6 ms·

As a counterpoint: Reasons to consider NOT switching to Linux https://corn.codeberg.page/notlinux.html https://corn.codeberg.page/notlinux.html

superasn 5y ago
My only two reasons would be no Photoshop and fewer games, though it's definitely catching up on both.
- Synaesthesia 5y ago
  Music making software is really lacking on Linux compared to Windows and Mac.
- jabroni_salad 5y ago
  Unfortunately it is not catching up by the way of 1st party support. The compatibility layers are getting pretty good, don't get me wrong. But if to you a computer is just a tool that runs specific programs you need, then you should probably stick with what the software developer recommends you run their software on.
peakaboo 5y ago
Well he is right. Linux is not for everyone. It's for people who can learn how to double click an icon that looks different from the one in Windows. That excludes probably 50% of Windows users right there.
- breakfastduck 5y ago
  This kind of attitude from linux users is significantly responsible for its lack of wider adoption. Who wants to learn something new when the people you need help from are going to treat you like a moron? We both know its more involved than clicking a different icon.
  - r_c_a_d 5y ago
    I totally agree. I am still a Linux user, but at home I use a Mac now. Why? Because I got sick of having to work out why my laptop couldn't print things anymore after an update. Not once has that happened to the Windows or Apple devices that my family own. Linux is great for doing all sorts of clever stuff; it's not so good at doing the ordinary stuff reliably.
  - agumonkey 5y ago
    No, he's right. It's like maths. A vast majority of people like to not like / learn it. I've spent a lot of time with average users of all kinds. They couldn't care less. To them it's a thing that has less value than a coffee cup. I could, and would sit down and explain to them everything that is cool, cute about every layers of a computer, with simple language and pragmatic use, with history context, and bits of benefits for their lives. They just don't want to hear it. Some will say it's geek stuff. Some will say "I'm too scared". Some will try and forget 13 seconds later. The insane side of this is that these people will spend grands on a new machine that will tickle their sense of free improvement (which will not happen). Again every 3-5 years.. forced by ecosystemic pressure to push old stuff out. ps: I agree that GP was a bit smug, but even then, the population is what it is. pps: even at work, if I offer to explain something, or write a script, or a macro to help, most people will react negatively for various reasons (very often its petty emotions, like jealousy, or disdain).
    - ziml77 5y ago
      No, he's not right. A computer is a tool. A tool should help you accomplish tasks. A well-designed tool that is meant to be used in the average household should be easy to use and hard to screw up. It shouldn't feel like it's getting in the way. There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. The history you're so eager to tell should just be trivia.
      - magicalhippo 5y ago
        > There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. Paraphrasing the CEO of Sun Microsystems (IIRC): you don't need to know how to operate a nuclear power plant to get light when you flick the light switch.
- xeromal 5y ago
  This is the exact elitist mentality that the article writer is talking about. Not only are you saying everyone who can't figure it out is dumb, but you forget, there are actually people who probably can't understand it because its a different icon like very elderly people. My grandma would only use a browser if I set the icon to the little IE6 icon. lol
  - iso1210 5y ago
    About half of windows users are dumber than the average person, and the average person is dumb.
    - xeromal 5y ago
      Amen. Hell, I might be one of those dummies.
dgan 5y ago
Actually (as a daily linux user) it's a nice write up! I was expecting nonsense.
apeace 5y ago
Right. I was going to comment "Reason #12 to switch to Linux: you love reformatting the entire system every once in a while, typically after struggling to fix a driver for hours and completely screwing everything up in a way you can't figure out how to undo."
- petschge 5y ago
  I have updated my laptop across 4 major releases of Debian now, never reformating the system. And the copy of my home directory (think user profile in windows) is even older. If you don't know what you are doing, saving a full system backup to an external hard drive is actually easy so you can try things and revert if it doesn't work.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    Same here. The only reason the last install was a fresh one was because I upgraded the storage on the laptop. My home folder has files that have been with me since 2006 or so. This laptop is 7 years old and this is the third fresh OS install it has in its lifetime - With one exception, it's always been updated to the latest Ubuntu version as needed with the Ubuntu tooling. What I have been doing to prevent data loss (that never happened) is to keep the interesting parts of my home folder on a separate filesystem and symlink them into my home folder. This allowed the previous fresh install to format the root partition and I didn't need to worry about my data being deleted.
- iso1210 5y ago
  That may be your experience, certainly not mine. I do remember than from the days of windows.
- dgan 5y ago
  For future readers: this is true (drivers/update problems), but easily fixable with for example Timeshift, or snapper (like openSUSE)
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  This is an interesting observation, considering that traditionally Windows has had these opaque failure and degradation modes that are "unfixable" unless you reinstall. Personally, it doesn't ring true to me - I've been using the very same OS install for around a decade now, I just kept moving it from machine to machine and I think my laptop install is actually a duplicate. I've restored it from backups a few times, though the leading cause is "accidentally powered off during system update".
yoyohello13 5y ago
This is a good article. This very thread has a ton of examples of what the author talks about. I've used Linux as my main OS for years now and I love it, but I've stopped trying to evangelize it. Just use whatever OS you want, I'm happy on Linux.
AdmiralAsshat 5y ago
The top reason NOT to switch to Linux should be "Because someone told you to." The Linux community has a terrible problem with proselytizing and then gatekeeping ("Welcome to Linux! Oh, you're using Linux Mint? Get fucked, then.")
TheCapn 5y ago
I just want to say that I thoroughly enjoyed that site. It feels incredibly grounded and a place where the author can have some fun. It tweaks some sort of nostalgia nerve while still having some good insights in his writings. The page on Aesthetics[1] makes me happy to see. [1] https://corn.codeberg.page/aesthetic.html
Kessler83 5y ago
I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD. It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things. Of course software is (also) about ideology. If you find yourself advocating putting more money in the pockets of the already super rich, or pretending that there isn't a digital part of human life where people have rights, well then obviously you have picked sides.
- fouric 5y ago
  > I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD. Content-less emotional manipulation - just the kind of thing that I hate to see on HN. You answered none of the points in the article itself, dismissing the entire thing out of hand with an acronym describing a concept that you provided no evidence actually applied to any of the arguments. > It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things. No. I've been using Linux as my daily driver for over a decade (and have spent far more time using it than Windows), and gotten a few other people on it, so I can say that, for actually getting things done and software just working, Windows is far better than Linux. An operating system where you have to struggle to get things done is a bad operating system. Linux isn't "democratic", either - Linus Torvalds controls kernel development, and the userspace components have wildly differing development practices. Nor is it "well documented" - Linux-related documentation is generally terrible to read. Technically correct? Sure - but that's not "well documented", that's an encyclopedia. Neither can you say that those "50,000" software packages are "quality" - the vast majority of open-source software that I've seen is buggy, under-documented, incomplete, and difficult to use. (I mean, so is the vast majority of proprietary software - but that software being "also bad" doesn't make OSS software "good") > Of course software is (also) about ideology. [...] well then obviously you have picked sides. Please leave your manipulative speech out of HN, and don't try to drag me (or anyone) into your idealistic flamewar. Microsoft is a company that is predatory towards its users, and that's why I recommend Linux despite all of its problems. Pretending that it has no problems, or is technically superior to Windows, and then piling on inflammatory dialog, does nobody any good.

