7 ms·

I don't want to comment much on the rest, but the whole trope of: a Linux machine is not for someone who isn't comfortable with the cli" needs to die. My partne

I don't want to comment much on the rest, but the whole trope of: a Linux machine is not for someone who isn't comfortable with the cli" needs to die. My partner is essentially computer illiterate (she didn't know about keyboard shortcuts, even for copy paste before we met and still doesn't really use them) and has been using my old Ubuntu laptop for years. The only thing I do is tell her from time to time not just to click away the update (she is a good example why having optional updates is not a good thing). Her issues are pretty much the same she would have for a Windows or Mac machine, usually related to how something in a word processor works. Also my mother (78yo) is using Linux as a only system, and she does a lot of photography and video work. She has actually even become quite competent with the cli by now, just because she likes to try stuff.

psalminen 4y ago
Same here. I put mint on my.computer illiterate girlfriend's old computer. She used it as effectively as any other os. The update issue is real though.
tpoacher 4y ago
Yeah, it's a bit like "A windows machine is not for someone who isn't comfortable editing registry entries". Or "A mac is not for someone who isn't comfortable with hidden system files". I.e. things the average user doesn't interact with anyway, and if they have to they'll probably do it by following a couple of steps blindly from the internet and that is that.
shalmanese 4y ago
It's impossible to generalize across a broad range of use because each person's needs are different and non-negotiable. We've had plenty of examples of totally tech illiterate people using linux with zero problems since 1999 but they're totally irrelevant because they happen to be the people who are on the narrow set of rails that don't touch linux's rough edges. To make a convincing case, you have to move beyond anecdote to actual statistical analysis and the numbers are still pretty overwhelming that many common things that many common people need to do can't be done without the CLI. And even if you generate data that 60, 70, 80% of people would have no problems using linux, that's irrelevant in the case of a specific person who has a specific common need that linux falls over at.
- arminiusreturns 4y ago
  How about we also include how MS infiltrated the education system with hidden incentives and essentially forced training in a non-free user hostile operating system to multiple genrations of people? I think people had to learn Windows. They can learn Linux. The excuses are bs. Schools should teach unix/linux, and not proprietary systems. We should expect people to learn new things to be able to operate new tools. Thats ok to expect. This idea that the computer is a dumb terminal is far too prevelant thanks to phone and tablet proliferation, another tech corrupted at the outset to be user-hostile and spy on them. Desktop linix and laptop linux are 99% of the way there. Yes, you will have to learn new commands and ways of doing things. Yes, some software you are used to won't work (wine be praised). It's worth all the trouble though. Freedom isn't free, you have to actively persue it. I look around and see way too much Stockholm Syndrome going on.
  - toastal 4y ago
    It's all software really. Most people would be fine without Adobe or Microsoft Office or Google Docs. We don't need to train kids with GitHub, Sibelius or Dorico, the list goes on. Concepts don't require application-specific training and the FOSS options are largely good enough if not better than the proprietary competitors.
    - wardedVibe 4y ago
      And would be even better and improve faster with more users.
  - Gareth321 4y ago
    > How about we also include how MS infiltrated the education system with hidden incentives and essentially forced training in a non-free user hostile operating system to multiple genrations of people? When was the last time you used Windows? Microsoft employees a small army of user experience designers to ensure it’s a great experience. It’s not perfect, but I can do everything I need to do using the GUI. This isn’t a case of learning how to do the same thing differently. The GUI is objectively better for most consumer use cases. Linux, for better and worse, relies more heavily on CLI.
loudmax 4y ago
