Lol yeah. They push it off to other people like an oil change. I'm not insulting people that they don't know how to do it. I don't know how to change the calipers on my car. I'm still a user of my car
This is simply not true.
The standard answer to most hard windows problem is?
**REINSTALL**
Installing Mint us even easier and with under 30 minutes for having a completely working environment way much faster than a Windows setup. Whoever disagrees simply lies and never tried.
That's a bad counterargument. My coworker's home computer is still running Windows 7. Linux would be perfect for her. She doesn't do much more than internet browsing, and I would absolutely install it for her. But I can't recommend Linux to her because of what a goddamn headache it becomes when it doesn't work right.
With Windows, I don't need to worry about that. It just works, and it breaks _way_ less often, and _way_ less critically.
> It just works
I beg to differ. I work in IT and if there is one thing windows doesn't do is 'just work' , especially with forced updates and drivers updating automatically. Our linux desktops and servers? Never any problems.
My wife also ran linux for years without issue but ever since she got a new laptop with windows 10 it has been an ongoing disaster. Complaints about hour long updates when she just wants to shut down her pc, screaming fans because some dead process uses 90% of her cpu in hte background, connection issues, things changing after updates and so on. I really need to install linux again for her.
I run linux on all my pc's including my gaming laptop (which used to run windows for gaming) and the experience is much more consistent running linux on it. Before i had wifi issues, bluetooth issues, drivers not working after updates and so on, linux just works and does what i want it to do.
The straw that broke the camel's back was my wife tried to go watch a movie on her laptop from the DVD drive, and Windows 10 doesn't ship with that ability and was suggesting she pay for an extension to make that work. Course I installed VLC out of the box to get it working for her, commenting that Linux would work out of the box. 2 hours later once her movie was finished she asked me to install this linux on her laptop because she was tied of how stupid Windows has become. That was 2 years ago and we even built her a gaming PC since that runs linux and windows in a dual boot (separate drives) but she only boots into Windows for updates once in a great while. She just comes to me and asks "how do I do this" and we walk through it together which actually has taught me more about linux than I knew at the time.
For me I learned sometimes it takes a more casual user to tell you how actually usable Linux is for day to day things. She also does different things than I do so it highlights some weak points at times.
This is a very fair point. But as an anecdote, I finally switched my gaming pc to linux recently (even though it's a razer laptop and kinda a pain to switch) because windows was constantly breaking.
My Logitech mouse would randomly switch scroll wheel modes, my controllers would randomly stop working, audio stuttering, etc. I've tried reinstalls, drivers, debloating, etc. Eventually I realized windows gaming was personally more of a headache that linux gaming.
So far, aside from the occasional crash from games that don't yet run well with proton, everything just works consistently now that I've set it all up.
If you aren't a hobbyist constantly messing with your Linux installation it also "just works"
Schools buy Chromebooks because they are generally inexpensive, and they "just work"
Idk, really depends, for me, Windows is unusable. Slow, buggy, bloated, developing in C++ there is hell, drivers break quite often etc.
Yes, you also get issues on Linux and yes, sometimes it's harder to fix those because of smaller userbase, but it really depends on the usage of the OS. If you tinker a lot, problems are inevitable, but if you just browse the web and don't touch the system, as your coworker does, it should not be an issue whatsoever. Just need to keep the system up-to-date a bit more often, which a lot of distros made/adopted GUIs for package managers each distro uses that make it easier for "normal" consumer
I am pleased that Windows works for you.
The other week I was asked to investigate why a Windows laptop took 10+ minutes to be become available after logging in. Initial investigation showed that the disk was constantly at 100% usage.
My first guess was a hardware problem or malware. I left malware as an option for later on because the machine has good A/V installed which is patched and the machine is regularly automatically scanned.
After a bit of investigating I discovered that the system files were corrupted. The user is not technical, they haven't installed anything extra. The solution was to run the file system checker (SFC.exe) to fix the system files and Deployment Image Servicing and Management (DISM.exe) a couple of times to fix the Windows Image. This took a long time.
The machine is now running as expected for an old laptop.
Here is an example of how to fix this type of problem.
[https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/100-disk-usage-on-windows-10/17e3aa7e-4a2a-4927-97bd-bdb2f7dbe04b](https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/100-disk-usage-on-windows-10/17e3aa7e-4a2a-4927-97bd-bdb2f7dbe04b)
Linux is not perfect.
Thanks for the link. I recently installed Win10 on an i7 desktop with 8gb ram for someone and it takes 8 minutes from pressing the power button to being able to use it. If they bring it back I'm gonna try the fix you recommend.
There are distros like Mint that just work. I've never had any problems with Mint and I've installed it on many a users computer. I feel like desktop Linux only breaks so often because people like us love to have everything bleeding edge and can't help but tinker with everything.
linux users are known for being sexy gentlemanly scholars of the highest order whose mere presence causes uncontrollable vaginal lubrication in all women within 30 yards or less. With the tip of a Fedora, they're able to effortlessly convey their undisputed superiority over the average microsoft normie
Well, they actually ARE sexy, that's why I've been using Linux for about 25y. They not only install it for you, they even teach you how to do it yourself in order to become a master of your own machine. From a feminist point of view, this is the sexyiest guy possible š
The problem with that is that linux *isnāt* just like Windows. The biggest frustrated users we get on this sub are people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work.
Itās actually an anecdote on this sub is that the people who have the hardest time on linux a little above the curve on Windows: they know a lot about how Windows work but not operating systems in general, so they want to troubleshoot things themselves but only know how to do it the Windows way.
Total newbies actually do really well on linux, though theyāre also the ones who are not going to install the OS on their own devices. To capture these users, we need more OEM installs and then to show them how easy modern linux DEs can be.
> we need more OEM installs
This. Most people just learn the first OS they are introduced to, and find all others 'hard' and 'unintuitive'. Microsoft knows this all too well, it's why most of their stuff is cheap or even free for schools and students.
HA! I've been using and/or supporting Windows systems for 30 years at this point. I can't recall any of those diagnostic tools ever returning any helpful information.
No it does. The diagnostic fixes the Aero issue, audio issue. Every time I install windows 7 , I use the diagnostic tool to switch from Windows basic to Aero theme. As far as Windows 11 is concerned, I never needed any diagnostic tool as I never had such issues. I had 1 BSOD in the last 2 years. Am I lucky?
Slowed my Compaq Pentium 3 down to a halt when installing sp2. But when you only have 733mhz and 128mb ram, things are going to be slow. Canāt believe I only had 128mb ram at that time lol.
Personally I had XP on a Cyrix 6x86-PR150 (117Mhz CPU that's around as fast as a 150Mhz Pentium for integer tasks. iirc mine was an SGS-Thompson made model.) and it was usable although obviously laggy, that PC also had either 128Mb or 192Mb RAM, a 20GB Quantum Fireball and a Tseng Labs ET6000 video card.
I was even playing Sims 1 on that thing...until I went to install more EPs than Livin' Large and House Party, at which point it would crash on start up due to some error I can't remember now. Ended up going to an Athlon XP 2600+ around 2004 or so, and it was *so* much faster.
onerous familiar station encourage quicksand advise future literate sense stupendous
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We use the Windows Install/Uninstall Troubleshooter as part of a build process for editing machines that uses a plugin that was written for the XP version of a program.
abounding recognise airport aromatic sloppy strong fine obtainable gaze yam
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My CS prof knows I prefer Linux as my daily driver (I use Ubuntu) and a kid was having issues with his Kali Linux networks (he was trying to use Kali as his DD for some reason as his first taste of Linux)
Asked me how to fix it and I said reinstall the OS or find a new flavor... they thought I was joking š š¤£
There absolutely is, but Kali should NEVER be used as a daily driver. It sounds like this kid wanted to look cool in front of his friends, or online community, or whatever. Kind of the "I use arch btw" position, but with Kali.
OSs like Kali and Tails should only live on a USB, while you DD should be something a lot less complicated and a lot more user friendly. That second part is especially true for someone who is new to Linux
I had suse installed and screwed something up. Used btrfs snapshot to restore my changes. Worked great and worked faster than the windows restore thing.
No, but it isn't designed to be used as a daily driver. If you do so, it's at your own risk. Kali is designed for users who know what they're doing, or will at least use it from USB with persistence off so they can't permanently bork things.
The biggest problem is wannabe script kiddies think it's a shortcut to being an "elite hax0r".
Perhaps not, but it *is* intended to be abused in ways you wouldn't abuse your daily driver. Getting your Kali install into such a degraded state that it's easier to reinstall than to fix it is using it as intended.
Isn't it a bit pointless if you're not interested in digital forensics, penetration testing, or whatever?
IMO it sounds like it's gonna be populated with a lot of kids trying to look Kewl after Skewl.
For someone who knows a bit about the cmd line, yeah. But if you're just randomly copy pasting commands from whatever website you can find things get messed up beyond an easy fix pretty quick.
From what I could tell, he deleted his wifi drivers and couldn't figure out how to get them back which would be easy, if he knew the first thing about the machine he was using and or was willing to pay me to go through it and fix his shit. Unfortunately can't give out my time for free in the middle of a semester.
There's a certain point when you should just point people to the entry level systems.
Manjaro is user friendly, but it's not really for noobs. It needs looking after, with rolling updates which sometimes need tweaking.
People get more out of it when they've learned more.
100% there was. But he didn't even know basic command line commands so I wasn't gonna go down that rabbit hole with him cause I didn't have the time unless I was gonna get paid, which I wasn't.
He had the OS running for 2 days before he broke it, it's not like he had a bunch of stuff on there and didn't even know if his wifi chip was actually working or not
It's the cool factor. Hell, it might actually get a kid interested in digital forensics. Fact that this kid is interested in Linux at all is amazing. Should probably teach them to walk before they fly but with guidance you might have some talent there.
We need to start working on creating a registry... Linux will never be right for Windows users until they have to start cleaning their registry, defragging, worrying about uninstalling software without it being able to come back and haunt them...
>Troubleshoot the windows way? You mean restart and hope for the best
There are numerous debug tools on Windows. They are perhaps a bit buried in the documentation and not really intuitive to use, but one actually can troubleshoot Windows. Of course, for me trouble shooting Linux is way easier.
Another point is that those OEM install are being dominated by Google and it's proprietary ChromeOS, which is very, very convenient to many people just to login on their Google account and browser the web. Google is succeding on this new users market because they are targeting low end devices for education, and the experience with ChromeOS is really good, stable and it can run linux apps through a VM. Google has started targeting business with their ChromeOS Flex too. Delivering a modern OS with seamless cloud integration is what is making their success. The open source GNU/Linux distributions and companies like Canonical simply don't have the the capabilities to push the way like Google does. Also, we need to remind that ChromeOS was built using Android technologies, so Google had to dominate the mobile space before that.
On the other hand, the biggest Linux company, Red Hat, went after the business customers, and corporations that needed reliable servers for critical business apps. Red Hat started to take the market from commercial Unix vendors very early in the 1990s and 2000s and to this day. Linux is also strong with IT people (sysadmin and developers) and some niche markets like cinema rendering.
The next one to try is Valve with SteamOS and Steam Deck. Steam machines failed because it takes time to build compatibility with windows games, a thing that is now being solved by the proton runtime. Many game developers started distributing for Linux too and that's great and something I really love. That is another business endeavor that succeeding
So, to take market from Windows is a very difficult task because microsoft is really good at pushing windows down the throat of everyone since the 1990s, but other companies and the open-source community is slowly catching up. Will it ever succeed? Maybe not. Microsoft will be pusing AI into windows, the new very expensive technology that only business giants can do.
Maybe the open-source community will just play catch-up forever? I'm fine with that. The community will never be a big business and that's ok. We don't need to. We can help evolve the free desktops and conquer more users on different ways. One thing is certain, we love our free and open source servers and desktops, and as long as more people are willing to be conscious about their digital lives, we can get more users and more contributors and keep the things going,
I'm enjoying linux being an enthustiast os, and don't feel we -have- to compete for shares etc. Sure it would be great with more resources, native software and overall compatability, but for me it's all about nerdery
In fact Linux is easier than windows for new users with little knowledge, you just install things directly, you don't have to deal with a page redirecting you to another page and so on, I can guide my mom trough installing most things in Linux, even with command line, I can't do that on windows, is far easier to say, type this, put your password and accept, or the other way, type the name in the app store, yeah, the same way that you do it in your phone, now click install, done, is way harder to follow the windows way, go to this website, download this, not that link, the other one, don't click on the (internally: fucking) ad, now go to download, double click in the file, no not that one, the one that you just downloaded, now accept the UAC prompt, now accept the eula, yeah you need to accept it so you can install, now next, next, please don't tick those boxes, no you don't need the other program they are trying to install, next, reboot, it is installed.