superasn 5y ago

My only two reasons would be no Photoshop and fewer games, though it's definitely catching up on both.

Synaesthesia 5y ago
Music making software is really lacking on Linux compared to Windows and Mac.
jabroni_salad 5y ago
Unfortunately it is not catching up by the way of 1st party support. The compatibility layers are getting pretty good, don't get me wrong. But if to you a computer is just a tool that runs specific programs you need, then you should probably stick with what the software developer recommends you run their software on.

peakaboo 5y ago

Well he is right. Linux is not for everyone. It's for people who can learn how to double click an icon that looks different from the one in Windows. That excludes probably 50% of Windows users right there.

breakfastduck 5y ago
This kind of attitude from linux users is significantly responsible for its lack of wider adoption. Who wants to learn something new when the people you need help from are going to treat you like a moron? We both know its more involved than clicking a different icon.
- r_c_a_d 5y ago
  I totally agree. I am still a Linux user, but at home I use a Mac now. Why? Because I got sick of having to work out why my laptop couldn't print things anymore after an update. Not once has that happened to the Windows or Apple devices that my family own. Linux is great for doing all sorts of clever stuff; it's not so good at doing the ordinary stuff reliably.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  No, he's right. It's like maths. A vast majority of people like to not like / learn it. I've spent a lot of time with average users of all kinds. They couldn't care less. To them it's a thing that has less value than a coffee cup. I could, and would sit down and explain to them everything that is cool, cute about every layers of a computer, with simple language and pragmatic use, with history context, and bits of benefits for their lives. They just don't want to hear it. Some will say it's geek stuff. Some will say "I'm too scared". Some will try and forget 13 seconds later. The insane side of this is that these people will spend grands on a new machine that will tickle their sense of free improvement (which will not happen). Again every 3-5 years.. forced by ecosystemic pressure to push old stuff out. ps: I agree that GP was a bit smug, but even then, the population is what it is. pps: even at work, if I offer to explain something, or write a script, or a macro to help, most people will react negatively for various reasons (very often its petty emotions, like jealousy, or disdain).
  - ziml77 5y ago
    No, he's not right. A computer is a tool. A tool should help you accomplish tasks. A well-designed tool that is meant to be used in the average household should be easy to use and hard to screw up. It shouldn't feel like it's getting in the way. There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. The history you're so eager to tell should just be trivia.
    - magicalhippo 5y ago
      > There's no reason why anyone should need to know the details of how a computer works to use the computer. Paraphrasing the CEO of Sun Microsystems (IIRC): you don't need to know how to operate a nuclear power plant to get light when you flick the light switch.
xeromal 5y ago
This is the exact elitist mentality that the article writer is talking about. Not only are you saying everyone who can't figure it out is dumb, but you forget, there are actually people who probably can't understand it because its a different icon like very elderly people. My grandma would only use a browser if I set the icon to the little IE6 icon. lol
- iso1210 5y ago
  About half of windows users are dumber than the average person, and the average person is dumb.
  - xeromal 5y ago
    Amen. Hell, I might be one of those dummies.

