3 ms·

Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. I agree th

Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. I agree that it's not as much as a polished experience, but that's the point as indicated - trading off polish for ownership. I'm excluding from the discussion professional documents editing - compatibility with Libreoffice is mediocre (at best) in my experience, but having very good compatibility is not a consumer requirement IMO.

d3nj4l 6y ago
> Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered But it's also just as likely that you're using a browser made by Google, and using other services made by one of the big companies that don't care about your privacy. Where's the difference?
- pizza234 6y ago
  There's some confusion in the thread, in the fact that there's a mixup between operating systems and programs (or classes of programs), however the parent was referring to operating systems: > The alternatives are still completely unusable by most people. Otherwise the statement wouldn't make sense.
- sliken 6y ago
  Google's not in control of the CPU, OS, or Desktop. It's not fingerprinting every binary you run, nor locking you into any of the google tools. You could easily use a different email service, different photo service, etc.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Sure since but this subthread argues that users actually don’t need binaries other than the browser that’s moot.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
> Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. Or their smartphone, which is a hell of a lot smoother experience. So why does Linux Desktop continue to pride itself on being "good enough" for an "average user" [0] that doesn't even use a desktop? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047042
addandsubtract 6y ago
Ok, suppose I can find an alternative to Adobe & co. on linux. Which laptop features a multi finger touchpad as nice and feature rich as the MacBooks?
arvinsim 6y ago
> Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. Browser apps need connection. Most of the services are also subscription based.
zepto 6y ago
This is completely conceding the point. Nothing but the browser is up to par, and even that is not as ‘polished’. If all people need is a browser, they should buy ChromeOS or an iPad.
- pizza234 6y ago
  "Not as polished" doesn't imply "not up to par". Ironically, one of your two suggestions is a Linux distribution.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Android is a Linux distribution and MacOS is a FreeBSD distribution. There is nothing ironic about that. Users don’t know and don’t care. Are you equating the presence of the Linux kernel with some notion of software freedom or independence from corporate control? If all people want to use is a browser, Linux is irrelevant.

d3nj4l 6y ago

> Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered But it's also just as likely that you're using a browser made by Google, and using other services made by one of the big companies that don't care about your privacy. Where's the difference?

pizza234 6y ago
There's some confusion in the thread, in the fact that there's a mixup between operating systems and programs (or classes of programs), however the parent was referring to operating systems: > The alternatives are still completely unusable by most people. Otherwise the statement wouldn't make sense.
sliken 6y ago
Google's not in control of the CPU, OS, or Desktop. It's not fingerprinting every binary you run, nor locking you into any of the google tools. You could easily use a different email service, different photo service, etc.
- zepto 6y ago
  Sure since but this subthread argues that users actually don’t need binaries other than the browser that’s moot.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

> Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. Or their smartphone, which is a hell of a lot smoother experience. So why does Linux Desktop continue to pride itself on being "good enough" for an "average user" [0] that doesn't even use a desktop? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25047042

addandsubtract 6y ago

Ok, suppose I can find an alternative to Adobe & co. on linux. Which laptop features a multi finger touchpad as nice and feature rich as the MacBooks?

arvinsim 6y ago

> Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. Browser apps need connection. Most of the services are also subscription based.

zepto 6y ago

This is completely conceding the point. Nothing but the browser is up to par, and even that is not as ‘polished’. If all people need is a browser, they should buy ChromeOS or an iPad.

pizza234 6y ago
"Not as polished" doesn't imply "not up to par". Ironically, one of your two suggestions is a Linux distribution.
- zepto 6y ago
  Android is a Linux distribution and MacOS is a FreeBSD distribution. There is nothing ironic about that. Users don’t know and don’t care. Are you equating the presence of the Linux kernel with some notion of software freedom or independence from corporate control? If all people want to use is a browser, Linux is irrelevant.