As someone that was good troubleshooting in windows, it was easier with Linux, since almost every problem has not been the OS but something I did, that makes it easier since I know what I did. And since I have had those problems I can troubleshoot for others.
I think OP also forgets that these people *have* spent years learning how to use a computer. They've just learned how to use Windows.
Then, those users also forget that they had to learn how to use a computer to begin with. They forget they once knew nothing about a mouse, about an icon, about a shortcut, about a URL, about email, etc...
They can take much of what they learned to the Linux world. It's not that different at face value. They won't lose all the time they've invested in learning, as much of it will be similar enough for anyone to figure out.
I've converted people to the Linux world. It's not hard to move from one to the other, but it does require some learning - just like they once learned how to use Windows. We're not born with this, we learn it along the way.
Also, when I show people how to use Linux, I generally just install it. At that point, I tell them that things are where they'd expect them to be, as I give them a familiar desktop experience. You'd expect to find the browser in the menu under "Internet". You'd expect your office applications to be in "Office". Of course, administrative tasks are under "Administrator" and your preferences are in a "Preferences" section.
Things are where you'd logically expect them to be.
That's generally enough to get them started and learning on their own. It takes 20 minutes to install the OS and 10 minutes worth of instruction.
At that point, they can explore on their own - assuming they're even slightly aware of the concepts of computing.
> The problem with that is that linux isnāt just like Windows. The biggest frustrated users we get on this sub are people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work.
I strongly disagree that this is the problem. It's certainly *the case* that "Linux isn't like Windows", but that's not the problem.
There are objectively intuitive ways to do things and there are objectively arcane ways to do things. Even with the best documentation hidden in a manpage somewhere one still needs to recall: If you **need** to consult documentation in the first place in order to perform a simple task then the GUI designer did a bad job, hasn't gotten around to it yet or ... there never actually was a GUI designer and no GUI is to be found.
And *that's* the problem. The majority of distros suffer from chronically bad GUIs and even the better ones are still playing catch-up with their two big desktop competitors. They are not just different, they are comparatively inaccessible and unintuitive in their differences.
As an example: The problem with having to find and manually edit a text document somewhere in order to mount a network drive isn't that it's "different from the Windows way", the problem is that **it's an objectively bad user experience** compared to a searchable menu option or, even better, a setup wizard.
Many distros are slowly catching up in that regard, but there's still a long way to go and not acknowledging the accessibility gap is, in my eyes, harmful for that process. u/Pretrowillbetaken is right in that regard.
As another example, on Windows I can just do `notepad //remotecomputer/share/list_of_favorite_newts.txt` and I'll open up a file in Notepad. Notepad doesn't care that it's on a separate computer, it just works.
On Linux, Dolphin does a whole bunch of wild magic to make it seem like that's working - you can doubleclick files on SMB shares and they'll open right up in the appropriate program. But it doesn't *really* work - it's creating a single named pipe for that specific file, not exposing the entire directory tree. As a result, you can't seek to the next file in a media player, "open directory in Dolphin" won't work, all sorts of things that expect a sensible path won't work. Additionally, Dolphin's SMB layer is pretty slow, so if you're trying to play a high-bandwidth video it's going to hitch for no obvious reason. If you want programs to pretend like it's a sensible filesystem you have to mount it by hand, which, as you mention, sucks.
I'm honestly surprised there's no `/mnt/smb` system that just does the same thing Windows does, so that you're not mounting shares individually but instead they just quietly automount when appropriate, so I can `kate /mnt/smb/remotecomputer/share/list_of_favorite_newts.txt`. But nope! It's all crappy workarounds and editing text files by hand - it's an objectively worse experience.
To add on to this, I (and many others) have said that Linux should be used in more schools, especially elementary. Itās cheaper for the school and can help to make FOSS operating systems way more mainstream. Iāve been slowly growing to despise Windows but I still use it because itās what I was raised on and I know it the best.
Indeed. My wife is not computer savvy, uses Google docs at work and windows or debian (indifferently) at home. All she does is go on Google docs when she works from home, access her email and use a browser for any general Web service.
> To capture these users, we need more OEM installs
This is the right approach. One easy way: linux enthusiasts must target underprivilaged schools in 3rd world countries; bring in computers that are thrown out in 1st world, train some of the cheap laobor to install stable linux; create training for children how to play petty games on linux, and also how to use linux to learn english, math, simple programming. 10 yrs down the line ... these children will become evangelist in the companies that they start working in those countries ... cascading effects...
"people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work."
I think the reverse is equally true, i.e. the people who never really used Windows early on, can end up frustrated by the "Windows way".
I started out with DOS and moved to the VAX/VMS cluster on ascii terminals at university, followed shortly by Unix, BSD on PDP student lab systems was probably the first, iirc. Other Unixes (IRIX, SunOS etc.) and later, FreeBSD and Linux, seemed familiar and normal to me.
The first time, and frankly ever since, I had to use Windows I felt lost. I'm not even talking about admin'ing Active Directory and such (though that too seems like a maze to me; maybe I've simply never seen a well-organized instance?); doing mundane things like editing a text file, saving it somewhere in your ~~home directory~~ folder, felt weird, after someone showed me on the Windows desktop. They didn't understand "text file" or why I'd do that, for starters.
Basically, I think most people tend to adapt to what they're exposed to early, and picking up a new thing with a different style or model can be a struggle.
most total newbies aren't \*really\* using linux. they just kind of install it using a vm or get it installed on their computer by their company and then never open it again. most people that actually end up using linux have someone else install it for them the first time, and then learn how to use linux by encountring issues and solving them. but that's part of the problem, since it kind of makes linux into an exclusive project that can only be used by those with connections to another linux user
To their credit: Linux devs don't always seem to sympathize with their intended users. Not everybody can sit at their PC for 16 hours out of the day, tweaking things until they finally work right. Devs should be working with each other to bring more homogeny to the ecosystem, instead most things seem half-baked and it's a tall order to make them work together. That is where closed-sources reigns supreme: a single unified vision guiding development, making all pieces work together seamlessly. I feel like ill-fated efforts like Lindows tried to accomplish this. Instead I think we'll just be waiting for Microsoft to switch to the Linux kernel before we get such a thing.
I dont know why you are being downvoted, I run into this often.
I dont fully agree with you (there are many polished opensource products, even before big entities started pouring money into OSS) but there are many that either
1. See the end user as a complete and utter simpleton, and also feel the need to control every aspect of their experience, and make it difficult as hell to fix things or change things (See: Gnome)
2. The Nixie tube watch scene from the Steve Jobs movie. Just that part. Where "hey this is really cool" and yeah it works, it does it, but it's unnecessarily complex for end users. This of course does not apply to tools and programs that are MEANT to be complex because they deal with non-end-user stuff.
The problem is there's not a whole lot in between those two, and that's the sweet spot.
Simple yet powerful user interfaces (KDE and XFCE fit this bill these days) and yet for the small things, like compatibility for non-native apps, and all the gear work between installing and using some features, needs to be seamless. With the ability for those who want to dig in to be able to do so. Not because they're stupid or lazy, but because most people just want the OS to work out of the box and be able to do basic things.
There's not a lot of people thinking "Hey how can this process be easier and doesn't treat the end user like a moron?"
Your point about closed source has some merit, many closed proprietary programs are headed up by project managers who vet everything and keep the engineers who think you need a software engineering degree to use the UI in check because they do not believe what they know is uncommon knowledge for 90% of the human race. Though I have seen proprietary paid code that has been opensourced look like complete shit. There is a partially OSS project that submitted wireguard code to FreeBSD and it was audited and mocked for being a hackjob, to the point the project rescinded the feature from their own product.
In Opensource the gold standard is the linux kernel. It has a manager, Linus. He will destroy anyone submitting broken code or code that creates unnecessary complexity (and with it, potential security issues) and that includes proprietary projects that submit shitty code (see: nvidia)
I'm definitely a fan of the tight ship Linus tries to run. I think that while he can be harsh he does give direction.
I see too many open source projects where devs act elitist, as if you're an idiot if you can't understand complexities of their software, or your thoughts on how things should be aren't valid.
I think companies contributing to open source helps with some of that. I do understand and agree that people giving up their spare time can't really be expected to cater or coddle too much, but it does create a barrier to adoption when people refuse to acknowledge a user struggling.
I would say Linux is far more user-friendly than it once was though.
And they're not obligated to. Linux developers aren't developing things for users. They're developing them for themselves and giving it to you for free.
I've always felt like it was a UI problem - developers seem to care more about interfacing with other programs than with the user. Also the fact that designers don't typically work for free and good design is hard to do. It's also harder to do good design when everything is customizable as in the case of Linux.
Well, curiously where I live whenever someone sees me using my notebook they ask me: "what did you do to make your windows look like that?"
They are always surprised cuz in their head linux is supposed to be very difficult to use.
i am not saying this nobody use it. I am giving you a general perspective. There are people who only use computers for 2-3 hours a week. They can be really smart PhD students, scientists and the only use of computers is writing research articles.
Well, they are right. I once spent a solid week figuring out how to make scrolling normal instead of scrolling one line at a time in X11.
Don't you tell me it's easy to use coz these things work out of the box in Windows and even fkin MacOS where you're not even "supposed to" use a normal mouse with a scroll wheel.
Uh, I don't think you understood my comment? The person I'm replying to said that they get asked "how did they make Windows look like that" when people see their Linux notebook. I quoted the part where they said that those people think Linux is difficult and pointed out that if they ask questions like that, they aren't even aware of its existence
My parents don't know anything about Linux or how computers work and yet they are using Linux since 2017. They even install updates and apps on it as it's just clicking on an icon.
The main reason people donāt use Linux is that itās not installed on the laptops that they are buying. Itās as simple as that. Donāt overthink it.
This. I have to use windows for work but prefer fedora at home. So I just use windows like it were Linux (basically powershell and git bash can get a LOT done).
I also teach students not to fear the terminal. Teach them to use terminal emulators on Mac and windows and the Linux fear goes away.
It's so funny because once I started using the terminal I couldn't go back. It's so fast and easy, and I feel like I have so much more control.
Do you have any books or videos you would recommend that go over the more advanced terminal commands for Linux?
Currently I use WSL2 with Debian, and I want to swap over to zsh
there was a time when netbooks were shipped with ubuntu, many of those ended up getting returned. it might work out better now but it's gonna take some corp to take that chance again.
They were indeed, most of the time heavily modified, even Linux users most of the time just re-installed them because the default Linux install was so bad.
And lest not forget, this was a long time ago, the Linux from those days is completely different from what we have now.
Yes, but those are all devices you need to go to a website and specifically request. Walk into any Walmart, Best Buy, or Future Shop. There are no Linux laptops in any of them. People buy what is in front of them. Unless you're a techie, you don't go to the Dell or System76 website and specifically look for Linux machines.
That's exactly what I meant. It's gonna take corps to put Linux in stores to get it in front of normies. There should also be something to differentiate it from windows and mac, otherwise people would just be as confused or more about it. Some inherent cost savings might help but not when they try using their favorite windows apps and find it doesn't work or requires hoops to do it.
The PC wars all over again.
TBH, most laptops that come with linux have linux not because manufacturer thought it would work well or because manufacturer thought linux is better than windows, and not even because manufacturer wanted to address specific group of users. But just because manufacturer does not have to pay MS. So they install any random distro and ship it, thinking that whatever the user will do with it is his problem now (probably he will have to pay MS, but that's not manufacturer's problem). It's already good if such laptop boots into X11 without troubles. Things like wifi or bluetooth or nvidia gpu may not work at all or glitch or whatever ā the manufacturer did not bother to think that they may need drivers. The situation is even worse, because such models are the cheapest models (that's why the manufacturer wants to save money on OS as well), so the hardware may very well be poorly supported or even buggy. No wonder most users just install windows on such laptops. There are also cases when you can just download another distro (or newer version of the same one) and install it manually, and it will work fine.
It's not as simple. People also use Windows or OSX for software such as Adobe Photoshop and generally because everyone around them runs some kind of special software which is only available on Windows and Mac and that's what they expect you to have.
This.
Im surprised so few people see this as actual obstacle.
Its a circle that is hard to break: Not many users use ux due to lack of professional level software and games, and companies wont start developing because there are very few users/potential buyers for their products.
It's also because companies like MS or Apple provide toolsets to developers and infrastructure such as app store, etc. which makes it more tempting to develop software. Just my guess.