The issue is that open source distributions don't have access to the level of testing and quality control that the proprietary desktop duopoly do. Microsoft and Apple can spend millions of dollars to make it very unlikely that a system update will break your system. And even if when it breaks, there is such a large user base that a solution will usually be easy to find. Linux ditros don't have that. In my experience, Ubuntu and Fedora don't have that level of stability especially when running a heavy desktop like Gnome or KDE. My Arch laptop very stable, but I'm running a minimalist desktop. In the rare occasions where something goes wrong I have the experience and inclination to quickly learn to fix it. I wish there were more competition in the commercial space, but I'm not sure that it's even a good idea for open source to try to match the GUI administration utilities from the proprietary OS's. It's far too much work troubleshooting weird corner cases. I wholeheartedly recommend Linux or open source for people who want the level of control over their machines that open source allows. But for people who just want their machine to work, it's reasonable to cede control to Apple or Microsoft. Maybe PopOS, with it's backing from a commercial vendor on limited hardware will change this.
- addicted 4y ago
  And yet, I have never heard of a Linux update which bricked your system, something that has happened with both Windows and OSX. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/this-macos-update-is-bricking-some-macs https://www.tomsguide.com/news/this-macos-update-is-bricking... https://www.itpro.com/hardware/358739/apple-releases-macos-update-to-fix-usb-c-bricking-issue https://www.itpro.com/hardware/358739/apple-releases-macos-u... https://www.laptopmag.com/news/windows-10-update-now-bricking-pcs-what-to-do https://www.laptopmag.com/news/windows-10-update-now-brickin... Searching Linux update bricking systems brought up nothing relevant. The closest I could find was a forum post by a user complaining about the update bricking their “experimental system”. The Macos examples are particularly bad. Bricking systems with logic boards replaced by Apple repair and because you connected to “unauthorized” USB devices.
  - Fnoord 4y ago
    You have not heard of it? Well, you're replying to someone who's using Arch. With Arch, you get into trouble all the time, but if you're well versed with Linux (and Arch) you can fix it. I'm using Arch, and ZFS, on my work laptop. A month ago, when I update my kernel, boom I had to use Systemrescue because it would no longer boot ZFS root. And of course just at that day I lost my Ventoy USB stick (probably my 2 y.o. son got rid of it ...)
twawaaay 4y ago
Unfortunately, you are wrong. I have quarter of century experience working on Linux including running it on all my laptops and desktops for 23 years. Over the years keeping it working started becoming what seems like a full time job and I jumped the ship for M1 MacBook Pro. It still has a lot of problems but at least I have more time to do my actual work. I understand I might just becoming less tolerant of wasting time on things that should just work (my actual work being more and more distant from tinkering with OS internals). But, if I with all my experience am spending time keeping it alive, what has to do a person that has no idea about systemd or pulse audio or dealing with failed upgrades or anything else? Essentially -- you are using it until first problem happens and then you can either reinstall it from scratch or switch to Windows or Mac. I still keep a Linux laptop dedicated for critical security tasks (I don't trust Apple this much) and a number of Linux VMs (I am running small datacenter at home).
- ungamedplayer 4y ago
  Run Linux everyday. I am a heavy tech user. Multi polyglot developer.. what are you doing that turns admin into a full time job.. Even my stupid obtuse use case is not that heavy.
- dahfizz 4y ago
  In my experience, the people who spend so much time maintaining their Linux are the people hacking on their OS. Which is something I encourage; the customizability of Linux is part of what makes it so great. But if you load up the newest Ubuntu lts on a laptop and never fiddle with configs, switch display managers/ desktops, etc, then there will be zero maintenance required.
  - trelane 4y ago
    Also, buy Linux preinstalled and fully supported by the vendor. Saves so many headaches.
  - twawaaay 4y ago
    I agree, if you install and never do anything with it it will usually work. But that isn't very high bar for usability. What about people who actually use their machines for anything else than just browsing Internets? I had people break it even in this relatively simple case. I'll give you an example. I am using an external DAC (connected over Toslink). It starts up automatically when it detects digital audio signal and shuts down when the signal stops. Unfortunately, the startup sequence takes couple of seconds (it has a delay of 2s and then slowly increases the volume over 4s, can't be configured). So in the default configuration, PipeWire insists to turn off the audio whenever there is no client to play anything for more than X seconds. This is super annoying, every time you try to play youtube video after going to kitchen for coffee you are loosing first couple of seconds of audio. This can be changed (remove a module that causes automatic suspend), but over last couple of years I had to redo this configuration at least 5-6 times after various PipeWire upgrades because PipeWire developers don't give a shit about user configuration and are happy to override it or in fact do some stupid things like move it from /etc to /usr/share so you are left guessing why your config files no longer do what they were supposed to do.
