29
Installing Linux Doesn't Need to Change. The Experience Does. (peertube.wtf)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

No it does not.

TL;DR: People who cant use linux never learned the basics of computers. They just learned where to click to do x and where to do y in windows, and they just instantly lock up once anything is different

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    People who cant use linux never learned the basics of computers

    that's like 80% of all people

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And you know what? A lot of people don't give a shit; they just want it to work. They have no interest, desire, or - frankly - need to know how L2 caches work. Or devices drivers. Or the difference between Wayland and X11.

    Just as I have no interest or need to be able to take my car's engine apart. I don't want to have you stop on my way to the grocery store and fiddle under the hood so that I can make a right turn that my car, for some reason, is refusing to do.

    Elitism is not a good attitude.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    The problem with your argument is that you are phrasing that as a problem with how the OS is not able to do what you want. But Linux is able to do whatever you ask it to. The real problem is companies.

    Most of the problems Windows users have with Linux is "Software X is not working in Linux" followed by "Alternative Software Y is too weird/quirky/broken on Linux". This used to be a problem with Gaming. With the investment of Valve into Linux, the scene there has dramatically shifted. Yet, you have cases like that of Roblox whose software is clearly capable of running on Linux but they deliberately hobble it and only support Windows. The important thing is that free software is written and maintained by people in their free time for free. So you can't expect the same level of polish as a dedicated company working on the software (Of course I can point to beautiful exceptions like Blender, VLC, etc.)

    So essentially the problem is two fold:

    1. Software/Game vendors don't want to support Linux
    2. Microsoft benefits from having it this way so they bribe their way into having Windows on retail hardware.

    Nowadays you can find laptops from manufacturers like Tuxedo or Framework, or even Dell/Lenovo where if you chose to go without windows they often discount your purchase by $100 or in some cases even $200!

    So it turns out Microsoft got greedy and is charging like 10% of hardware price as the cost of having Windows pre-installed. (Citation needed, I learnt it here on the fediverse)

    You and other people who want their stuff to just work are correct about the assessment of what needs to happen in Linux for it to catch up with Mac or Windows, but are incorrectly attributing the steep gradient set by Microsoft/Apple to inadequacy on the part of Linux.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Am I? Phrasing it that way?

    So, first off, much OSS software is at least as polished as most commercial software I've seen, and KDE had gotten just plain incredible. There are gaps, though; Gimp is an incredible piece of software, but jesus is it user-hostile. You use it all the time, I'm sure it's fine, and efficient, and whatnot, but for casuals? It's a fucking fight to figure out how to draw a square box.

    Sure there's Roblox; there are always shitty companies. I think there real issue is that Linux software is designed by developers for themselves. It works the way they think it should, they like it, and they don't have Consumer Groups to test and complain, and they're largely unwilling to change the interface even if a bunch of people say the UI should change. I'm the same way. I wrote it that way because that's the way I like it to work, dammit. I'm not changing it because someone thinks it's obscure.

    I don't think Linux is inadequate at all. I live in the CLI, and I don't use desktops. I barely use a window manager, and only that because I found web browsing in the console to be occasionally impossible with w3m. But I do know a lot of people like my sister in law who has an iPhone calls me whenever my mostly senior mother in law has an issue with her Android phone, because she (my SIL) can't figure out Android. There's no way I would even consider putting her on KDE as good as it is, because she just doesn't understand technology. Sometimes she has trouble with her Mac. And my BIL, the C-level exec at a large international, positively loses his shit when a smart device has a problem and doesn't work the way he expects, or makes it hard to accomplish something.

    Mind you, I think you think I'm saying something I'm not. The person I was replying to - could have been you, my Lemmy app doesn't let me look at history while replying 🙄 - sounded like they were blaming users for wanting stuff to not be hard. All I was saying was that wanting software to be easy is a reasonable expectation. I don't know that Linux isn't easy; I think a lot of folks are just used to what they're used to. My octogenarian, blue-collar father has been using a Linux laptop for a decade; about a year ago, he bought a newer, used laptop and installed Linux on it without every booting into Windows. With me on the phone, sure, but still: he wanted Linux because that's what he'd gotten used to. And he didn't want to create a Microsoft account just to use the laptop; that played a factor, too. Still, Linux has gotten good, but we need to not blame users for when they have trouble with software.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    ok.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    it does kinda fit in that if you forced people to learn linux, the basic stuff most people do should in the end not be much more difficult than windows (assuming you don't run into more bugs)

    but that would never happen unless a "linux revolution" was already in full swing

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    People are running in all kinds of bugs with Windows, just look at their forums.

    The major difference is that people have been using Windows all their life and they've learned how to circumvent their bugs and hiccup.

    Switching to Linux means people will have to learn a new flow and it turns off a lot of people, simply by the fact that they have been using the same OS all their life and can't bother to learn something new.

    And that's all fine. But to go in your direction, when more manufacturers will offer 100-120$ off on Linux computers (because you don't pay the Windows license), it will probably boost Linux adoption rate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent