5 ms·

> As someone who has been using Linux for decades, I find the setup and user friendliness of something like Windows far inferior to to Linux. Yes, part of that

> As someone who has been using Linux for decades, I find the setup and user friendliness of something like Windows far inferior to to Linux. Yes, part of that is due to familiarity. On the other hand, some of it is inherent due to there being fewer restrictions with open source software. Non-tech people don't want (or don't know how) to "setup". The most user-friendly setup won't ever beat "no setup" (e.g., macOS). Besides, marketing plays a huge role as well. Ask people to name a few "computer" brands: Apple, Microsoft, Google. No one would name "Linux". So, it's not just that people should be able to buy Linux computers with no setup (Dell is selling them, I think), it's also that these kind of computers should get enough marketing so people know about them.

ppur 6y ago
I think another thing that contributes to that last problem about "computer" brands is the lack of knowledge of the distinction between operating system manufacturer and hardware manufacturer - I just moved recently, and in the process of getting to know more people and accidentally becoming their tech support, I was surprised to see how many people didn't have that basic bit of knowledge. When pointing at a chromebook, people say "Google" without questioning why "lenovo" is also written on it.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
> Non-tech people don't want (or don't know how) to "setup". The most user-friendly setup won't ever beat "no setup" (e.g., macOS). I don't like this line of thinking because it is condescending. More importantly though, there are plenty of competent technical users like myself that would love to be using an open operating system but are fed up with dealing with the systemic problems Linux Desktop has that its developers and community keep papering over and pretending don't exist.
- majewsky 6y ago
  It's not condescending, it's realistic. It's how I (as a tech person) approach most non-tech things in life. I rent because I don't want to deal with maintaining a house. I use public transit because I don't want to deal with maintaining a car. And so on. I may be an extreme example in some ways, but everyone only has so many fucks to give, and most people have legitimately exhausted their budget by the time they get to tech policy.
  - atonalfreerider 6y ago
    Extending your analogy, I always feel like when I set up my Linux workflow (something I attempt and abandon at least once a year) it feels like someone dropped a car off in my driveway with the engine and transmission on the sidewalk and no instructions on how to assemble. Installing the "engine" always requires hours of browsing through comment threads written by random people on the internet that are years old. This year is different though! I'm going to make it work. Also looking at Pinephone for my mobile.
- II2II 6y ago
  I'm going to let you in on a secret: most of the people who advocate a particular operating system are pretending that systematic problems don't exist. Strictly speaking, Windows is a usability nightmare. Most people don't notice simply because most people learn and use a tiny subset what is there. Beyond that, there is an entire industry to support Windows (which is part of the reason why people like it). Apple isn't much better. They tend to paper things over by simply dropping support. An example was brought up by another commenter when they mentioned that some ix programs use raster fonts. Strictly speaking that can happen under Linux yet not macOS since Apple dropped support for legacy software while some ix software is decades old. Linux will have its own issues, but I'm not the best judge of that since it is my operating system of choice. At the end of the day, any operating system will be a compromise of some form or another. Which you choose will depend upon what your wants and needs are.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    I don't disagree, Windows especially has been getting a lot worse as it embraces modern development and the users-are-cattle mindset that comes with it. My problem isn't so much that there are tradeoffs, or even that those tradeoffs are not ones I want to make, it's that there are people out there who seem to insist that Linux Desktop is the one and only proper choice and everyone who doesn't choose it is either stupid or misinformed. If Linux Desktop people were more willing to listen to why people don't use it and take criticism to heart instead of as some kind of personal attack, it might have evolved into something more people would actually want to use.
    - II2II 6y ago
      > My problem isn't so much that there are tradeoffs, or even that those tradeoffs are not ones I want to make, That's fine, and I agree that advocates sometimes detract from progress.
megous 6y ago
They can buy a PC with GNU/Linux preinstalled then. If I bought a mac and tried to install windows there it would be a shitshow too.
- sdevonoes 6y ago
  > They can buy a PC with GNU/Linux preinstalled then. That's the problem: non-tech people don't know they can do that. Besides, why would they buy a PC with "GNU/Linux" preinstalled if they don't know what "GNU/Linux" mean to begin with? Almost everyone out there knows what "Mac" or "Windows" means, and so they buy Apple stuff. Again, marketing.
- wilsonnb3 6y ago
  It would actually work rather well, that’s the whole point of bootcamp.
  - megous 6y ago
    Interesting. :)