Gareth321 4y ago
No one is claiming Linux is bad for very basic users. It’s fine for people who only ever use bowsers. Linux is also great for developers. It’s most of us in between who struggle. The last time I booted up Ubuntu I couldn’t even adjust the mouse acceleration without spending 10 minutes on Google and more time installing an additional tool. I tried to install Radarr - a very popular home media server app. The instruction manual required is absurd: https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/installation https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/installation Linux developers need to start caring about UX if they want the OS to appreciably rise above 1-2% consumer. Users should never ever, for any reason ever, need to open the CLI. Not when I want to install or configure an app, and certainly not when I want to update a driver or setting.
- cycomanic 4y ago
  I disagree on not using the cli for installing things etc. Instructions on commands are much easier than instruction about the gui, because they are easily copy pastable. One example i encounter quite a bit, the instructions for installing python and packages for building cython modules. I have students who are very much intermediate Windows users, but explaining to them how to get the development (they need python for experiment control and analysis) environment going is really painful. They often take days to get in going. On the other hand Linux users are much easier, I just give them the commands to install the packages in an email.
  - Hellion 4y ago
    First of all, training users to copy stuff into a terminal is just a bad idea. Also, youre basically suggested that users use a GUI (a web browser) to get instructions on how to use a command line. It makes a lot more sense for there to be a clear and easy to use package manager, and if users are having trouble figuring that out, work needs to be done to rectify that. Also, if you’re targeting power users who are familiar with the command line, that’s one thing. But right now linux desktop feels like it wants to be everything for everyone and that’s a very hard rope to walk
  - heywoodlh 4y ago
    > I disagree on not using the cli for installing things I think that it depends on who the target audience is. For myself, I heavily prefer the command line for literally everything. But if the goal is for Linux on desktop to be beginner/non-power-user friendly then I agree with the parent comment that you should be able to do everything without opening the CLI. For me, I will always be happier with CLI tools. :)
bstar77 4y ago
The command line is a problem for intermediate users. I consider Linus from LTT to be at the upper end of intermediate and he was borderline incompetent in Linux. When you have enough knowledge to be dangerous and the hubris to assume you know everything you should need to know, you will find yourself in deep trouble quickly. The most computer illiterate will be fine, but they will not be buying a machine like this. The most advanced people will probably be fine mainly because their expectations will be in check. I'm personally having a hard time getting my 13 year old to debug issues in windows and linux because his expectations are just too high (probably years of ipad use). He expects things should just work and get frustrated too quickly. Anyway, I think success in linux is more mental than anything. The terminal shouldn't be the frightening thing people like to think it is. It's just FUD. I'm in the terminal all the time on my Mac and no one seems to have an issue with that.
- pkulak 4y ago
  Windows is the same way. But even worse, since instead of a broken machine, you’ll enroll in some bot-net. Someone who knows enough to be dangerous in Windows starts downloaded and running random executables from the internet when things go wrong.
- klibertp 4y ago
  > I'm personally having a hard time getting my 13 year old to debug issues in windows and linux because his expectations are just too high (probably years of ipad use). He expects things should just work and get frustrated too quickly. Please persist in your effort. Teaching your kid logical thinking and scientific method ("debugging") and helping him not to be easily frustrated are probably skills that he will need anyway later on.
  - bstar77 4y ago
    Thanks, I agree 100%. It's a process, he's a hormonal teenager at the moment that I have to wear white gloves with when it comes to these things. We are making progress, tho... since I got him the Steamdeck he's been in Linux about 90% of the time and asking tons of questions.