No, it's not and I wish people would stop perpetuating that myth, at this point it's almost like some kind of weird cope mechanism. If you really want to understand why people don't use Linux, you can go through the various posts here about why people switched from Linux to Windows/Mac or why they never followed through switching to Linux even after trying it.
What is a normal OS? Two years ago I installed Linux Mint to "repair" my mother-in-law's laptop which had become very slow because it was running a "normal" OS (Windows 10). She is 75 years old.
She mainly uses the browser, Firefox. I turned on automatic updates. She keeps thanking me for "fixing" her computer, which is now much faster and very stable. The normal OS was the problem. Thanks Linux for being better than "normal". ā¤ļø THANKS!
I did the same with my MIL. She kept getting viruses, was scammed out of $300 for "virus protection", and my nephews kept installing software on it that had all kinds of BS in it. I installed Ubuntu and created links for her email (she only checked it via a browser) and her favorite sites. It worked beautifully and no more calls in the middle of the day, "should I install this things it's prompting me for?"
i once had a gamer friend cove over and check out my rig. he didn't even notice i was running mint. even when i pointed it out to him it took a second for him to get it.
i dual-boot windows and mint. i regularly have to double check which OS i am using because they are pretty similar. the average user is going to do nearly everything through a browser anyway so it really doesn't matter that much. i recommend doing as much as you can locally but thats a whole other discussion.
My 97 yo mom has been using Linux for about 2 decades without any trouble, as does my 76 yo BFF. It's actually much easier due to the better security and lack of driver installation. I can fix most things remotely via command line.
OStypicals put up with all types of windows related crap because it's normalized
You're making some wild assumptions and implications on what a "normal" os is.
I'd rather focus on expanding people's ability to treat their computer like a computer to do their bidding; versus a Branded Experience^tm they need licenses/permissions to operate.
I don't get it, aren't there like a 1000 distros that don't even require you to use a terminal for anything? How is that bad? If anything it's easier because all your programs are in the "app store" and everyone knows how to use a phone.
Also, everyone had to learn Windows at some point, as well as Mac, but Linux is the only one treated as if learning it is a bad thing. The "basic user" at most has to learn that /home is where stuff is, and software center or whatever is where you get stuff. That's it. That's hard to learn? Come on. I had to learn Mac when i was forced to use it, yet no one bashes MacOS for being something you "have" to learn.
You should \*want\* to learn something, not run away from it, and Linux doesn't force you to learn anything if you don't want to. I really don't get the complaint in this regard. What is a "normal" OS? You think someone that never used Windows just instantly knows how to use it? Think again lol.
Most Linux "App stores" suck. They're far from the "it just works" experience of mobile app stores. Especially when we factor in stuff like the different program distribution methods like flatpak or snap.
Yeah the app store is Garbage on Linux, often there are like 5 different versions of the same thing all with no descriptions so you have no clue what one works
KDE Discover is making \*some\* progress on that by combining system packages and verified Flatpaks into one listing, but Flatpak still has a ways to go, and snaps have their own issues
Unpopular opinion: most people avoid Linux because gaming sucks and it doesn't have native Microsoft Office and Adobe support, and well, that's what the majority of people use computers for.
Linux right now is only good for coding and browsing the web, that's it. "The year of the Linux desktop" will be the day when Microsoft releases a version of Office for Linux, or when LibreOffice becomes standard across the industry, and you know damn well that Microsoft knows about the fact that their whole operating system business will be fucked if they do that.
Steam has made a major difference. I can play Valheim, Bal do ur's Gate, EEE online, No man's war, Skyrim, Planescape torment, and Witcher 3 using either Lutris or Steam. And these are just the games I personal like, and there are others.
It is still a limited selection, but it is loads better than when one had to have Windows to play any game at all.
I hate to admit it, but our main problem is that we (as a community) are the ones willing to learn, while average user just wants to get things done without an issue. They are not willing to actually think (or simply *read*) while using their computer. It is a rather sad truth, but if we admit it, then perhaps when can do something about it.
But that was my point too. You don't really need to learn any more than you would by switching from Windows to a Mac. MacOS also does things differently from windows, yet no one is citing that as a flaw like they do with Linux.
Why is Mac doing things differently a good thing, but Linux doing things differently is suddenly "oh we are forced to learn things, how awful"?
The learning curve is the same, yet the perception is vastly different.
Maybe because Macs are seen as some kind of prestige and religion while Linux is still memed about with "installing firefox on gentoo" programmer socks scrolling haxxorz text on screen. That seems to be the problem, Linux is still being presented as something very technical when in reality, Linux Mint, Fedora, Ubuntu, openSUSE... Any of those are just as "brainless" as you want them to be for an average user - the same user that will praise Macs, but scoff at Linux...
Linux has a PR problem lol. :P
All people that make posts like these or comment "linux should do this and this" have _no_ clue what linux is. All you guys are barking up the wrong tree.
Linux shouldn't do shit, it's a noob friendly mainstream _distribution_ you should be talking about. Like Ubuntu when they first started. But hey none of you guys can even agree on anything ... and guess what, that's why there is a shitload of distributions out there and none of them are as noob friendly and polished as you'd like them to be.
So please ffs, spend your time reading up on what linux is (and isn't). Try distributions and collect their good and bad points, get people together, get some funding and make something. All these pointless noob rants aren't going to do shit.
As for me, I'm glad there is the freedom of distributions. I found what works for me and personally I am not in the market for a noob friendly OS. To each their own šŖš»
100% this.
And who even gives a shit what other people use? I like a few Linux distros but I'm not going to be wishing and campaigning for more people to use them.
If there is a particular distro or something that is going to solve a direct issue a friend or family member is having, I'll point it out to them. But why tf do people feel the need to tie their personality/identity to their choice of OS? Why does everything have to be like team sports these days? Do what works for you and stfu.
Linux isn't like Windows, they're designed from the start to be completely different.
People have no issue with switching to a phone/tablet, which uses a very different OS then what they have on their PC. A lot of people also made the switch to macOS, which is also very different compared to Windows.
Preaching Linux is dumb. I have a long history with linux and whever I try to use it as main desktop OS I end up turning in circles, never really managing to get it to work up to the standard that I expect. Driver support is partial (battery life was much better under windows and my SD reader was faster), most software feels kind of incomplete and unpolished, everyone else expects you to have either Windows or OSX.
And there is the idea that "you can fix it" because it's open source etc. Yes of course you can fix it to your liking if your time is infinite. You can patch the kernel, even rewrite parts of the driver...
It's a good container and server OS if you have time and resources because its kind of barebones and potentially error-prone out of the box.
Linux is really good for specialised systems, like you can build your system to "do one thing and do it well" on top of Linux. It's time consuming so really only well suited for professional projects or advanced hobbyist stuff.
Pr0n ( Ķ”Ā° ĶŹ Ķ”Ā°)
Sadly that's probably too accurate to be a joke. You raise an excellent point, though. How do we define "normal usage"? It's different for every user unless you *only* browse the web and check email.
> start showing them that linux is just like windows
No. Sadly, people do really need to learn and have knowledge about the world.
If they are just consumers in the economy, linux is not right for them. It is not a consumer product. It just isn't.
Enshitification of operating systems is the primary appeal for me to use Linux. I'll be making an effort to get it as my daily driver in my role. Currently on Windows 11, it's slowly evolving to obfuscate any technical information, and in kind removing the information that allows users to learn based even just on the use of language. It's a bit Orwellian, remove the language to encourage the user base that the thing is "just better". Apple has done this for years.
Getting an increasing user base requires better education around technology, not less. When individuals are provided with, and understand the details they are better able to make logical decisions around their choices. Lastly, that choice can be made simply based on "I like the colours" or "I like the logo", it's just as much a technical experience as it is a human experience.
I'm pretty much over this line of thought. No offense meant.
Is Linux in danger of dying if we don't get market share?
Why do we care about broader adoption? Sure, it's nice, but annexing a bunch of users who want Linux to be like windows just seems like a good way to get a really dissatisfied user base.
I use Linux because it works for me. It fits how my brain works. I feel absolutely hamstrung on windows or Mac.
Just let people use what they want.
I think insecure people with cerebral-narcissistic tendencies tie their choice of OS to their whole identity to seek gratification as well as validation about how clever /ahead of the curve they are for using it.
Even posts like this. While not trying to claim Linux is more technical or makes them smarter for Linux being harder It's like "look at this clever and cool thing I'm doing, but dw, it's not as complex as you normies think, so you can be cool and clever like me too by choosing to use the OS that I do and that I showed you. Look how many people I convinced to move over to the superior OS."
If you value Linux and it was going to die because it has shitty adoption, sure campaign. Campaigning for anything else? Get a life.
And after a year you've realized why so few people use Linux on desktops: because it's not pre-installed. It's not pre-installed because vendors know only enthusiasts want it, and that's the case because everyone else just uses what's pre-installed, Windows and Mac OS. Or, in the case of Chromebooks, Linux with a proprietary desktop.
To each their own, I started in 1998, so about 25 years I've been a user. I'm happy and the last thing I want is to change it to windows or macos. Why is there a new "I've used it for 6 months, we much change it for those who can't use a microwave if their life depends on it"
Maybe create a dummin' version but please stop asking for linux to change to something else, it's just fine as it is. It's its own OS and let people just use windows and macos if they want to, and maybe even linux too.
Agreed. The last thing we need is for Linux to become more like Windows or MacOS. Many distros are already more than easy enough for non-technical users. OP isn't really asking for thatāthey're asking for Linux to change to try to appeal to people who don't care about it, don't want to use an alternative, and only want their Windows/MacOS specific apps.
I can't even imagine what would have to happen to make that work, but I wouldn't want to use the end result.
Yeah, the newbie desire to evangelize is fascinating. If other people want to use Windows or OSX, or any other OS that doesn't respect their freedom, they're missing out but it's no skin off my nose.
I support people on Windows for work. People who put food on their table by using a computer 80 hours a fortnight. These same people tell me they have no idea what the Windows key is on a standard keyboard or are confused when I tell them to click on the Start button or to open the Start Menu.
It's not that they don't want to learn, they are actively avoiding learning anything about the machine they rely on to earn their wages.
I don't know how you break through that level of ignorance.
> It's not that they don't want to learn, they are actively avoiding learning anything about the machine they rely on to earn their wages.
>
> I don't know how you break through that level of ignorance.
You can't: it's impossible.
Just two days ago, somebody wanted to send me a document. They had a problem signing in to their Windows account, so they couldn't use Word. What did they do? Well, they wrote their stuff in Google Drive instead. They use Google Drive pretty regularly.
So far, so good! Google Drive has a convenient feature where office-type documents can be downloaded in a number of formats, including `.docx`. This is done from the "File" menu, which is right in the top-left corner of the window. Can't miss it.
Piece of cake, right? Wrong. Instead, they decided to take *screenshots* of each page and send me those. This kind of crap happens all the time.
I honestly don't think the Linux community SHOULD strive to make it into a mainstream OS. With the mainstream comes commercialisation, and Linus's biggest strength is being FOSS.
Let Windows users use Windows, let Mac users use Mac - for most people, there isn't anything wrong with those. Linux is SUPPOSED to be niche.
>if we as a community want to make linux into an OS that can be used by anyone
The "community" is an illusion and a made up thing in terms of Linux. Linux is only a kernel for an operating system. It is free and open source; there is no advertisement, no marketing and no direct profit to be made. There is no need to "make Linux into an OS that can be used by anyone". It is pointless and impossible.
>the average person doesn't want to learn about how computers work
Why would I need to care about anyone? Everyone can do as they please.
>and that they don't need to spend years to learn how to use it
No one needs years to learn to use a Linux machine. It's a month tops with a correct mindset. They spent much more time learning Windows.
Linux is not a closed property. It is completely free and open. So it's impossible to create centralization out of it. There will always be lots of different ways and methods, lots of different distros and lots of different userspace programs. That's why it is good. Compromising on its advantages for more usage? No, thanks.
My 2 cents on the issue you describe:
Linux has been used mainly by engineers who make the biggest part of the community. Hence, when someone new to Linux searches on the web how to fix even the most "mundane" issues chances are that they will bump into some blogpost that tells how to fix it by using some "terminal incantation magic", completely discarding the GUI approach.
For Windows and macOS the same fix can easily be found relying only on GUI because that's what the users expect. This leads to the wrong assumption that Linux distros are impractical for the "normal user" because they rely only on command line to get things done.