ppur 6y ago

I think another thing that contributes to that last problem about "computer" brands is the lack of knowledge of the distinction between operating system manufacturer and hardware manufacturer - I just moved recently, and in the process of getting to know more people and accidentally becoming their tech support, I was surprised to see how many people didn't have that basic bit of knowledge. When pointing at a chromebook, people say "Google" without questioning why "lenovo" is also written on it.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

> Non-tech people don't want (or don't know how) to "setup". The most user-friendly setup won't ever beat "no setup" (e.g., macOS). I don't like this line of thinking because it is condescending. More importantly though, there are plenty of competent technical users like myself that would love to be using an open operating system but are fed up with dealing with the systemic problems Linux Desktop has that its developers and community keep papering over and pretending don't exist.

majewsky 6y ago
It's not condescending, it's realistic. It's how I (as a tech person) approach most non-tech things in life. I rent because I don't want to deal with maintaining a house. I use public transit because I don't want to deal with maintaining a car. And so on. I may be an extreme example in some ways, but everyone only has so many fucks to give, and most people have legitimately exhausted their budget by the time they get to tech policy.
- atonalfreerider 6y ago
  Extending your analogy, I always feel like when I set up my Linux workflow (something I attempt and abandon at least once a year) it feels like someone dropped a car off in my driveway with the engine and transmission on the sidewalk and no instructions on how to assemble. Installing the "engine" always requires hours of browsing through comment threads written by random people on the internet that are years old. This year is different though! I'm going to make it work. Also looking at Pinephone for my mobile.
II2II 6y ago
I'm going to let you in on a secret: most of the people who advocate a particular operating system are pretending that systematic problems don't exist. Strictly speaking, Windows is a usability nightmare. Most people don't notice simply because most people learn and use a tiny subset what is there. Beyond that, there is an entire industry to support Windows (which is part of the reason why people like it). Apple isn't much better. They tend to paper things over by simply dropping support. An example was brought up by another commenter when they mentioned that some ix programs use raster fonts. Strictly speaking that can happen under Linux yet not macOS since Apple dropped support for legacy software while some ix software is decades old. Linux will have its own issues, but I'm not the best judge of that since it is my operating system of choice. At the end of the day, any operating system will be a compromise of some form or another. Which you choose will depend upon what your wants and needs are.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  I don't disagree, Windows especially has been getting a lot worse as it embraces modern development and the users-are-cattle mindset that comes with it. My problem isn't so much that there are tradeoffs, or even that those tradeoffs are not ones I want to make, it's that there are people out there who seem to insist that Linux Desktop is the one and only proper choice and everyone who doesn't choose it is either stupid or misinformed. If Linux Desktop people were more willing to listen to why people don't use it and take criticism to heart instead of as some kind of personal attack, it might have evolved into something more people would actually want to use.
  - II2II 6y ago
    > My problem isn't so much that there are tradeoffs, or even that those tradeoffs are not ones I want to make, That's fine, and I agree that advocates sometimes detract from progress.

megous 6y ago

They can buy a PC with GNU/Linux preinstalled then. If I bought a mac and tried to install windows there it would be a shitshow too.

sdevonoes 6y ago
> They can buy a PC with GNU/Linux preinstalled then. That's the problem: non-tech people don't know they can do that. Besides, why would they buy a PC with "GNU/Linux" preinstalled if they don't know what "GNU/Linux" mean to begin with? Almost everyone out there knows what "Mac" or "Windows" means, and so they buy Apple stuff. Again, marketing.
wilsonnb3 6y ago
It would actually work rather well, that’s the whole point of bootcamp.
- megous 6y ago
  Interesting. :)