dgan 5y ago

Actually (as a daily linux user) it's a nice write up! I was expecting nonsense.

apeace 5y ago

Right. I was going to comment "Reason #12 to switch to Linux: you love reformatting the entire system every once in a while, typically after struggling to fix a driver for hours and completely screwing everything up in a way you can't figure out how to undo."

petschge 5y ago
I have updated my laptop across 4 major releases of Debian now, never reformating the system. And the copy of my home directory (think user profile in windows) is even older. If you don't know what you are doing, saving a full system backup to an external hard drive is actually easy so you can try things and revert if it doesn't work.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  Same here. The only reason the last install was a fresh one was because I upgraded the storage on the laptop. My home folder has files that have been with me since 2006 or so. This laptop is 7 years old and this is the third fresh OS install it has in its lifetime - With one exception, it's always been updated to the latest Ubuntu version as needed with the Ubuntu tooling. What I have been doing to prevent data loss (that never happened) is to keep the interesting parts of my home folder on a separate filesystem and symlink them into my home folder. This allowed the previous fresh install to format the root partition and I didn't need to worry about my data being deleted.
iso1210 5y ago
That may be your experience, certainly not mine. I do remember than from the days of windows.
dgan 5y ago
For future readers: this is true (drivers/update problems), but easily fixable with for example Timeshift, or snapper (like openSUSE)
formerly_proven 5y ago
This is an interesting observation, considering that traditionally Windows has had these opaque failure and degradation modes that are "unfixable" unless you reinstall. Personally, it doesn't ring true to me - I've been using the very same OS install for around a decade now, I just kept moving it from machine to machine and I think my laptop install is actually a duplicate. I've restored it from backups a few times, though the leading cause is "accidentally powered off during system update".

yoyohello13 5y ago

This is a good article. This very thread has a ton of examples of what the author talks about. I've used Linux as my main OS for years now and I love it, but I've stopped trying to evangelize it. Just use whatever OS you want, I'm happy on Linux.

AdmiralAsshat 5y ago

The top reason NOT to switch to Linux should be "Because someone told you to." The Linux community has a terrible problem with proselytizing and then gatekeeping ("Welcome to Linux! Oh, you're using Linux Mint? Get fucked, then.")

TheCapn 5y ago

I just want to say that I thoroughly enjoyed that site. It feels incredibly grounded and a place where the author can have some fun. It tweaks some sort of nostalgia nerve while still having some good insights in his writings. The page on Aesthetics[1] makes me happy to see. [1] https://corn.codeberg.page/aesthetic.html

Kessler83 5y ago

I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD. It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things. Of course software is (also) about ideology. If you find yourself advocating putting more money in the pockets of the already super rich, or pretending that there isn't a digital part of human life where people have rights, well then obviously you have picked sides.

fouric 5y ago
> I'm surprised you can't see that this counter-article is just plain old FUD. Content-less emotional manipulation - just the kind of thing that I hate to see on HN. You answered none of the points in the article itself, dismissing the entire thing out of hand with an acronym describing a concept that you provided no evidence actually applied to any of the arguments. > It should be a no-brainer that an operative system that is free, open, democratic, well documented and consisting of over 50,000 quality software packages---Debian, for example---is better than an OS which isn't any of those things. No. I've been using Linux as my daily driver for over a decade (and have spent far more time using it than Windows), and gotten a few other people on it, so I can say that, for actually getting things done and software just working, Windows is far better than Linux. An operating system where you have to struggle to get things done is a bad operating system. Linux isn't "democratic", either - Linus Torvalds controls kernel development, and the userspace components have wildly differing development practices. Nor is it "well documented" - Linux-related documentation is generally terrible to read. Technically correct? Sure - but that's not "well documented", that's an encyclopedia. Neither can you say that those "50,000" software packages are "quality" - the vast majority of open-source software that I've seen is buggy, under-documented, incomplete, and difficult to use. (I mean, so is the vast majority of proprietary software - but that software being "also bad" doesn't make OSS software "good") > Of course software is (also) about ideology. [...] well then obviously you have picked sides. Please leave your manipulative speech out of HN, and don't try to drag me (or anyone) into your idealistic flamewar. Microsoft is a company that is predatory towards its users, and that's why I recommend Linux despite all of its problems. Pretending that it has no problems, or is technically superior to Windows, and then piling on inflammatory dialog, does nobody any good.