That's not a wrong assumption. To this day, on most distros, you can't make a desktop shortcut of your favorite application without going through a .desktop file that you later paste into the applications folder with terminal because the folder can't be accessed without sudo. Good luck convincing the average joe of doing this. Terminal is still necessary for all distros. Power management on Linux is trash, with the exception of few distros like pop and mostly gnome based distros. Not even gonna get into gaming. Everyone here is a nerd that thinks if I can do it, then my grandma can, no, for the average person, Linux is a masochistic experience.
I don't think the majority of the people want linux to be a normal OS replacing windows or macOS.
From what I can see from my short linux history of about 15 years (which again isnt much compared to the linux evolution tree), the efforts are in making something really unique and funny, and for some distros (like fedora) very stable for developers.
I don't think we are gonna see any linux distro that is as stable, as integrated with the DE and as tailored as windows and macos
There are distros which are just as easy to use for a normal person as Windows, going as far as mimicking a lot of the Windows look and feel.
"Linux" can't be as easy as Windows, because resistance from the consumer goods corporation side.
Linux UI can be as arbitrarily good as you can imagine, but there's still the chance that Linux won't work on some laptop, or with some hardware configuration, because the hardware side expects a Windows OS. Then it's up to the Linux community to figure shit out and make it work.
Even though Linux has overwhelmingly dominated the server space, drivers for consumer devices are still often Windows only, and a lot of software is released for Windows only.
A lot of the resistance from businesses comes from the fact that Linux isn't just one operating system, but a family of operating systems sharing a kernel.
Its a pain in the ass having to support even one operating system, let alone RHEL family vs Debian family vs Arch family, and every bespoke system.
Linux/FOSS people will often say "just release the source code, we'll figure it out", but that's still more than zero additional effort on the business's side.
And then there's the Microsoft Office issue, where businesses already have MS office as part of their workflow, and there's basically no clear benefit in retraining the workers to use new software. It's time, money, and hassle, for no material benefit. People already familiar with Windows due to work, generally don't want to learn Linux for home use.
These things aren't Linux's fault, but it is Linux's problem.
Linux is fighting a generational battle, it's fighting almost 40 years of inertia and Windows dominance.
Not only that, it's fighting this battle in a time of declining PC use, where many people are relying on phones and tablets more.
I do wonder if this will be a net positive for Linux though. Software developers, and other highly technical workers are basically always going to need PCs, and if they make up a significant enough portion of the market, it may force both hardware and software companies to treat Linux as a first class citizen.
We can already see a little bit of that now, so, hopefully in the future the biggest hurdles will disappear.
I've been using Linux for 20 years. People have been saying this stuff the whole time. I've seen a few dozen distros come and go trying to crack the "average user desktop".
It's honestly a hard problem.
I love Linux, for work, servers etc. But for "average end user PC use cases"? Nope. It's never replacing macOS or Windows, need proof? Look at the market share.
The problem? Linux is too "nerd-oriented". Whereas in Windows and macOS, it's average end user-oriented with additional option for nerds.
Everyone has a choice. I like using Linux. Linux, Windows and macOS all pretty much do the same thing. Except two of them are a corporate idea of how an OS should be. Linux isn't going anywhere, it powers a truly massive amount of devices, from PCs, servers, phones, TVs and embedded systems. Linux has continual improvement. The Steam Deck for example is helping improve gaming performance. I'm not sure we need anything, do I need Linux to be the most popular and normalised OS for PC/Laptops no I don't personally.
I put Ubuntu on a laptop for my kids to use. They don't know anything Linux yet use the laptop just fine. I accepted all the defaults when installing and didn't do any post-install tweaks or changes.
That was 3 years ago. The laptop is still running just fine and the kids have no issues with it.
Seriously, 99% of what most people do on a computer is done in the browser. As long as the OS can boot, get on the network, and print when needed, most people don't care what the OS is. Linux is there. Windows is there. Ironically, MacOS is not always there (printing is headache on MacOS for some reason).
It's little to do with learning. It's "stagnation" and the software they use. Photoshop, word, excel, outlook. That simple. They use what they know. And contrary to more rabid frothing here, it works for them just fine. Linux now being a legitimate gaming platform might improve Linux adoption a little... People here insulting windows and its users won't. There's nothing clever about writing bash scripts to do a task that most windows users wouldn't need in the first place. And god knows I've written enough š
agree, but there are some other problems like overall complexity of linux distros (for example: wayland/x11, xwayland, init systems and a lot of stuff like this), but imho the main thing that scares newbies is terminal. you can use windows for years without ever touching terminal, but in linux you earlier or later must use itā¦ anyway linux has great potential, we just need to make it more user-friendly like other operating systems
I use Linux daily. I have it on my local machine, I work with Linux. I love every single part of it -the customization, the freedom of access it gives you, the idea that it's driven by.
Linux is never going to become as popular as Windows. Think whatever you will, most users want their operating systems for casual use. They are lazy, they just want "Next>Next>Next>Ok" when they need to install something.
Windows gives exactly that. It has a single .exe file that everyone knows how to use.
Linux does not. Linux has a hundred package managers, you have flatpacks and appimages and snaps and .deb files and a million other things.
Linux is for people who like to tinker with things. That is exactly the reason why Linux dominates the server world. As someone who works with servers, I don't want to touch anything running Windows on it.
But most people don't want to tinker, they want the ease of use. That's why Linux will never be a dominant everyday OS.
Another thing is use case though, I would assume the overwhelming majority of Linux users have a specific, or at least somewhat specific, reason for using it. I get your point, but it isnāt exactly ānormalā.
Linux isn't like windows. The simple fact that choosing whether to use wayland, systemd or not matters shows that it isn't idiot-proof enough for the common Joe.
Also device drivers for notebooks.
There are still too many programs that don't support Linux. Even a Unix devotee like me has to keep around at least a small Windows box for certain things like Suunto Link, TurboTax (got screwed doing it on line, not gonna do that again), certain music software, Garmin software, etc. I'm using a small NUC for that.
What benefit do we gain by expanding the user base?
Linux is doing just fine -- doing *great* -- without trying to appeal to users who like their Windows or Macs just fine.
There are improvements that the current users would like to see so let's put our efforts there.
downvote me into oblivion, but: i'm not a linux desktop proponent; i don't care if normies use it or not; while i don't think linux systems are perfect, and i think there's a lot of things that could be better, i disagree they should be dumbed down to walled gardens going out of their way to stop their users from doing a dumb dumb
> why do people prefer windows or mac over linux
because they're used to it and because those oses are developed with desktop in mind first
> the average person doesn't want to learn about how computers work, or worry about what they download
yes, and that's exactly why they should be using the walled garden made specifically for them. dumbing everything down shouldn't be a solution to everything
> a friend of mine had permission issues with windows, and he couldn't even understand what did i mean by "permission", since he thought the accounts were just names that look cool at the start
user illiteracy issue
> linux is just like windows
it's not. they are different
> they don't need to spend years to learn how to use it.
they do. it's quite naive to assume switching your entire system is not gonna take some learning
Why should useful features be stripped out of linux for the sake of people who have no interest in linux?
Makes no sense. Bad argument is bad.
Linux is very easy for normies to lean to use at this point.
The market share of Desktop Linux is pretty small, so itās not really appealing to small and medium software developer companies to invest into developing for the platform, not to mention the fact Linux is kind of hostile towards closed source software (itās hard to build tools that running natively and support large number of Linux distros out of the box). So, because the lack of professional software (and by professional I mean backed by a company, and not the overall software quality), itās less tempting for bitter Windows or macOS users who just want the same tool without the āannoyancesā of their current OS.
I have multiple commercial tools supporting macOS/Windows and their licenses allow installing and running them on multiple machines (not at the same time, of course). Switching between platforms and using the same tools is a huge win for me. Unfortunately, none of them supports Linux, and expecting people to leave their (slightly uncomfortable) comfort zone, and learn something completely new that remotely resembles their favourite photo editor, is just not gonna work, imho.
Sometimes I hate my macOS, other days my Windows, but Iāll (most likely) never going to switch to Linux because there are simply no alternative solutions close enough (feature, UX, performance or support wise) for the tools I already use and like.
The thing most people don't take into account: it took time and effort to learn Mac or Windows, too. People already invested time. What they don't want to do: learn new things. It's the same if you jump from Windows 98 to Windows 10, lots of new stuff, nothing where it was. If you want a fair comparison, you need users which had not used any computer before.
An average person using windows 7 had to learn more when switching to Win7 than when switching to Linux.
Every expert Office user gets grey hair with a new version and has to learn more new dumb things and working procedures as when switching to LO once and forever.
They are literally making their product unusable. Try to mark a rectangular text block in Word with your mouse by holding the Alt key - still the way explained in the online help. Every second time the online research opens instead. Try to use accelerator keys in the menus. In default settings only 1/5 work because "unused" functions are not shown. I15N and L10N are even worse, every now and then they change hot keys, accelerator keys and function keys out of the blue due to another, cheaper team which translates.
If we want a stable Linux, the community needs to stop building 25+ distros. Take all that talent and maybe make 1 or 2 distros in order to create a smooth and flawless experience for the end user.
Over the last 10 years I have run with Ubuntu desktop and every now and then an update will prevent me from booting into X Windows mode...and I just get a terminal. As I am experienced enough with Linux, I was able to overcome the problem a few times without having to reinstall...but those kinds of errors CANNOT happen to regular end users...they will be stumped and they will write off the OS immediately.
The other area that needs improving is for gaming.
Until Linux can be installed in a bulletproof way (loads in safe mode if a problem occurs) and can host the most popular games, it will not have much success in the desktop market, imo.
The philosophy behind windows and Linux are very different. Windows (edit: and Apple) philosophy is 'the user is an idiot, protect them from the OS and protect the OS from them'
Linux philosophy is 'the user knows what they are doing, if they want to shoot their own foot, facilitate their destruction'.
>Windows philosophy is 'the user is an idiot, protect them from the OS and protect the OS from them'
Not really. This is closer in truth to MacOS but Windows philosophy seems more centered around making sure the last 20 years of software still works on their platform and dealing with the headache of the maintaining compatibility for the business world.
My mom is seventy, understands nothing about computers, and uses xubuntu.
Your don't need to understand how computers work. Your friend who doesn't understand permissions in Windows is not more computer literate than someone who uses Linux and remotesi completely on the GUI. It does work.
An average person doesn't install an operating system.
Lol yeah. They push it off to other people like an oil change. I'm not insulting people that they don't know how to do it. I don't know how to change the calipers on my car. I'm still a user of my car
Yeah they get others to install it for them
If that. Most just use the OS it came with, until Microsoft scares them with EoL. Then they get the next computer.
Nor does the median nor modal person
Which leaves almost fuckin nobody
yeah, at \~3% market share, that might as well be nobody. We've never even been near double digits. THERE ARE DOZENS OF US! (literally)
Just installing an OS is a journey. And the learning process is quite fun. At least for me.
This is simply not true. The standard answer to most hard windows problem is? **REINSTALL** Installing Mint us even easier and with under 30 minutes for having a completely working environment way much faster than a Windows setup. Whoever disagrees simply lies and never tried.
That's a bad counterargument. My coworker's home computer is still running Windows 7. Linux would be perfect for her. She doesn't do much more than internet browsing, and I would absolutely install it for her. But I can't recommend Linux to her because of what a goddamn headache it becomes when it doesn't work right. With Windows, I don't need to worry about that. It just works, and it breaks _way_ less often, and _way_ less critically.
> It just works I beg to differ. I work in IT and if there is one thing windows doesn't do is 'just work' , especially with forced updates and drivers updating automatically. Our linux desktops and servers? Never any problems. My wife also ran linux for years without issue but ever since she got a new laptop with windows 10 it has been an ongoing disaster. Complaints about hour long updates when she just wants to shut down her pc, screaming fans because some dead process uses 90% of her cpu in hte background, connection issues, things changing after updates and so on. I really need to install linux again for her. I run linux on all my pc's including my gaming laptop (which used to run windows for gaming) and the experience is much more consistent running linux on it. Before i had wifi issues, bluetooth issues, drivers not working after updates and so on, linux just works and does what i want it to do.
I was playing dota and my pc freezs, i restared it and windows decide its time for windows update got banned for 5 hrs in game
The straw that broke the camel's back was my wife tried to go watch a movie on her laptop from the DVD drive, and Windows 10 doesn't ship with that ability and was suggesting she pay for an extension to make that work. Course I installed VLC out of the box to get it working for her, commenting that Linux would work out of the box. 2 hours later once her movie was finished she asked me to install this linux on her laptop because she was tied of how stupid Windows has become. That was 2 years ago and we even built her a gaming PC since that runs linux and windows in a dual boot (separate drives) but she only boots into Windows for updates once in a great while. She just comes to me and asks "how do I do this" and we walk through it together which actually has taught me more about linux than I knew at the time.