psalminen 4y ago

Same here. I put mint on my.computer illiterate girlfriend's old computer. She used it as effectively as any other os. The update issue is real though.

tpoacher 4y ago

Yeah, it's a bit like "A windows machine is not for someone who isn't comfortable editing registry entries". Or "A mac is not for someone who isn't comfortable with hidden system files". I.e. things the average user doesn't interact with anyway, and if they have to they'll probably do it by following a couple of steps blindly from the internet and that is that.

shalmanese 4y ago

It's impossible to generalize across a broad range of use because each person's needs are different and non-negotiable. We've had plenty of examples of totally tech illiterate people using linux with zero problems since 1999 but they're totally irrelevant because they happen to be the people who are on the narrow set of rails that don't touch linux's rough edges. To make a convincing case, you have to move beyond anecdote to actual statistical analysis and the numbers are still pretty overwhelming that many common things that many common people need to do can't be done without the CLI. And even if you generate data that 60, 70, 80% of people would have no problems using linux, that's irrelevant in the case of a specific person who has a specific common need that linux falls over at.

arminiusreturns 4y ago
How about we also include how MS infiltrated the education system with hidden incentives and essentially forced training in a non-free user hostile operating system to multiple genrations of people? I think people had to learn Windows. They can learn Linux. The excuses are bs. Schools should teach unix/linux, and not proprietary systems. We should expect people to learn new things to be able to operate new tools. Thats ok to expect. This idea that the computer is a dumb terminal is far too prevelant thanks to phone and tablet proliferation, another tech corrupted at the outset to be user-hostile and spy on them. Desktop linix and laptop linux are 99% of the way there. Yes, you will have to learn new commands and ways of doing things. Yes, some software you are used to won't work (wine be praised). It's worth all the trouble though. Freedom isn't free, you have to actively persue it. I look around and see way too much Stockholm Syndrome going on.
- toastal 4y ago
  It's all software really. Most people would be fine without Adobe or Microsoft Office or Google Docs. We don't need to train kids with GitHub, Sibelius or Dorico, the list goes on. Concepts don't require application-specific training and the FOSS options are largely good enough if not better than the proprietary competitors.
  - wardedVibe 4y ago
    And would be even better and improve faster with more users.
- Gareth321 4y ago
  > How about we also include how MS infiltrated the education system with hidden incentives and essentially forced training in a non-free user hostile operating system to multiple genrations of people? When was the last time you used Windows? Microsoft employees a small army of user experience designers to ensure it’s a great experience. It’s not perfect, but I can do everything I need to do using the GUI. This isn’t a case of learning how to do the same thing differently. The GUI is objectively better for most consumer use cases. Linux, for better and worse, relies more heavily on CLI.

loudmax 4y ago

The issue is that open source distributions don't have access to the level of testing and quality control that the proprietary desktop duopoly do. Microsoft and Apple can spend millions of dollars to make it very unlikely that a system update will break your system. And even if when it breaks, there is such a large user base that a solution will usually be easy to find. Linux ditros don't have that. In my experience, Ubuntu and Fedora don't have that level of stability especially when running a heavy desktop like Gnome or KDE. My Arch laptop very stable, but I'm running a minimalist desktop. In the rare occasions where something goes wrong I have the experience and inclination to quickly learn to fix it. I wish there were more competition in the commercial space, but I'm not sure that it's even a good idea for open source to try to match the GUI administration utilities from the proprietary OS's. It's far too much work troubleshooting weird corner cases. I wholeheartedly recommend Linux or open source for people who want the level of control over their machines that open source allows. But for people who just want their machine to work, it's reasonable to cede control to Apple or Microsoft. Maybe PopOS, with it's backing from a commercial vendor on limited hardware will change this.

addicted 4y ago
And yet, I have never heard of a Linux update which bricked your system, something that has happened with both Windows and OSX. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/this-macos-update-is-bricking-some-macs https://www.tomsguide.com/news/this-macos-update-is-bricking... https://www.itpro.com/hardware/358739/apple-releases-macos-update-to-fix-usb-c-bricking-issue https://www.itpro.com/hardware/358739/apple-releases-macos-u... https://www.laptopmag.com/news/windows-10-update-now-bricking-pcs-what-to-do https://www.laptopmag.com/news/windows-10-update-now-brickin... Searching Linux update bricking systems brought up nothing relevant. The closest I could find was a forum post by a user complaining about the update bricking their “experimental system”. The Macos examples are particularly bad. Bricking systems with logic boards replaced by Apple repair and because you connected to “unauthorized” USB devices.
- Fnoord 4y ago
  You have not heard of it? Well, you're replying to someone who's using Arch. With Arch, you get into trouble all the time, but if you're well versed with Linux (and Arch) you can fix it. I'm using Arch, and ZFS, on my work laptop. A month ago, when I update my kernel, boom I had to use Systemrescue because it would no longer boot ZFS root. And of course just at that day I lost my Ventoy USB stick (probably my 2 y.o. son got rid of it ...)

twawaaay 4y ago

Unfortunately, you are wrong. I have quarter of century experience working on Linux including running it on all my laptops and desktops for 23 years. Over the years keeping it working started becoming what seems like a full time job and I jumped the ship for M1 MacBook Pro. It still has a lot of problems but at least I have more time to do my actual work. I understand I might just becoming less tolerant of wasting time on things that should just work (my actual work being more and more distant from tinkering with OS internals). But, if I with all my experience am spending time keeping it alive, what has to do a person that has no idea about systemd or pulse audio or dealing with failed upgrades or anything else? Essentially -- you are using it until first problem happens and then you can either reinstall it from scratch or switch to Windows or Mac. I still keep a Linux laptop dedicated for critical security tasks (I don't trust Apple this much) and a number of Linux VMs (I am running small datacenter at home).

