed the patents it alleges have been infringed; and

      (b) never disclosed the terms of the so-called 'Patent Agreements' it has signed with Novel, et. al.

      Defending a spurious claim involves costs - both in legal fees and management's required attention. It is an equally plausible argument that the reason by Novel, et. al. signed the agreements with MSFT is because the 'protection money' they pay to MSFT (if they do at all- we don't know as no-one has seen the agreements) is much less that the expensive US legal bill that would have to be carried through to settlement. With out knowing the content of these 'Patent Agreements' is CANNOT be said that they give support to MSFT's claims and it is a complicit media that does not point this out.

      IT CAN ONLY BE DEDUCED that the reason MSFT has consistently failed to detail anything (other than the total number) about its patents is because even they do not believe they can be enforced - either because (a) they have no basis in law, or (b) they are trivial such that they can be side-stepped/worked around with some non-significant code adjustments.

      The article fails to directly mention any of this. And for that reason it gets an....

      ... EPIC FAIL!

      29 6
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Microsoft *has* NOT won. AT ALL.

        I agree with Mr. Shagbag.

        Does the article have any basis for intimating that there is a cause/effect between GNOME's evolution and Microsoft's deals with some "Linux" companies? Or is it merely speculating on an apparent coincidence? This needs to be made clear.

        6 1

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like