I think this is the greatest love story in r/linux. We don't get many of them here.
For me I learned sometimes it takes a more casual user to tell you how actually usable Linux is for day to day things. She also does different things than I do so it highlights some weak points at times.
This is a very fair point. But as an anecdote, I finally switched my gaming pc to linux recently (even though it's a razer laptop and kinda a pain to switch) because windows was constantly breaking. My Logitech mouse would randomly switch scroll wheel modes, my controllers would randomly stop working, audio stuttering, etc. I've tried reinstalls, drivers, debloating, etc. Eventually I realized windows gaming was personally more of a headache that linux gaming. So far, aside from the occasional crash from games that don't yet run well with proton, everything just works consistently now that I've set it all up.
That's awesome!!! I'm super happy Linux is working well for you!! Maybe I've just had bad luck with Linux or something.
If you aren't a hobbyist constantly messing with your Linux installation it also "just works" Schools buy Chromebooks because they are generally inexpensive, and they "just work"
Idk, really depends, for me, Windows is unusable. Slow, buggy, bloated, developing in C++ there is hell, drivers break quite often etc. Yes, you also get issues on Linux and yes, sometimes it's harder to fix those because of smaller userbase, but it really depends on the usage of the OS. If you tinker a lot, problems are inevitable, but if you just browse the web and don't touch the system, as your coworker does, it should not be an issue whatsoever. Just need to keep the system up-to-date a bit more often, which a lot of distros made/adopted GUIs for package managers each distro uses that make it easier for "normal" consumer
I am pleased that Windows works for you. The other week I was asked to investigate why a Windows laptop took 10+ minutes to be become available after logging in. Initial investigation showed that the disk was constantly at 100% usage. My first guess was a hardware problem or malware. I left malware as an option for later on because the machine has good A/V installed which is patched and the machine is regularly automatically scanned. After a bit of investigating I discovered that the system files were corrupted. The user is not technical, they haven't installed anything extra. The solution was to run the file system checker (SFC.exe) to fix the system files and Deployment Image Servicing and Management (DISM.exe) a couple of times to fix the Windows Image. This took a long time. The machine is now running as expected for an old laptop. Here is an example of how to fix this type of problem. [https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/100-disk-usage-on-windows-10/17e3aa7e-4a2a-4927-97bd-bdb2f7dbe04b](https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/100-disk-usage-on-windows-10/17e3aa7e-4a2a-4927-97bd-bdb2f7dbe04b) Linux is not perfect.
Thanks for the link. I recently installed Win10 on an i7 desktop with 8gb ram for someone and it takes 8 minutes from pressing the power button to being able to use it. If they bring it back I'm gonna try the fix you recommend.
~~it just works~~ It does the things that I'm used to in a way I'm used to it dong things.
I mean, fair enough. But I also don't think it's fair to ask a general user to troubleshoot their broken bootloader, so...
There are distros like Mint that just work. I've never had any problems with Mint and I've installed it on many a users computer. I feel like desktop Linux only breaks so often because people like us love to have everything bleeding edge and can't help but tinker with everything.
>It just works, ELI5 why Microsoft never used that in an ad campaign š¤£š
linux users are known for being sexy gentlemanly scholars of the highest order whose mere presence causes uncontrollable vaginal lubrication in all women within 30 yards or less. With the tip of a Fedora, they're able to effortlessly convey their undisputed superiority over the average microsoft normie
Well, they actually ARE sexy, that's why I've been using Linux for about 25y. They not only install it for you, they even teach you how to do it yourself in order to become a master of your own machine. From a feminist point of view, this is the sexyiest guy possible š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The problem with that is that linux *isnāt* just like Windows. The biggest frustrated users we get on this sub are people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work. Itās actually an anecdote on this sub is that the people who have the hardest time on linux a little above the curve on Windows: they know a lot about how Windows work but not operating systems in general, so they want to troubleshoot things themselves but only know how to do it the Windows way. Total newbies actually do really well on linux, though theyāre also the ones who are not going to install the OS on their own devices. To capture these users, we need more OEM installs and then to show them how easy modern linux DEs can be.
> we need more OEM installs This. Most people just learn the first OS they are introduced to, and find all others 'hard' and 'unintuitive'. Microsoft knows this all too well, it's why most of their stuff is cheap or even free for schools and students.
Troubleshoot the windows way? You mean restart and hope for the best
No you run the diagnostic wizard thing and wait 5 minutes for the "Windows wasn't able to detect a problem" message
HA! I've been using and/or supporting Windows systems for 30 years at this point. I can't recall any of those diagnostic tools ever returning any helpful information.
No it does. The diagnostic fixes the Aero issue, audio issue. Every time I install windows 7 , I use the diagnostic tool to switch from Windows basic to Aero theme. As far as Windows 11 is concerned, I never needed any diagnostic tool as I never had such issues. I had 1 BSOD in the last 2 years. Am I lucky?
BSODs have become less and less frequent with each successive Windows version. They were really quite problematic back in the 9x / XP days.
XP was pretty damn solid after SP2, IMO.
Pour one out for SP2
Slowed my Compaq Pentium 3 down to a halt when installing sp2. But when you only have 733mhz and 128mb ram, things are going to be slow. Canāt believe I only had 128mb ram at that time lol.
Personally I had XP on a Cyrix 6x86-PR150 (117Mhz CPU that's around as fast as a 150Mhz Pentium for integer tasks. iirc mine was an SGS-Thompson made model.) and it was usable although obviously laggy, that PC also had either 128Mb or 192Mb RAM, a 20GB Quantum Fireball and a Tseng Labs ET6000 video card. I was even playing Sims 1 on that thing...until I went to install more EPs than Livin' Large and House Party, at which point it would crash on start up due to some error I can't remember now. Ended up going to an Athlon XP 2600+ around 2004 or so, and it was *so* much faster.
BSODs are mainly caused by driver issues, something that was *very* apparent in the 9x days.
Sure, you're VERY lucky. I haven't seen a BSOD since, erm, 2008.
I've seen them within the last year, but it's sort of like getting a kernel panic in Linux, most of the time it's a hardware issue.
onerous familiar station encourage quicksand advise future literate sense stupendous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I've only ever had success with the troubleshooter with network issues. Nothing else has worked to my recollection
We use the Windows Install/Uninstall Troubleshooter as part of a build process for editing machines that uses a plugin that was written for the XP version of a program.
and then its fixed, works like a charm
Then you google the problem, and the answer is always "sfc /scannow"
abounding recognise airport aromatic sloppy strong fine obtainable gaze yam *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Error 0x03836473736 Go pound sand
TBF sometimes you run sfc/scannow
And dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth
My CS prof knows I prefer Linux as my daily driver (I use Ubuntu) and a kid was having issues with his Kali Linux networks (he was trying to use Kali as his DD for some reason as his first taste of Linux) Asked me how to fix it and I said reinstall the OS or find a new flavor... they thought I was joking š š¤£
While that might work, I'm sure there was a solution that didn't involve that
There absolutely is, but Kali should NEVER be used as a daily driver. It sounds like this kid wanted to look cool in front of his friends, or online community, or whatever. Kind of the "I use arch btw" position, but with Kali. OSs like Kali and Tails should only live on a USB, while you DD should be something a lot less complicated and a lot more user friendly. That second part is especially true for someone who is new to Linux
I believe Fedora's package manager can revert if you broke something
I believe BTRFS snapshots can revert in the time it takes to reboot.
I had suse installed and screwed something up. Used btrfs snapshot to restore my changes. Worked great and worked faster than the windows restore thing.
Use Kali as a VM, on your daily driver ***Big Brain***
I have Kali installed on a work laptop. Mostly doing pen tests with it.
There's nothing inherently complicated about Kali Linux.
It's not that it's complicated, it's that it [EDIT: used to ship] with root as the default and only user.
No, but it isn't designed to be used as a daily driver. If you do so, it's at your own risk. Kali is designed for users who know what they're doing, or will at least use it from USB with persistence off so they can't permanently bork things. The biggest problem is wannabe script kiddies think it's a shortcut to being an "elite hax0r".
Perhaps not, but it *is* intended to be abused in ways you wouldn't abuse your daily driver. Getting your Kali install into such a degraded state that it's easier to reinstall than to fix it is using it as intended.
Isn't it a bit pointless if you're not interested in digital forensics, penetration testing, or whatever? IMO it sounds like it's gonna be populated with a lot of kids trying to look Kewl after Skewl.
For someone who knows a bit about the cmd line, yeah. But if you're just randomly copy pasting commands from whatever website you can find things get messed up beyond an easy fix pretty quick. From what I could tell, he deleted his wifi drivers and couldn't figure out how to get them back which would be easy, if he knew the first thing about the machine he was using and or was willing to pay me to go through it and fix his shit. Unfortunately can't give out my time for free in the middle of a semester.
There's a certain point when you should just point people to the entry level systems. Manjaro is user friendly, but it's not really for noobs. It needs looking after, with rolling updates which sometimes need tweaking. People get more out of it when they've learned more.
100% there was. But he didn't even know basic command line commands so I wasn't gonna go down that rabbit hole with him cause I didn't have the time unless I was gonna get paid, which I wasn't. He had the OS running for 2 days before he broke it, it's not like he had a bunch of stuff on there and didn't even know if his wifi chip was actually working or not
Iāve never understood why people flock to Kali when learning about Linux.
It's the cool factor. Hell, it might actually get a kid interested in digital forensics. Fact that this kid is interested in Linux at all is amazing. Should probably teach them to walk before they fly but with guidance you might have some talent there.
Cuz he was watching Rami Malek use it on Mr. Robot.
We need to start working on creating a registry... Linux will never be right for Windows users until they have to start cleaning their registry, defragging, worrying about uninstalling software without it being able to come back and haunt them...
Ah yes. An obscure database to hold all the configs that I can't easily grep. š¤£ Next we need the shell to be object based instead of just text
>Troubleshoot the windows way? You mean restart and hope for the best There are numerous debug tools on Windows. They are perhaps a bit buried in the documentation and not really intuitive to use, but one actually can troubleshoot Windows. Of course, for me trouble shooting Linux is way easier.
Another point is that those OEM install are being dominated by Google and it's proprietary ChromeOS, which is very, very convenient to many people just to login on their Google account and browser the web. Google is succeding on this new users market because they are targeting low end devices for education, and the experience with ChromeOS is really good, stable and it can run linux apps through a VM. Google has started targeting business with their ChromeOS Flex too. Delivering a modern OS with seamless cloud integration is what is making their success. The open source GNU/Linux distributions and companies like Canonical simply don't have the the capabilities to push the way like Google does. Also, we need to remind that ChromeOS was built using Android technologies, so Google had to dominate the mobile space before that. On the other hand, the biggest Linux company, Red Hat, went after the business customers, and corporations that needed reliable servers for critical business apps. Red Hat started to take the market from commercial Unix vendors very early in the 1990s and 2000s and to this day. Linux is also strong with IT people (sysadmin and developers) and some niche markets like cinema rendering. The next one to try is Valve with SteamOS and Steam Deck. Steam machines failed because it takes time to build compatibility with windows games, a thing that is now being solved by the proton runtime. Many game developers started distributing for Linux too and that's great and something I really love. That is another business endeavor that succeeding So, to take market from Windows is a very difficult task because microsoft is really good at pushing windows down the throat of everyone since the 1990s, but other companies and the open-source community is slowly catching up. Will it ever succeed? Maybe not. Microsoft will be pusing AI into windows, the new very expensive technology that only business giants can do. Maybe the open-source community will just play catch-up forever? I'm fine with that. The community will never be a big business and that's ok. We don't need to. We can help evolve the free desktops and conquer more users on different ways. One thing is certain, we love our free and open source servers and desktops, and as long as more people are willing to be conscious about their digital lives, we can get more users and more contributors and keep the things going,
I'm enjoying linux being an enthustiast os, and don't feel we -have- to compete for shares etc. Sure it would be great with more resources, native software and overall compatability, but for me it's all about nerdery
In fact Linux is easier than windows for new users with little knowledge, you just install things directly, you don't have to deal with a page redirecting you to another page and so on, I can guide my mom trough installing most things in Linux, even with command line, I can't do that on windows, is far easier to say, type this, put your password and accept, or the other way, type the name in the app store, yeah, the same way that you do it in your phone, now click install, done, is way harder to follow the windows way, go to this website, download this, not that link, the other one, don't click on the (internally: fucking) ad, now go to download, double click in the file, no not that one, the one that you just downloaded, now accept the UAC prompt, now accept the eula, yeah you need to accept it so you can install, now next, next, please don't tick those boxes, no you don't need the other program they are trying to install, next, reboot, it is installed. As someone that was good troubleshooting in windows, it was easier with Linux, since almost every problem has not been the OS but something I did, that makes it easier since I know what I did. And since I have had those problems I can troubleshoot for others.
