1. Different desktop managers lead to a fragmented experience

I am a big fan of the Gnome desktop environment and conversely I dislike KDE (but I do respect it). Unfortunately, in the Linux community, this story is all too common. It equates to the old Chevy vs. Ford, Coke vs. Pepsi and Xbox vs. PlayStation debates. However, with Linux, there is also XFCE, Unity, Cinnamon, etc. -- all of which have associated "fan-boys". In other words, the community is vastly divided by tribal identity.

While many may point to the freedom of user-interface choice as a positive (and it can be), I would also argue that it is a negative. You see, from a trouble-shooting perspective, it is almost impossible to direct a Linux user over the phone or instant-messenger by just knowing their distribution. If a user seeking help says they are on Ubuntu, you cannot be sure that they are on Unity -- they may be on KDE, Gnome or something else which ultimately can lead to confusion.

A lack of familiarity and shared experiences fragments users since they do not have a shared rallying point. A screenshot of an OS X or Windows desktop is immediately recognizable; the countless Linux desktops? Not so much.

2. Too many package managers makes Linux hard to learn and master

Many Linux newbies start with Ubuntu. This should not take away from Ubuntu; it is a testament to its smart design and ease of use. In the terminal or on the command-line, these users will learn the apt package manager commands, as that is what Ubuntu uses. Sadly, these new Linux users will think the apt package manager is the only package manager. There are many other managers such as YUM and Pacman. These package managers use entirely different commands which can be confusing.

For the most part, that is fine if they never stray from Ubuntu. However, if they do stray, they will be in for a rude awakening and frustration when the commands they know and love no longer work. How can a user master Linux and become an expert when an unfamiliar package manager can cause a beginner-like regression?

3. Lack of software

This is a sore subject for many, as Linux-purists and loyalist will eagerly point you to wonderful alternatives that can be acceptable. Need Adobe Photoshop? Use Gimp. Need Microsoft Office? Use LibreOffice. For basic users, these alternatives may work (and work well). However, true professionals cannot trust their careers and reputations to alternative software. Open-source ideology be damned, Microsoft Office will create more compatible files and lead to a more successful employee.

While Linux distributions offer wonderful photo-managing and editing, video-editing is poor to non-existent. There is no way around it -- to properly edit a video and create something professional, you must use Windows or Mac.

A good example of software woe is, to protect my father from malware, I built him a computer using Linux Mint. I figured, since he lives in the browser, a Linux desktop with Google Chrome would be ideal and safe. For a while, this worked like a dream. However, one day his printer broke so he had to go to the store to buy another.

He wanted a wireless one so he could put the printer in another room. Of course, the HP setup CD-ROM did not support Linux and setting up a networked printer manually was not something he knew how to do. This lead to headaches and disappointment and in the end he had to return the printer (I later installed Windows 7 at his request and installed the printer for him).

Overall, there are no true killer Linux applications that a Windows user would lust over. However, conversely, Linux users have plenty to be envious of -- Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, Netflix support and much more.

4. Hardware compatibility

Linux has come a long way regarding hardware compatibility. In fact, I would say that Linux now offers a better out-of-the-box experience than Windows or Mac for basic hardware detection. However, out-of-the-box is not the end-all-be-all. Hardware will be released after that kernel release and some accessory hardware will not have the needed software to interface.

When I bought my first Nexus phone, the Galaxy Nexus, I was in pure Android heaven. However, that device did away with USB Mass Storage and opted instead for MTP. Sadly, this caused the device not to interface with Linux properly. It was not until much later that lengthy and convoluted instructions were posted on the internet that enabled flaky performance at best. It is only very recently that MTP support has started working out of the box.

Another example happened to a friend of mine who is in the Army and purchased a Garmin GPS running watch. After running and working out, you can connect the watch to a computer to upload the data. Unfortunately, the watch was not recognized by Linux (Ubuntu 13.04) and even if it had been, there was no Garmin software for it to interface with. Unfortunately, I had to set up a dual boot with Windows; an embarrassing moment since I was the one who got him started on Linux.

5. Linus Torvalds is mortal

Linus Torvalds, the founder of the Linux kernel is a remarkable man. However, his intelligence and prowess is rivaled by his outlandish and controversial behavior -- hurling profanities at Nvidia and insulting kernel developers are two examples that come to mind. Ultimately, it is his project and he is the keeper of the kernel; he maintains it. The problem is, Linus will not live forever and his death can cause grave consequences. You see, once Mr. Torvalds is no longer living, a new top kernel maintainer and protector must be named. This can potentially cause a schism in the project or even worse -- lead to its demise.

Linus Torvalds is both a gift and a curse for the Linux community. Obviously, the entire thing would not exist without him. However, developers and users only tolerate his behavior as he is the father of the creation; he is not often second-guessed (those that do will feel his wrath). Even if a capable successor is named, their intentions and decisions will always be questioned. Eventually, the entire project could be forked into irrelevance.

Linux seems unapproachable

Whether it’s by design or not when the average PC user hears the word Linux; highly technical and complex systems come to his mind. This is a major set back for us as a community because there are distros that focus on user experience and they more or less hit the mark. In fact I believe if you take someone who is not familiar with Windows way of user interface and give them Ubuntu to use, with minimal coaching they will be able to open a web browser and just about every thing they need to do. This perception of complexity exists in minds of your average PC user. Linux isn’t that complex just different from windows and it is pretty darn easy to learn.

Bad attitudes

When I had desire to become a Linux user, it was a different world. It was nearly a decade ago when I tried my first distro and I had my fare share of people telling me to read the manuals before diving into this new world. I became a Linux user in spite of that hostile unhelpful and frankly isolationist behavior. Things are better now for sure but there are still some extremist attitudes held by some. While I won’t point fingers, I will say that we as a community should aspire to be better than this. These attitudes only divide people and shoo away new users from Linux.

The longer I’ve been a free software user the more I realized how dangerous and harmful proprietary offering can be. We need more unity in free software and open source world. It’s perfectly valid to do your computing with open source software.

Linux is everywhere and nobody knows it

One of the major problem with Linux is that most of the people don’t know that they use Linux on a daily basis. Linux would get more traction for desktop use if people understood how prevalent Linux is. It’s everywhere from retails kiosk to set of box, from raspberry pies to super computers, from your phone to your TV, even the international space station. If there was more awareness of ubiquity of our favorite kernel we’d  see greater adoption in Linux world. People are more likely to do something or try something new if they know other people are also doing it. One of my goal with this domain is to raise awareness about Linux and help people try it when they otherwise wouldn’t have.

Conclusion

Despite these five problems, Fedora will continue to be my main operating system at home on my desktop; I can personally get by without Windows or Mac. However, I still maintain Windows and Hackintosh installs just in case.