ungamedplayer 4y ago
Run Linux everyday. I am a heavy tech user. Multi polyglot developer.. what are you doing that turns admin into a full time job.. Even my stupid obtuse use case is not that heavy.
dahfizz 4y ago
In my experience, the people who spend so much time maintaining their Linux are the people hacking on their OS. Which is something I encourage; the customizability of Linux is part of what makes it so great. But if you load up the newest Ubuntu lts on a laptop and never fiddle with configs, switch display managers/ desktops, etc, then there will be zero maintenance required.
- trelane 4y ago
  Also, buy Linux preinstalled and fully supported by the vendor. Saves so many headaches.
- twawaaay 4y ago
  I agree, if you install and never do anything with it it will usually work. But that isn't very high bar for usability. What about people who actually use their machines for anything else than just browsing Internets? I had people break it even in this relatively simple case. I'll give you an example. I am using an external DAC (connected over Toslink). It starts up automatically when it detects digital audio signal and shuts down when the signal stops. Unfortunately, the startup sequence takes couple of seconds (it has a delay of 2s and then slowly increases the volume over 4s, can't be configured). So in the default configuration, PipeWire insists to turn off the audio whenever there is no client to play anything for more than X seconds. This is super annoying, every time you try to play youtube video after going to kitchen for coffee you are loosing first couple of seconds of audio. This can be changed (remove a module that causes automatic suspend), but over last couple of years I had to redo this configuration at least 5-6 times after various PipeWire upgrades because PipeWire developers don't give a shit about user configuration and are happy to override it or in fact do some stupid things like move it from /etc to /usr/share so you are left guessing why your config files no longer do what they were supposed to do.

Gareth321 4y ago

No one is claiming Linux is bad for very basic users. It’s fine for people who only ever use bowsers. Linux is also great for developers. It’s most of us in between who struggle. The last time I booted up Ubuntu I couldn’t even adjust the mouse acceleration without spending 10 minutes on Google and more time installing an additional tool. I tried to install Radarr - a very popular home media server app. The instruction manual required is absurd: https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/installation https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/installation Linux developers need to start caring about UX if they want the OS to appreciably rise above 1-2% consumer. Users should never ever, for any reason ever, need to open the CLI. Not when I want to install or configure an app, and certainly not when I want to update a driver or setting.

cycomanic 4y ago
I disagree on not using the cli for installing things etc. Instructions on commands are much easier than instruction about the gui, because they are easily copy pastable. One example i encounter quite a bit, the instructions for installing python and packages for building cython modules. I have students who are very much intermediate Windows users, but explaining to them how to get the development (they need python for experiment control and analysis) environment going is really painful. They often take days to get in going. On the other hand Linux users are much easier, I just give them the commands to install the packages in an email.
- Hellion 4y ago
  First of all, training users to copy stuff into a terminal is just a bad idea. Also, youre basically suggested that users use a GUI (a web browser) to get instructions on how to use a command line. It makes a lot more sense for there to be a clear and easy to use package manager, and if users are having trouble figuring that out, work needs to be done to rectify that. Also, if you’re targeting power users who are familiar with the command line, that’s one thing. But right now linux desktop feels like it wants to be everything for everyone and that’s a very hard rope to walk
- heywoodlh 4y ago
  > I disagree on not using the cli for installing things I think that it depends on who the target audience is. For myself, I heavily prefer the command line for literally everything. But if the goal is for Linux on desktop to be beginner/non-power-user friendly then I agree with the parent comment that you should be able to do everything without opening the CLI. For me, I will always be happier with CLI tools. :)

bstar77 4y ago

The command line is a problem for intermediate users. I consider Linus from LTT to be at the upper end of intermediate and he was borderline incompetent in Linux. When you have enough knowledge to be dangerous and the hubris to assume you know everything you should need to know, you will find yourself in deep trouble quickly. The most computer illiterate will be fine, but they will not be buying a machine like this. The most advanced people will probably be fine mainly because their expectations will be in check. I'm personally having a hard time getting my 13 year old to debug issues in windows and linux because his expectations are just too high (probably years of ipad use). He expects things should just work and get frustrated too quickly. Anyway, I think success in linux is more mental than anything. The terminal shouldn't be the frightening thing people like to think it is. It's just FUD. I'm in the terminal all the time on my Mac and no one seems to have an issue with that.

pkulak 4y ago
Windows is the same way. But even worse, since instead of a broken machine, you’ll enroll in some bot-net. Someone who knows enough to be dangerous in Windows starts downloaded and running random executables from the internet when things go wrong.
klibertp 4y ago
> I'm personally having a hard time getting my 13 year old to debug issues in windows and linux because his expectations are just too high (probably years of ipad use). He expects things should just work and get frustrated too quickly. Please persist in your effort. Teaching your kid logical thinking and scientific method ("debugging") and helping him not to be easily frustrated are probably skills that he will need anyway later on.
- bstar77 4y ago
  Thanks, I agree 100%. It's a process, he's a hormonal teenager at the moment that I have to wear white gloves with when it comes to these things. We are making progress, tho... since I got him the Steamdeck he's been in Linux about 90% of the time and asking tons of questions.