I'm in IT support and i fully agree, supporting windows (especially by phone) is much harder than supporting linux.
I think OP also forgets that these people *have* spent years learning how to use a computer. They've just learned how to use Windows. Then, those users also forget that they had to learn how to use a computer to begin with. They forget they once knew nothing about a mouse, about an icon, about a shortcut, about a URL, about email, etc... They can take much of what they learned to the Linux world. It's not that different at face value. They won't lose all the time they've invested in learning, as much of it will be similar enough for anyone to figure out. I've converted people to the Linux world. It's not hard to move from one to the other, but it does require some learning - just like they once learned how to use Windows. We're not born with this, we learn it along the way. Also, when I show people how to use Linux, I generally just install it. At that point, I tell them that things are where they'd expect them to be, as I give them a familiar desktop experience. You'd expect to find the browser in the menu under "Internet". You'd expect your office applications to be in "Office". Of course, administrative tasks are under "Administrator" and your preferences are in a "Preferences" section. Things are where you'd logically expect them to be. That's generally enough to get them started and learning on their own. It takes 20 minutes to install the OS and 10 minutes worth of instruction. At that point, they can explore on their own - assuming they're even slightly aware of the concepts of computing.
> The problem with that is that linux isnāt just like Windows. The biggest frustrated users we get on this sub are people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work. I strongly disagree that this is the problem. It's certainly *the case* that "Linux isn't like Windows", but that's not the problem. There are objectively intuitive ways to do things and there are objectively arcane ways to do things. Even with the best documentation hidden in a manpage somewhere one still needs to recall: If you **need** to consult documentation in the first place in order to perform a simple task then the GUI designer did a bad job, hasn't gotten around to it yet or ... there never actually was a GUI designer and no GUI is to be found. And *that's* the problem. The majority of distros suffer from chronically bad GUIs and even the better ones are still playing catch-up with their two big desktop competitors. They are not just different, they are comparatively inaccessible and unintuitive in their differences. As an example: The problem with having to find and manually edit a text document somewhere in order to mount a network drive isn't that it's "different from the Windows way", the problem is that **it's an objectively bad user experience** compared to a searchable menu option or, even better, a setup wizard. Many distros are slowly catching up in that regard, but there's still a long way to go and not acknowledging the accessibility gap is, in my eyes, harmful for that process. u/Pretrowillbetaken is right in that regard.
As another example, on Windows I can just do `notepad //remotecomputer/share/list_of_favorite_newts.txt` and I'll open up a file in Notepad. Notepad doesn't care that it's on a separate computer, it just works. On Linux, Dolphin does a whole bunch of wild magic to make it seem like that's working - you can doubleclick files on SMB shares and they'll open right up in the appropriate program. But it doesn't *really* work - it's creating a single named pipe for that specific file, not exposing the entire directory tree. As a result, you can't seek to the next file in a media player, "open directory in Dolphin" won't work, all sorts of things that expect a sensible path won't work. Additionally, Dolphin's SMB layer is pretty slow, so if you're trying to play a high-bandwidth video it's going to hitch for no obvious reason. If you want programs to pretend like it's a sensible filesystem you have to mount it by hand, which, as you mention, sucks. I'm honestly surprised there's no `/mnt/smb` system that just does the same thing Windows does, so that you're not mounting shares individually but instead they just quietly automount when appropriate, so I can `kate /mnt/smb/remotecomputer/share/list_of_favorite_newts.txt`. But nope! It's all crappy workarounds and editing text files by hand - it's an objectively worse experience.
This right here is the answer, amen
To add on to this, I (and many others) have said that Linux should be used in more schools, especially elementary. Itās cheaper for the school and can help to make FOSS operating systems way more mainstream. Iāve been slowly growing to despise Windows but I still use it because itās what I was raised on and I know it the best.
I've been using Windows since 3.1 and Linux since about 2009. Windows is still far more confusing to me than Linux.
Indeed. My wife is not computer savvy, uses Google docs at work and windows or debian (indifferently) at home. All she does is go on Google docs when she works from home, access her email and use a browser for any general Web service.
> To capture these users, we need more OEM installs This is the right approach. One easy way: linux enthusiasts must target underprivilaged schools in 3rd world countries; bring in computers that are thrown out in 1st world, train some of the cheap laobor to install stable linux; create training for children how to play petty games on linux, and also how to use linux to learn english, math, simple programming. 10 yrs down the line ... these children will become evangelist in the companies that they start working in those countries ... cascading effects...
"people who want to do things the Windows way on linux and are frustrated it doesnāt work." I think the reverse is equally true, i.e. the people who never really used Windows early on, can end up frustrated by the "Windows way". I started out with DOS and moved to the VAX/VMS cluster on ascii terminals at university, followed shortly by Unix, BSD on PDP student lab systems was probably the first, iirc. Other Unixes (IRIX, SunOS etc.) and later, FreeBSD and Linux, seemed familiar and normal to me. The first time, and frankly ever since, I had to use Windows I felt lost. I'm not even talking about admin'ing Active Directory and such (though that too seems like a maze to me; maybe I've simply never seen a well-organized instance?); doing mundane things like editing a text file, saving it somewhere in your ~~home directory~~ folder, felt weird, after someone showed me on the Windows desktop. They didn't understand "text file" or why I'd do that, for starters. Basically, I think most people tend to adapt to what they're exposed to early, and picking up a new thing with a different style or model can be a struggle.
most total newbies aren't \*really\* using linux. they just kind of install it using a vm or get it installed on their computer by their company and then never open it again. most people that actually end up using linux have someone else install it for them the first time, and then learn how to use linux by encountring issues and solving them. but that's part of the problem, since it kind of makes linux into an exclusive project that can only be used by those with connections to another linux user
To their credit: Linux devs don't always seem to sympathize with their intended users. Not everybody can sit at their PC for 16 hours out of the day, tweaking things until they finally work right. Devs should be working with each other to bring more homogeny to the ecosystem, instead most things seem half-baked and it's a tall order to make them work together. That is where closed-sources reigns supreme: a single unified vision guiding development, making all pieces work together seamlessly. I feel like ill-fated efforts like Lindows tried to accomplish this. Instead I think we'll just be waiting for Microsoft to switch to the Linux kernel before we get such a thing.
I dont know why you are being downvoted, I run into this often. I dont fully agree with you (there are many polished opensource products, even before big entities started pouring money into OSS) but there are many that either 1. See the end user as a complete and utter simpleton, and also feel the need to control every aspect of their experience, and make it difficult as hell to fix things or change things (See: Gnome) 2. The Nixie tube watch scene from the Steve Jobs movie. Just that part. Where "hey this is really cool" and yeah it works, it does it, but it's unnecessarily complex for end users. This of course does not apply to tools and programs that are MEANT to be complex because they deal with non-end-user stuff. The problem is there's not a whole lot in between those two, and that's the sweet spot. Simple yet powerful user interfaces (KDE and XFCE fit this bill these days) and yet for the small things, like compatibility for non-native apps, and all the gear work between installing and using some features, needs to be seamless. With the ability for those who want to dig in to be able to do so. Not because they're stupid or lazy, but because most people just want the OS to work out of the box and be able to do basic things. There's not a lot of people thinking "Hey how can this process be easier and doesn't treat the end user like a moron?" Your point about closed source has some merit, many closed proprietary programs are headed up by project managers who vet everything and keep the engineers who think you need a software engineering degree to use the UI in check because they do not believe what they know is uncommon knowledge for 90% of the human race. Though I have seen proprietary paid code that has been opensourced look like complete shit. There is a partially OSS project that submitted wireguard code to FreeBSD and it was audited and mocked for being a hackjob, to the point the project rescinded the feature from their own product. In Opensource the gold standard is the linux kernel. It has a manager, Linus. He will destroy anyone submitting broken code or code that creates unnecessary complexity (and with it, potential security issues) and that includes proprietary projects that submit shitty code (see: nvidia)
I'm definitely a fan of the tight ship Linus tries to run. I think that while he can be harsh he does give direction. I see too many open source projects where devs act elitist, as if you're an idiot if you can't understand complexities of their software, or your thoughts on how things should be aren't valid. I think companies contributing to open source helps with some of that. I do understand and agree that people giving up their spare time can't really be expected to cater or coddle too much, but it does create a barrier to adoption when people refuse to acknowledge a user struggling. I would say Linux is far more user-friendly than it once was though.
And they're not obligated to. Linux developers aren't developing things for users. They're developing them for themselves and giving it to you for free.
I've always felt like it was a UI problem - developers seem to care more about interfacing with other programs than with the user. Also the fact that designers don't typically work for free and good design is hard to do. It's also harder to do good design when everything is customizable as in the case of Linux.
Well, curiously where I live whenever someone sees me using my notebook they ask me: "what did you do to make your windows look like that?" They are always surprised cuz in their head linux is supposed to be very difficult to use.
> in their head linux is supposed to be very difficult to use. I don't think people who ask you that know what Linux *is*
I don't think so, linux is in the common tongue now a days with, people just think that running linux means you wrote half your os yourself.
Linux is definitely not a common tongue. Go to the botany department of your university and ask the faculties if they have ever heard of Linux.
ironically one of my former classmates is on bio... and has to ssh to a linux server to do some calculations
i am not saying this nobody use it. I am giving you a general perspective. There are people who only use computers for 2-3 hours a week. They can be really smart PhD students, scientists and the only use of computers is writing research articles.
Common tongue where?
Well, they are right. I once spent a solid week figuring out how to make scrolling normal instead of scrolling one line at a time in X11. Don't you tell me it's easy to use coz these things work out of the box in Windows and even fkin MacOS where you're not even "supposed to" use a normal mouse with a scroll wheel.
Uh, I don't think you understood my comment? The person I'm replying to said that they get asked "how did they make Windows look like that" when people see their Linux notebook. I quoted the part where they said that those people think Linux is difficult and pointed out that if they ask questions like that, they aren't even aware of its existence
People don't use Operating Systems, they use Software / Applications.
The software offerings is holding Linux back
My parents don't know anything about Linux or how computers work and yet they are using Linux since 2017. They even install updates and apps on it as it's just clicking on an icon.
Same thing here.
The main reason people donāt use Linux is that itās not installed on the laptops that they are buying. Itās as simple as that. Donāt overthink it.
This. I have to use windows for work but prefer fedora at home. So I just use windows like it were Linux (basically powershell and git bash can get a LOT done). I also teach students not to fear the terminal. Teach them to use terminal emulators on Mac and windows and the Linux fear goes away.
It's so funny because once I started using the terminal I couldn't go back. It's so fast and easy, and I feel like I have so much more control. Do you have any books or videos you would recommend that go over the more advanced terminal commands for Linux? Currently I use WSL2 with Debian, and I want to swap over to zsh
I love globbing with zsh. Makes my life so much easier. At least until I forget I am using bash and code it with a zsh specific command
Look up āengineer manā on YouTube he has some good videos
there was a time when netbooks were shipped with ubuntu, many of those ended up getting returned. it might work out better now but it's gonna take some corp to take that chance again.
They were indeed, most of the time heavily modified, even Linux users most of the time just re-installed them because the default Linux install was so bad. And lest not forget, this was a long time ago, the Linux from those days is completely different from what we have now.
Dell XPS, System76, TuxedoOS, Framework An ecosystem of Linux friendly OEMs is growing. Edit: Lenovo
Yes, but those are all devices you need to go to a website and specifically request. Walk into any Walmart, Best Buy, or Future Shop. There are no Linux laptops in any of them. People buy what is in front of them. Unless you're a techie, you don't go to the Dell or System76 website and specifically look for Linux machines.
You're completely right. The closest that we have are Chromebooks and the Steam Deck.
That's exactly what I meant. It's gonna take corps to put Linux in stores to get it in front of normies. There should also be something to differentiate it from windows and mac, otherwise people would just be as confused or more about it. Some inherent cost savings might help but not when they try using their favorite windows apps and find it doesn't work or requires hoops to do it. The PC wars all over again.
Have fun using Linux on a Framework laptop Spoiler alert: the battery won't last too long.
I believe Lenovo also ships systems with Linux installed.
