4 ms·

> Experience helps, but it doesn't take an expert to tell that removing 90 packages in order to install 1 application doesn't seem normal. You're looking at it

> Experience helps, but it doesn't take an expert to tell that removing 90 packages in order to install 1 application doesn't seem normal. You're looking at it from a seasoned Linux user's perspective, not from the perspective of a guy who has used Windows for decades and can't remember the last time he needed to use the Command Prompt. I don't know if it's lack of empathy or unrelenting bias. Is it hard to believe that millions of desktop users don't understand what a "package" or a "dependency" is? Windows doesn't link packages dynamically, it's just fat statically linked exe files, or exe files bundled with everything needed, like AppImages. For someone who's never known the concept of a dependency, expecting him to understand that wall of text is pretty elitist. > One of the reasons I like Unix-like operating systems (aside from macOS, which violates this principle) is that they don't waste your time with tons of warnings and locks and gates Yes, agreed, and I'm of the same opinion, which is why I use Linux as a daily driver. However, this is NOT the experience a new user or a complete beginner should have. A power user experience for beginner is like giving keys to a car to someone who's never driven one and asking him to drive in a metropolitan city with millions of cars on the road. You know what's gonna happen and it'd be pretty weird and apathetic to blame the beginner if he crashes his car and gets injured, which is what you're doing. > But I'm not very interested in running systems which are designed to cater to people who want to use them (and use them recklessly, at that) without understanding them at the expense of users who are willing to learn how they work. Sure, but then let's not proselytize Linux and how it's beginner friendly and how it's "better" than Windows or Mac when the intended usage involves knowing how to work on a terminal. Unless you can confidently say that this Linux distribution doesn't require you to touch the terminal, ever, not once, don't recommend it. This is why I don't recommend anyone to use Linux, not unless I want to waste their time and see them in pain.

pxc 5y ago
> You're looking at it from a seasoned Linux user's perspective, not from the perspective of a guy who has used Windows for decades and can't remember the last time he needed to use the Command Prompt. I'm writing with Hacker News readers, and especially developers (as mentioned somewhere upstream in this thread), in mind as prospective Linux users. For them, I don't think what happened to Linus represents a difficulty they will struggle with or find difficult to avoid. > Is it hard to believe that millions of desktop users don't understand what a "package" or a "dependency" is? Windows doesn't link packages dynamically, it's just fat statically linked exe files, or exe files bundled with everything needed, like AppImages. For someone who's never known the concept of a dependency, expecting him to understand that wall of text is pretty elitist. It's not hard to believe at all. That's why, imo, distributions that target users migrating from Windows— especially distros that target Windows ‘power users’— should generally direct users away from package managers like apt in favor of package managers which avoid negotiating dependency conflicts in a single global namespace, like Flatpak, Snap, AppImage, Guix, etc. I agree that Linus' experience was a problem, especially for Pop!_OS, given its mission. But I don't think apt was really ill-behaved here, and I don't think interventions at the level of apt's behavior are likely to be as effective as directing new users toward more appropriate tools when they ‘just wanna install Steam’, so-to-speak. > Sure, but then let's not proselytize Linux and how it's beginner friendly and how it's "better" than Windows or Mac when the intended usage involves knowing how to work on a terminal. Agreed, kinda. I've never recommended desktop Linux to a Windows ‘power user’, and nowadays there isn't really one I would recommend to such a person unless they asked me what to try. I have recommended desktop Linux to totally non-technical people I'm willing to support, though. After the first week, I pretty much don't hear from them again until the hardware dies. I've also recommended desktop Linux to mathematicians and scientists who may have written some code before but don't really know anything about hardware, operating systems, or systems administration. They seem to do fine solving their own issues.
- ayushnix 5y ago
  > I'm writing with Hacker News readers, and especially developers in mind Not all developers are system administrators, which is one of the reasons why MacOS is vastly more popular among developers than Linux. Imagine executing `sudo apt install npm` or `sudo apt install python-pip` and having your desktop wiped out just because you were in a hurry and assumed that everything would work out (which, admittedly, it usually does). I know how to recover from that, not all developers would. > That's why, imo, distributions that target users migrating from Windows— especially distros that target Windows ‘power users’— should generally direct users away from package managers like apt in favor of package managers which avoid negotiating dependency conflicts in a single global namespace, like Flatpak Agreed when it comes to Flatpak (I despise it though). > I have recommended desktop Linux to totally non-technical people I'm willing to support, though. I've done that before and those people usually turn into help vampires, so I don't do it anymore.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

pxc 5y ago

> You're looking at it from a seasoned Linux user's perspective, not from the perspective of a guy who has used Windows for decades and can't remember the last time he needed to use the Command Prompt. I'm writing with Hacker News readers, and especially developers (as mentioned somewhere upstream in this thread), in mind as prospective Linux users. For them, I don't think what happened to Linus represents a difficulty they will struggle with or find difficult to avoid. > Is it hard to believe that millions of desktop users don't understand what a "package" or a "dependency" is? Windows doesn't link packages dynamically, it's just fat statically linked exe files, or exe files bundled with everything needed, like AppImages. For someone who's never known the concept of a dependency, expecting him to understand that wall of text is pretty elitist. It's not hard to believe at all. That's why, imo, distributions that target users migrating from Windows— especially distros that target Windows ‘power users’— should generally direct users away from package managers like apt in favor of package managers which avoid negotiating dependency conflicts in a single global namespace, like Flatpak, Snap, AppImage, Guix, etc. I agree that Linus' experience was a problem, especially for Pop!_OS, given its mission. But I don't think apt was really ill-behaved here, and I don't think interventions at the level of apt's behavior are likely to be as effective as directing new users toward more appropriate tools when they ‘just wanna install Steam’, so-to-speak. > Sure, but then let's not proselytize Linux and how it's beginner friendly and how it's "better" than Windows or Mac when the intended usage involves knowing how to work on a terminal. Agreed, kinda. I've never recommended desktop Linux to a Windows ‘power user’, and nowadays there isn't really one I would recommend to such a person unless they asked me what to try. I have recommended desktop Linux to totally non-technical people I'm willing to support, though. After the first week, I pretty much don't hear from them again until the hardware dies. I've also recommended desktop Linux to mathematicians and scientists who may have written some code before but don't really know anything about hardware, operating systems, or systems administration. They seem to do fine solving their own issues.

ayushnix 5y ago
> I'm writing with Hacker News readers, and especially developers in mind Not all developers are system administrators, which is one of the reasons why MacOS is vastly more popular among developers than Linux. Imagine executing `sudo apt install npm` or `sudo apt install python-pip` and having your desktop wiped out just because you were in a hurry and assumed that everything would work out (which, admittedly, it usually does). I know how to recover from that, not all developers would. > That's why, imo, distributions that target users migrating from Windows— especially distros that target Windows ‘power users’— should generally direct users away from package managers like apt in favor of package managers which avoid negotiating dependency conflicts in a single global namespace, like Flatpak Agreed when it comes to Flatpak (I despise it though). > I have recommended desktop Linux to totally non-technical people I'm willing to support, though. I've done that before and those people usually turn into help vampires, so I don't do it anymore.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]