this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
956 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
59589 readers
2838 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Chicken and egg. Linux is roughly 4% of the OS space. If more people would get on board, it would become a better tool. I use both. Windows because I have to. Linux because I want to.
Linux missed the mark years ago. It's not a lack of people using it, it's a lack of usability for people. You're blaming users because Linux doesn't work for them.
My standard response to "just go Linux" :
I keep having to say this, as much as I like Linux for certain things, as a desktop it's still no competition to Windows, even with this awful shit going on.
As some background - I wrote my first Fortran program on a Sperry Rand Univac (punched cards) in about 1985. Cobol was immediately after Fortran (wish I'd stuck with Cobol).
I had my first UNIX class in about 1990.
I run a Mint laptop (for the hell of it, and I do mean hell) . Update: stopped running Mint on that laptop, it'll never be viable for the intended use-case. Power management is a joke. Configured as best as possible, walked in the other day and it was dead - as in battery at zero, won't even boot.
Windows would never do this, no, Windows can never do this. It is incapable of running a battery to zero, it'll shutoff before then to protect the battery. To really kill it you have to boot to BIOS and let it sit, Windows simply will not let a battery get to zero.
There's no way even possible via the Mint GUI to config power management for things like low/critical battery conditions /actions. None, nada, zip, not at all. Command line only, in the twenty-first century, something Windows has had since I don't recall, 95 I think (I was carrying a laptop then, and I believe it had hibernate, sorry, it's been what, almost thirty years now).
There are many reasons why Linux doesn't compete with Windows on the desktop - this is just one glaring one.
Now let's look at Office. Open an Excel spreadsheet with tables in any app other than excel. Tables are something that's just a given in excel, takes 10 seconds to setup, and you get automatic sorting and filtering, with near-zero effort. The devs of open office refuse to support tables, saying "you should manage data in a proper database app". While I don't disagree with the sentiment, no, I'm not setting up a DB in an open-source competitor to Access. That's just too much effort for simple sorting and filtering tasks, and isn't realistically shareable with other people. I do this several times a day in excel.
Now there's that print monitor that's on by default, and can only be shut up by using a command line. Wtf? Again, in the 21st century?
Networking... Yea, samba works, but how do you clear creds you used one time to connect to a share, even though you didn't say "save creds"? Oh, yea, command line again or go download an app to clear them for for you. In the 21st century?
Oh, you have a wireless Logitech mouse? Linux won't even recognize it. You have to search for a solution and go find a third-party download that makes it work. My brand new wireless mouse works on any version of Windows since Win2k (at the least) and would probably work on Win95.
Someone else said it better than me:
Now I love Linux for my services: Proxmox, UnRAID, TrueNAS, containers for Syncthing, PiHole, Owncloud/NextCloud, CasaOS/Yuno, etc, etc. I even run a few Windows VM's on Linux (Proxmox) because that's better than running Linux VM's on a Windows server.
Linux is brilliant for this stuff. Just not brilliant for a desktop, let alone in a business environment.
Linux doesn't even use a common shell (which is a good thing in it's own way), and that's a massive barrier for users.
If it were 40 years ago, maybe Linux would've had a chance to beat MS, even then it would've required settling on a single GUI (which is arguably half of why Windows became a standard, the other half being a common API), a common build (so the same tools/utilities are always available), and a commitment to put usability for the inexperienced user first.
These are what MS did in the 1980's to make Windows attractive to the 3 groups who contend with desktops: developers, business management, end users.
All this without considering the systems management requirements of even an SMB with perhaps a dozen users (let alone an enterprise with tens of thousands).
I was going to write a reply to that guy about how linux doesn't work for the common man, but then you come in and write shakespear level articulation that blows away my tiny brain cell reply.
It's just such a complete analysis of the situation. The only thing missing is how linux requires you to use the terminal. Yes, REQUIRES. People can say it doesn't all they want, but go on any self help guide, and any problem you have, is "step 1, open terminal".
What would you say to someone who doesn't know what terminal is?
"Ok, open terminal?"
"Whats that?"
"Its like a command line, but better"
"Whats a command line?"
And this is why 96% of people AREN'T using linux. Most windows users don't understand how windows works. Most drivers don't understand how cars work. And linux you HAVE TO be a mechanic to use linux. Because unlike windows and mac, linux isn't designed to be used by idiots. And most of the world are idiots. Hell, I'm an idiot.
And until linux can fix itself FOR the user, no user will even take a look. Even if there were a single distro that did all that, you'd have to convince people "this linux isn't like the other linux". It's the main reason that even though Android is linux, it stays far far away from that branding. It doesn't want the linux stink.
And from what I've seen, every developer WANTS linux to be hard to use. Like a right of passage. "I had to endure these learning curves, and so shall you!"
That's a marketing problem, not a functionality problem. The terminal isn't really hard to use.
People used BASIC easily back in the 80's. My mom did it back then, and she isn't tech savvy.
I've been trying to learn it for 15 years. The only thing I've learned is that sudo stands for super user. Outside of that, I've learned nothing about how to use terminal other than copy/pasting other peoples commands.
If you've been unable to learn some basic command line in 15 years perhaps computing is not your forte.
Well, not linux. I do just fine on windows 7.
For most cases, you need to use the package manager (apt is the standard for Debian-based) . You also need 'grep' to select a specific phrase sometimes.
But that problem normally occur when you are using proprietary software. You'll need to download packages (wget), add repository packages and run shell scripts for most proprietary software, and I think most people would use copy-paste in those scenarios.
.........do what now?
BTW sudo stands for substitute user.
More info