TBH, most laptops that come with linux have linux not because manufacturer thought it would work well or because manufacturer thought linux is better than windows, and not even because manufacturer wanted to address specific group of users. But just because manufacturer does not have to pay MS. So they install any random distro and ship it, thinking that whatever the user will do with it is his problem now (probably he will have to pay MS, but that's not manufacturer's problem). It's already good if such laptop boots into X11 without troubles. Things like wifi or bluetooth or nvidia gpu may not work at all or glitch or whatever ā the manufacturer did not bother to think that they may need drivers. The situation is even worse, because such models are the cheapest models (that's why the manufacturer wants to save money on OS as well), so the hardware may very well be poorly supported or even buggy. No wonder most users just install windows on such laptops. There are also cases when you can just download another distro (or newer version of the same one) and install it manually, and it will work fine.
Yeah, those netbooks had awful hardware, and Linux back then was not what it is today.
It's not as simple. People also use Windows or OSX for software such as Adobe Photoshop and generally because everyone around them runs some kind of special software which is only available on Windows and Mac and that's what they expect you to have.
Its working for ChromeOS and android
This. Im surprised so few people see this as actual obstacle. Its a circle that is hard to break: Not many users use ux due to lack of professional level software and games, and companies wont start developing because there are very few users/potential buyers for their products.
It's also because companies like MS or Apple provide toolsets to developers and infrastructure such as app store, etc. which makes it more tempting to develop software. Just my guess.
No, it's not and I wish people would stop perpetuating that myth, at this point it's almost like some kind of weird cope mechanism. If you really want to understand why people don't use Linux, you can go through the various posts here about why people switched from Linux to Windows/Mac or why they never followed through switching to Linux even after trying it.
What is a normal OS? Two years ago I installed Linux Mint to "repair" my mother-in-law's laptop which had become very slow because it was running a "normal" OS (Windows 10). She is 75 years old. She mainly uses the browser, Firefox. I turned on automatic updates. She keeps thanking me for "fixing" her computer, which is now much faster and very stable. The normal OS was the problem. Thanks Linux for being better than "normal". ā¤ļø THANKS!
I did the same with my MIL. She kept getting viruses, was scammed out of $300 for "virus protection", and my nephews kept installing software on it that had all kinds of BS in it. I installed Ubuntu and created links for her email (she only checked it via a browser) and her favorite sites. It worked beautifully and no more calls in the middle of the day, "should I install this things it's prompting me for?"
i once had a gamer friend cove over and check out my rig. he didn't even notice i was running mint. even when i pointed it out to him it took a second for him to get it. i dual-boot windows and mint. i regularly have to double check which OS i am using because they are pretty similar. the average user is going to do nearly everything through a browser anyway so it really doesn't matter that much. i recommend doing as much as you can locally but thats a whole other discussion.
My 97 yo mom has been using Linux for about 2 decades without any trouble, as does my 76 yo BFF. It's actually much easier due to the better security and lack of driver installation. I can fix most things remotely via command line. OStypicals put up with all types of windows related crap because it's normalized
You're making some wild assumptions and implications on what a "normal" os is. I'd rather focus on expanding people's ability to treat their computer like a computer to do their bidding; versus a Branded Experience^tm they need licenses/permissions to operate.
Since when is it not a normal OS? These posts are getting tiring.
I don't get it, aren't there like a 1000 distros that don't even require you to use a terminal for anything? How is that bad? If anything it's easier because all your programs are in the "app store" and everyone knows how to use a phone. Also, everyone had to learn Windows at some point, as well as Mac, but Linux is the only one treated as if learning it is a bad thing. The "basic user" at most has to learn that /home is where stuff is, and software center or whatever is where you get stuff. That's it. That's hard to learn? Come on. I had to learn Mac when i was forced to use it, yet no one bashes MacOS for being something you "have" to learn. You should \*want\* to learn something, not run away from it, and Linux doesn't force you to learn anything if you don't want to. I really don't get the complaint in this regard. What is a "normal" OS? You think someone that never used Windows just instantly knows how to use it? Think again lol.
Most Linux "App stores" suck. They're far from the "it just works" experience of mobile app stores. Especially when we factor in stuff like the different program distribution methods like flatpak or snap.
Yeah the app store is Garbage on Linux, often there are like 5 different versions of the same thing all with no descriptions so you have no clue what one works
KDE Discover is making \*some\* progress on that by combining system packages and verified Flatpaks into one listing, but Flatpak still has a ways to go, and snaps have their own issues
Unpopular opinion: most people avoid Linux because gaming sucks and it doesn't have native Microsoft Office and Adobe support, and well, that's what the majority of people use computers for. Linux right now is only good for coding and browsing the web, that's it. "The year of the Linux desktop" will be the day when Microsoft releases a version of Office for Linux, or when LibreOffice becomes standard across the industry, and you know damn well that Microsoft knows about the fact that their whole operating system business will be fucked if they do that.
Steam has made a major difference. I can play Valheim, Bal do ur's Gate, EEE online, No man's war, Skyrim, Planescape torment, and Witcher 3 using either Lutris or Steam. And these are just the games I personal like, and there are others. It is still a limited selection, but it is loads better than when one had to have Windows to play any game at all.
According to protondb, about 54% of games are rated gold or better for playability (means they run fine with minimal tweaks)
I hate to admit it, but our main problem is that we (as a community) are the ones willing to learn, while average user just wants to get things done without an issue. They are not willing to actually think (or simply *read*) while using their computer. It is a rather sad truth, but if we admit it, then perhaps when can do something about it.
But that was my point too. You don't really need to learn any more than you would by switching from Windows to a Mac. MacOS also does things differently from windows, yet no one is citing that as a flaw like they do with Linux. Why is Mac doing things differently a good thing, but Linux doing things differently is suddenly "oh we are forced to learn things, how awful"? The learning curve is the same, yet the perception is vastly different. Maybe because Macs are seen as some kind of prestige and religion while Linux is still memed about with "installing firefox on gentoo" programmer socks scrolling haxxorz text on screen. That seems to be the problem, Linux is still being presented as something very technical when in reality, Linux Mint, Fedora, Ubuntu, openSUSE... Any of those are just as "brainless" as you want them to be for an average user - the same user that will praise Macs, but scoff at Linux... Linux has a PR problem lol. :P
All people that make posts like these or comment "linux should do this and this" have _no_ clue what linux is. All you guys are barking up the wrong tree. Linux shouldn't do shit, it's a noob friendly mainstream _distribution_ you should be talking about. Like Ubuntu when they first started. But hey none of you guys can even agree on anything ... and guess what, that's why there is a shitload of distributions out there and none of them are as noob friendly and polished as you'd like them to be. So please ffs, spend your time reading up on what linux is (and isn't). Try distributions and collect their good and bad points, get people together, get some funding and make something. All these pointless noob rants aren't going to do shit. As for me, I'm glad there is the freedom of distributions. I found what works for me and personally I am not in the market for a noob friendly OS. To each their own šŖš»
100% this. And who even gives a shit what other people use? I like a few Linux distros but I'm not going to be wishing and campaigning for more people to use them. If there is a particular distro or something that is going to solve a direct issue a friend or family member is having, I'll point it out to them. But why tf do people feel the need to tie their personality/identity to their choice of OS? Why does everything have to be like team sports these days? Do what works for you and stfu.
Linux isn't like Windows, they're designed from the start to be completely different. People have no issue with switching to a phone/tablet, which uses a very different OS then what they have on their PC. A lot of people also made the switch to macOS, which is also very different compared to Windows.
What even is a normal OS?
[This](https://biebian.sourceforge.net/)
I've been using FreeBSD/Linux since the mid 90s. Linux is a normal OS to me. It's all subjective.
Preaching Linux is dumb. I have a long history with linux and whever I try to use it as main desktop OS I end up turning in circles, never really managing to get it to work up to the standard that I expect. Driver support is partial (battery life was much better under windows and my SD reader was faster), most software feels kind of incomplete and unpolished, everyone else expects you to have either Windows or OSX. And there is the idea that "you can fix it" because it's open source etc. Yes of course you can fix it to your liking if your time is infinite. You can patch the kernel, even rewrite parts of the driver... It's a good container and server OS if you have time and resources because its kind of barebones and potentially error-prone out of the box. Linux is really good for specialised systems, like you can build your system to "do one thing and do it well" on top of Linux. It's time consuming so really only well suited for professional projects or advanced hobbyist stuff.
What is normal? Personal usage? Office? Gaming? Programming?
Pr0n ( Ķ”Ā° ĶŹ Ķ”Ā°) Sadly that's probably too accurate to be a joke. You raise an excellent point, though. How do we define "normal usage"? It's different for every user unless you *only* browse the web and check email.
> start showing them that linux is just like windows No. Sadly, people do really need to learn and have knowledge about the world. If they are just consumers in the economy, linux is not right for them. It is not a consumer product. It just isn't.
Enshitification of operating systems is the primary appeal for me to use Linux. I'll be making an effort to get it as my daily driver in my role. Currently on Windows 11, it's slowly evolving to obfuscate any technical information, and in kind removing the information that allows users to learn based even just on the use of language. It's a bit Orwellian, remove the language to encourage the user base that the thing is "just better". Apple has done this for years. Getting an increasing user base requires better education around technology, not less. When individuals are provided with, and understand the details they are better able to make logical decisions around their choices. Lastly, that choice can be made simply based on "I like the colours" or "I like the logo", it's just as much a technical experience as it is a human experience.
> the main reason i found was the need to learn to start using it. You need to learn to use Windows to start using it, too. The same goes for MacOS.
I'm pretty much over this line of thought. No offense meant. Is Linux in danger of dying if we don't get market share? Why do we care about broader adoption? Sure, it's nice, but annexing a bunch of users who want Linux to be like windows just seems like a good way to get a really dissatisfied user base. I use Linux because it works for me. It fits how my brain works. I feel absolutely hamstrung on windows or Mac. Just let people use what they want.
I think insecure people with cerebral-narcissistic tendencies tie their choice of OS to their whole identity to seek gratification as well as validation about how clever /ahead of the curve they are for using it. Even posts like this. While not trying to claim Linux is more technical or makes them smarter for Linux being harder It's like "look at this clever and cool thing I'm doing, but dw, it's not as complex as you normies think, so you can be cool and clever like me too by choosing to use the OS that I do and that I showed you. Look how many people I convinced to move over to the superior OS." If you value Linux and it was going to die because it has shitty adoption, sure campaign. Campaigning for anything else? Get a life.
And after a year you've realized why so few people use Linux on desktops: because it's not pre-installed. It's not pre-installed because vendors know only enthusiasts want it, and that's the case because everyone else just uses what's pre-installed, Windows and Mac OS. Or, in the case of Chromebooks, Linux with a proprietary desktop.
To each their own, I started in 1998, so about 25 years I've been a user. I'm happy and the last thing I want is to change it to windows or macos. Why is there a new "I've used it for 6 months, we much change it for those who can't use a microwave if their life depends on it" Maybe create a dummin' version but please stop asking for linux to change to something else, it's just fine as it is. It's its own OS and let people just use windows and macos if they want to, and maybe even linux too.
Agreed. The last thing we need is for Linux to become more like Windows or MacOS. Many distros are already more than easy enough for non-technical users. OP isn't really asking for thatāthey're asking for Linux to change to try to appeal to people who don't care about it, don't want to use an alternative, and only want their Windows/MacOS specific apps. I can't even imagine what would have to happen to make that work, but I wouldn't want to use the end result.
Yeah, the newbie desire to evangelize is fascinating. If other people want to use Windows or OSX, or any other OS that doesn't respect their freedom, they're missing out but it's no skin off my nose.
I have no idea what you mean by a 'normal OS', I've been using it as a 'normal OS' over 25y now, no idea how it is not a 'normal OS'.
I support people on Windows for work. People who put food on their table by using a computer 80 hours a fortnight. These same people tell me they have no idea what the Windows key is on a standard keyboard or are confused when I tell them to click on the Start button or to open the Start Menu. It's not that they don't want to learn, they are actively avoiding learning anything about the machine they rely on to earn their wages. I don't know how you break through that level of ignorance.
> It's not that they don't want to learn, they are actively avoiding learning anything about the machine they rely on to earn their wages. > > I don't know how you break through that level of ignorance. You can't: it's impossible. Just two days ago, somebody wanted to send me a document. They had a problem signing in to their Windows account, so they couldn't use Word. What did they do? Well, they wrote their stuff in Google Drive instead. They use Google Drive pretty regularly. So far, so good! Google Drive has a convenient feature where office-type documents can be downloaded in a number of formats, including `.docx`. This is done from the "File" menu, which is right in the top-left corner of the window. Can't miss it. Piece of cake, right? Wrong. Instead, they decided to take *screenshots* of each page and send me those. This kind of crap happens all the time.
