Most of this article is arguing about things that have almost no effect on market share.
“Because no one sells systems at Besy Buy with it preinstalled.” is the answer you’re looking for. No standard user is going to replace the OS a system came with – not even to upgrade to a new major version of Windows.
Imma let you finish, but I feel like until there is a stable, well-supported(*), aesthetic Linux laptop, lists like this are sort of like pointing to a car with square wheels and asking, “Why won’t anyone use the stereo?”
There are many reasons why the Linux world never got a laptop better than the old Thinkpads – most of them out the control of kernel hackers, system programmers, and web developers (the people I assume are reading this article) – but without solving that problem, it doesn’t really matter which desktop window manager is the best. Sorry to be a downer.
(*) meaning, at bare minimum, that wifi & sleep modes work without a single line of config file tweaking
To be fair, I never needed to tweak a single line of config in order to get wifi working since I switched to Mint a few years ago (and I’ve used multiple versions on multiple computers). But you’re absolutely right that there are all these minor things like headphones working strangely, webcams showing upside down, random crashes at boot time, even rare screen freezes at daily use. For a programmer, these minor annoyances aren’t enough to counter the value you get out of developing on Linux, but for a home user who just wants to browse Facebook, they’d be show stoppers from day 1.
Mostly because Linux ended up skipping over the desktop and taking over the (much larger) smartphone market instead.
Server market maybe. I don’t have current numbers but it had a lot of web servers and currently cloud stuff. Then, after Blackberry OS’s dominated the smartphone market in enterprise and Darwin (Mach/BSD/Applestuff) reinvented it to dominate consumer market plus entering enterprise, Android (Linux/Java/GoogleStuff) took over the market in terms of deployed devices at hardly any profit while Apple’s continued to dominate on profit with them having one of largest cash piles in history. That seems more like a lesser win for Linux esp since the developer and user experience is so different from desktop/native Linux. Apple won by far with a great ecosystem and UI on top of a shitty microkernel + BSD + their stuff.
I have yet to see a linux desktop deserve mass adoption, and I’m someone who loves linux on the server. General user UX isn’t even slightly a priority and until it is we simply will never see mass adoption.
I think that’s true of every single desktop UX I’ve seen from any vendor ever ;) Users don’t use things they love (they hate all of it) – they use what the salesman sold them
The Amiga, BeOS, and Next people seem to be exceptions to that. They seemed to love their systems tolerating whatever faults they knew about it. Looking back on the competition, I could see why where each had a wowing user experience. If you want developer-centric or power-user UI, that would be the LISP machines or Smalltalk box that had an everything in one kind of system that could be easily changed or debugged like a program. I’m still waiting to see something match and exceed their capabilities mixed with modern stacks.