One of the things I think is keeping any desktop from being "the one" is the lack of true developer interoperability. You can program in gtk or qt (or many many others) but for a single distro your "best" programs span a number of different ways to do the same thing (and many flame wars).
This is the greatest thing about Linux, and its curse. In Windows you have the Windows API, in OSx you have Cocoa. Sure you can add more to the mix but most of it is the main API.
I enjoyed the direction gnome2 was going, slowly filling in the niches needed to create a complete system. Then it seems they scratched that and went with gnome3. I like a lot of things about gnome3, but I wish gnome2 would not be defunct.
The same goes for kde, slowly building a complete system of tools for most users.
Both gnome and kde are the reason people would choose gtk or qt for their development.
What Unity needs (and I am not sure if it is in the works) is a true Unity API. Build apps for Unity with Unity specifics. Of course this goes against the Linux way, but if one really wants "the year of Linux on the desktop" we have to stop being a moving target.
This is the greatest thing about Linux, and its curse. In Windows you have the Windows API, in OSx you have Cocoa. Sure you can add more to the mix but most of it is the main API.
I enjoyed the direction gnome2 was going, slowly filling in the niches needed to create a complete system. Then it seems they scratched that and went with gnome3. I like a lot of things about gnome3, but I wish gnome2 would not be defunct.
The same goes for kde, slowly building a complete system of tools for most users.
Both gnome and kde are the reason people would choose gtk or qt for their development.
What Unity needs (and I am not sure if it is in the works) is a true Unity API. Build apps for Unity with Unity specifics. Of course this goes against the Linux way, but if one really wants "the year of Linux on the desktop" we have to stop being a moving target.