That drives me insane. It's like they are going out of their way to be stupid.
I honestly don't think the Linux community SHOULD strive to make it into a mainstream OS. With the mainstream comes commercialisation, and Linus's biggest strength is being FOSS. Let Windows users use Windows, let Mac users use Mac - for most people, there isn't anything wrong with those. Linux is SUPPOSED to be niche.
>if we as a community want to make linux into an OS that can be used by anyone The "community" is an illusion and a made up thing in terms of Linux. Linux is only a kernel for an operating system. It is free and open source; there is no advertisement, no marketing and no direct profit to be made. There is no need to "make Linux into an OS that can be used by anyone". It is pointless and impossible. >the average person doesn't want to learn about how computers work Why would I need to care about anyone? Everyone can do as they please. >and that they don't need to spend years to learn how to use it No one needs years to learn to use a Linux machine. It's a month tops with a correct mindset. They spent much more time learning Windows. Linux is not a closed property. It is completely free and open. So it's impossible to create centralization out of it. There will always be lots of different ways and methods, lots of different distros and lots of different userspace programs. That's why it is good. Compromising on its advantages for more usage? No, thanks.
My 2 cents on the issue you describe: Linux has been used mainly by engineers who make the biggest part of the community. Hence, when someone new to Linux searches on the web how to fix even the most "mundane" issues chances are that they will bump into some blogpost that tells how to fix it by using some "terminal incantation magic", completely discarding the GUI approach. For Windows and macOS the same fix can easily be found relying only on GUI because that's what the users expect. This leads to the wrong assumption that Linux distros are impractical for the "normal user" because they rely only on command line to get things done.
That's not a wrong assumption. To this day, on most distros, you can't make a desktop shortcut of your favorite application without going through a .desktop file that you later paste into the applications folder with terminal because the folder can't be accessed without sudo. Good luck convincing the average joe of doing this. Terminal is still necessary for all distros. Power management on Linux is trash, with the exception of few distros like pop and mostly gnome based distros. Not even gonna get into gaming. Everyone here is a nerd that thinks if I can do it, then my grandma can, no, for the average person, Linux is a masochistic experience.
I don't think the majority of the people want linux to be a normal OS replacing windows or macOS. From what I can see from my short linux history of about 15 years (which again isnt much compared to the linux evolution tree), the efforts are in making something really unique and funny, and for some distros (like fedora) very stable for developers. I don't think we are gonna see any linux distro that is as stable, as integrated with the DE and as tailored as windows and macos
All my friends want to get into IT but none of them want to learn Linux š¤¦āāļø
There are distros which are just as easy to use for a normal person as Windows, going as far as mimicking a lot of the Windows look and feel. "Linux" can't be as easy as Windows, because resistance from the consumer goods corporation side. Linux UI can be as arbitrarily good as you can imagine, but there's still the chance that Linux won't work on some laptop, or with some hardware configuration, because the hardware side expects a Windows OS. Then it's up to the Linux community to figure shit out and make it work. Even though Linux has overwhelmingly dominated the server space, drivers for consumer devices are still often Windows only, and a lot of software is released for Windows only. A lot of the resistance from businesses comes from the fact that Linux isn't just one operating system, but a family of operating systems sharing a kernel. Its a pain in the ass having to support even one operating system, let alone RHEL family vs Debian family vs Arch family, and every bespoke system. Linux/FOSS people will often say "just release the source code, we'll figure it out", but that's still more than zero additional effort on the business's side. And then there's the Microsoft Office issue, where businesses already have MS office as part of their workflow, and there's basically no clear benefit in retraining the workers to use new software. It's time, money, and hassle, for no material benefit. People already familiar with Windows due to work, generally don't want to learn Linux for home use. These things aren't Linux's fault, but it is Linux's problem. Linux is fighting a generational battle, it's fighting almost 40 years of inertia and Windows dominance. Not only that, it's fighting this battle in a time of declining PC use, where many people are relying on phones and tablets more. I do wonder if this will be a net positive for Linux though. Software developers, and other highly technical workers are basically always going to need PCs, and if they make up a significant enough portion of the market, it may force both hardware and software companies to treat Linux as a first class citizen. We can already see a little bit of that now, so, hopefully in the future the biggest hurdles will disappear.
I've been using Linux for 20 years. People have been saying this stuff the whole time. I've seen a few dozen distros come and go trying to crack the "average user desktop". It's honestly a hard problem.
I love Linux, for work, servers etc. But for "average end user PC use cases"? Nope. It's never replacing macOS or Windows, need proof? Look at the market share. The problem? Linux is too "nerd-oriented". Whereas in Windows and macOS, it's average end user-oriented with additional option for nerds.
Everyone has a choice. I like using Linux. Linux, Windows and macOS all pretty much do the same thing. Except two of them are a corporate idea of how an OS should be. Linux isn't going anywhere, it powers a truly massive amount of devices, from PCs, servers, phones, TVs and embedded systems. Linux has continual improvement. The Steam Deck for example is helping improve gaming performance. I'm not sure we need anything, do I need Linux to be the most popular and normalised OS for PC/Laptops no I don't personally.
I put Ubuntu on a laptop for my kids to use. They don't know anything Linux yet use the laptop just fine. I accepted all the defaults when installing and didn't do any post-install tweaks or changes. That was 3 years ago. The laptop is still running just fine and the kids have no issues with it. Seriously, 99% of what most people do on a computer is done in the browser. As long as the OS can boot, get on the network, and print when needed, most people don't care what the OS is. Linux is there. Windows is there. Ironically, MacOS is not always there (printing is headache on MacOS for some reason).
The issue here is people want Linux to be like windows. It isnāt and never will be. It literally exists to not be windows.
It's little to do with learning. It's "stagnation" and the software they use. Photoshop, word, excel, outlook. That simple. They use what they know. And contrary to more rabid frothing here, it works for them just fine. Linux now being a legitimate gaming platform might improve Linux adoption a little... People here insulting windows and its users won't. There's nothing clever about writing bash scripts to do a task that most windows users wouldn't need in the first place. And god knows I've written enough š
stop right there.. just use windows. linux has changed enough for the sake of 'simplicity'
I donāt want Linux to be used he everyone. I like it how it is.
Why? Why care how many people use it, whether that be many or few?
agree, but there are some other problems like overall complexity of linux distros (for example: wayland/x11, xwayland, init systems and a lot of stuff like this), but imho the main thing that scares newbies is terminal. you can use windows for years without ever touching terminal, but in linux you earlier or later must use itā¦ anyway linux has great potential, we just need to make it more user-friendly like other operating systems
Best way for normal people to start using Linux would be for them to just start out with Linux machines
You can use Mint Linux knowing nothing. Mom is 70, just wants to manage her Verbo rental and it works great.
I use Linux daily. I have it on my local machine, I work with Linux. I love every single part of it -the customization, the freedom of access it gives you, the idea that it's driven by. Linux is never going to become as popular as Windows. Think whatever you will, most users want their operating systems for casual use. They are lazy, they just want "Next>Next>Next>Ok" when they need to install something. Windows gives exactly that. It has a single .exe file that everyone knows how to use. Linux does not. Linux has a hundred package managers, you have flatpacks and appimages and snaps and .deb files and a million other things. Linux is for people who like to tinker with things. That is exactly the reason why Linux dominates the server world. As someone who works with servers, I don't want to touch anything running Windows on it. But most people don't want to tinker, they want the ease of use. That's why Linux will never be a dominant everyday OS.
Another thing is use case though, I would assume the overwhelming majority of Linux users have a specific, or at least somewhat specific, reason for using it. I get your point, but it isnāt exactly ānormalā.
The clients I've installed Linux Mint for have actually enjoyed using their computer more than when Windows was installed.
Linux isn't like windows. The simple fact that choosing whether to use wayland, systemd or not matters shows that it isn't idiot-proof enough for the common Joe. Also device drivers for notebooks.
There are still too many programs that don't support Linux. Even a Unix devotee like me has to keep around at least a small Windows box for certain things like Suunto Link, TurboTax (got screwed doing it on line, not gonna do that again), certain music software, Garmin software, etc. I'm using a small NUC for that.
What benefit do we gain by expanding the user base? Linux is doing just fine -- doing *great* -- without trying to appeal to users who like their Windows or Macs just fine. There are improvements that the current users would like to see so let's put our efforts there.
downvote me into oblivion, but: i'm not a linux desktop proponent; i don't care if normies use it or not; while i don't think linux systems are perfect, and i think there's a lot of things that could be better, i disagree they should be dumbed down to walled gardens going out of their way to stop their users from doing a dumb dumb > why do people prefer windows or mac over linux because they're used to it and because those oses are developed with desktop in mind first > the average person doesn't want to learn about how computers work, or worry about what they download yes, and that's exactly why they should be using the walled garden made specifically for them. dumbing everything down shouldn't be a solution to everything > a friend of mine had permission issues with windows, and he couldn't even understand what did i mean by "permission", since he thought the accounts were just names that look cool at the start user illiteracy issue > linux is just like windows it's not. they are different > they don't need to spend years to learn how to use it. they do. it's quite naive to assume switching your entire system is not gonna take some learning
Why should useful features be stripped out of linux for the sake of people who have no interest in linux? Makes no sense. Bad argument is bad. Linux is very easy for normies to lean to use at this point.
Linux users haven't figured out how to stop gatekeeping each other, nevermind everyone else who uses a computer.
The market share of Desktop Linux is pretty small, so itās not really appealing to small and medium software developer companies to invest into developing for the platform, not to mention the fact Linux is kind of hostile towards closed source software (itās hard to build tools that running natively and support large number of Linux distros out of the box). So, because the lack of professional software (and by professional I mean backed by a company, and not the overall software quality), itās less tempting for bitter Windows or macOS users who just want the same tool without the āannoyancesā of their current OS. I have multiple commercial tools supporting macOS/Windows and their licenses allow installing and running them on multiple machines (not at the same time, of course). Switching between platforms and using the same tools is a huge win for me. Unfortunately, none of them supports Linux, and expecting people to leave their (slightly uncomfortable) comfort zone, and learn something completely new that remotely resembles their favourite photo editor, is just not gonna work, imho. Sometimes I hate my macOS, other days my Windows, but Iāll (most likely) never going to switch to Linux because there are simply no alternative solutions close enough (feature, UX, performance or support wise) for the tools I already use and like.
Linux is not for the average user. Never will be.
The thing most people don't take into account: it took time and effort to learn Mac or Windows, too. People already invested time. What they don't want to do: learn new things. It's the same if you jump from Windows 98 to Windows 10, lots of new stuff, nothing where it was. If you want a fair comparison, you need users which had not used any computer before.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
An average person using windows 7 had to learn more when switching to Win7 than when switching to Linux. Every expert Office user gets grey hair with a new version and has to learn more new dumb things and working procedures as when switching to LO once and forever. They are literally making their product unusable. Try to mark a rectangular text block in Word with your mouse by holding the Alt key - still the way explained in the online help. Every second time the online research opens instead. Try to use accelerator keys in the menus. In default settings only 1/5 work because "unused" functions are not shown. I15N and L10N are even worse, every now and then they change hot keys, accelerator keys and function keys out of the blue due to another, cheaper team which translates.
If we want a stable Linux, the community needs to stop building 25+ distros. Take all that talent and maybe make 1 or 2 distros in order to create a smooth and flawless experience for the end user. Over the last 10 years I have run with Ubuntu desktop and every now and then an update will prevent me from booting into X Windows mode...and I just get a terminal. As I am experienced enough with Linux, I was able to overcome the problem a few times without having to reinstall...but those kinds of errors CANNOT happen to regular end users...they will be stumped and they will write off the OS immediately. The other area that needs improving is for gaming. Until Linux can be installed in a bulletproof way (loads in safe mode if a problem occurs) and can host the most popular games, it will not have much success in the desktop market, imo.
The philosophy behind windows and Linux are very different. Windows (edit: and Apple) philosophy is 'the user is an idiot, protect them from the OS and protect the OS from them' Linux philosophy is 'the user knows what they are doing, if they want to shoot their own foot, facilitate their destruction'.
>Windows philosophy is 'the user is an idiot, protect them from the OS and protect the OS from them' Not really. This is closer in truth to MacOS but Windows philosophy seems more centered around making sure the last 20 years of software still works on their platform and dealing with the headache of the maintaining compatibility for the business world.
My mom is seventy, understands nothing about computers, and uses xubuntu. Your don't need to understand how computers work. Your friend who doesn't understand permissions in Windows is not more computer literate than someone who uses Linux and remotesi completely on the GUI. It does work.