3 ms·

To you and me, sure, there is value in a linux desktop. To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. Where it works, i

To you and me, sure, there is value in a linux desktop. To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. Where it works, it is the exception, not the norm. Taking linux and turning it into a business model can be done - see valve and the steam deck. Granted, that is gaming-only but it can be done. The #1 problem with the linux desktop is that there is no single linux desktop and things break far too often.

sho_hn 4y ago
> To you and me, sure, there is value in a linux desktop. "You and me" is actually not a small or meaningless demographic. It includes my thousands of colleagues at Mercedes-Benz who use Linux desktops to do engineering work, and millions of other developers. It means a lot of scientists, for example at NASA and CERN. It means a lot of school students and government employees in educational and other municipal deployments. A lot of the places where Linux is used is for roles that act as multiplicators, e.g. in the development and production of end-user products, or research/science/RD that will lead to new ones, or in educating the people who will one day make new ones. All of this is a lot of value if you sum it up. There may be no single shining CEO and his shareholders getting rich off of the Linux desktop in the way we're used to fawning over in the tech hustle news cycle. But the world at large almost certainly is. I submit that's a fine success metric. > To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. For many users it's today more reliable than contemporary Windows. Ten years ago, the Linux desktop experience for a non-technical user was death by a thousand papercuts. Today there are still some gaps in HW support that can create unsolvables, but if your machine is well-supported, things work just fine. What's mainly keeping it back is many other factors, from channel availability to software availability. > see valve and the steam deck :-) I worked on the Steam Deck as CTO of one of Valve's contractors on the project. Glad you like it.
- philistine 4y ago
  In 2023, Linux on the desktop is merely death by a hundred papercuts instead of a thousand. Progress!
  - surgical_fire 4y ago
    You may be snarky, but it is actually meaningful progress. My first attempt on Linux was 20 years ago, before I was a technical user. It was a nightmare. Getting my mouse to work was impossible. Even figuring out how to turn the computer off so I could reinstall Windows was a pain. I came back to Linux some 8 years ago, already as a Developer. Installed Ubuntu. Everything hardware worked well, no need to tinker around. Usability was good and somewhat intuitive, but it took me some time to adjust. I enjoyed it for programming, but not being able to play most games I care about limited my use, and I kept Windows in dual boot. Nowadays I use Linux Mint as my only OS. It's objectively better than Windows in every way. For regular usage I don't even need to tinker with anything. Although I like the terminal and prefer using it, I can totally see how an average user can get by without touching it at all. I need only to tinker a little to get certain games running, and that's all.
- surgical_fire 4y ago
  > -) I worked on the Steam Deck as CTO of one of Valve's contractors on the project. Glad you like it. Not who you're responding to, but I am extremely grateful for the work that was put to make gaming on Linux possible. I may not own a Steam Deck, but it's development allowed me to switch entirely to Linux without looking back.
JohnFen 4y ago
> To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. I've switched about a dozen average users to Linux from Windows, and they have all been happy with the change and have not switched back. Based on that, I say that Linux absolutely is usable as a daily driver desktop. The only place I can see where Linux might not be the right choice is with a certain class of gamer -- but those gamers are not "average users". > The #1 problem with the linux desktop is that there is no single linux desktop That's a strength, not a weakness. For the user want a windows-like desktop? Done. Does the user want something more to their style of working? Done. Not being locked into the desktop means that if your objection to desktop linux is the UX, there's probably a different desktop that will make you happier.
- jabradoodle 4y ago
  If it takes someone to show you how, it is not there yet. I know many technical people who can't be bothered to deal with Linux on the desktop due to driver issues et al For it to be ready to be a mainstream desktop, it needs to just work.
  - sho_hn 4y ago
    > If it takes someone to show you how, it is not there yet. How many average users install Windows by themselves? Most people just take their Windows laptop to a store/service provider for maintenance, buy a new PC because "the old one is slow now" or have their nerdy fam member once a year remove mal/spy/adware and run a reg cleaner. And yes, show them things. Like OP, I've converted many family members over the years to Linux desktops, and as the resident nerdy family member, the amount of maintenance and assistance I need to provide has gone down very decently vs. supporting family Windows sytems. My 70+ mother in law has no problems using a Linux desktop to run her book club and other things she needs to do, but is far less likely to accidentally install malware. I used to come back to these systems a year later and find a system tray full of 20 new icons, a stack of 5 new browser toolbars, ad popups and "install new version" popups galore and other horrific stuff that needed hours to clean up or required a wipe and reinstall. There's a lot of Windows users on the fence about Linux that absolutely underestimate how technical they are and how much active and passive maintenance they do on their Windows systems. Are you a tech user who reads The Verge or Ars Technica and knows in advance about that bad new option in the new Win11 update that you will switch of day 0? Do you have your mental laundry list of five settings you change in every new Windows system you acquire? Most Windows users are and do not. The truth is, a lot of people have a working body of knowledge about how to admin and keep alive a Windows system, and a Linux switch requires re-learning and re-acquiring similar knowledge at times. And it's absolutely fine if you don't have the time to do that. There's value to that existing body of knowledge, and there is a switching cost. Some people have better things to do than installing Linux. But Windows is not magically maintenance/upkeep/difficulty-free.

sho_hn 4y ago

> To you and me, sure, there is value in a linux desktop. "You and me" is actually not a small or meaningless demographic. It includes my thousands of colleagues at Mercedes-Benz who use Linux desktops to do engineering work, and millions of other developers. It means a lot of scientists, for example at NASA and CERN. It means a lot of school students and government employees in educational and other municipal deployments. A lot of the places where Linux is used is for roles that act as multiplicators, e.g. in the development and production of end-user products, or research/science/RD that will lead to new ones, or in educating the people who will one day make new ones. All of this is a lot of value if you sum it up. There may be no single shining CEO and his shareholders getting rich off of the Linux desktop in the way we're used to fawning over in the tech hustle news cycle. But the world at large almost certainly is. I submit that's a fine success metric. > To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. For many users it's today more reliable than contemporary Windows. Ten years ago, the Linux desktop experience for a non-technical user was death by a thousand papercuts. Today there are still some gaps in HW support that can create unsolvables, but if your machine is well-supported, things work just fine. What's mainly keeping it back is many other factors, from channel availability to software availability. > see valve and the steam deck :-) I worked on the Steam Deck as CTO of one of Valve's contractors on the project. Glad you like it.

philistine 4y ago
In 2023, Linux on the desktop is merely death by a hundred papercuts instead of a thousand. Progress!
- surgical_fire 4y ago
  You may be snarky, but it is actually meaningful progress. My first attempt on Linux was 20 years ago, before I was a technical user. It was a nightmare. Getting my mouse to work was impossible. Even figuring out how to turn the computer off so I could reinstall Windows was a pain. I came back to Linux some 8 years ago, already as a Developer. Installed Ubuntu. Everything hardware worked well, no need to tinker around. Usability was good and somewhat intuitive, but it took me some time to adjust. I enjoyed it for programming, but not being able to play most games I care about limited my use, and I kept Windows in dual boot. Nowadays I use Linux Mint as my only OS. It's objectively better than Windows in every way. For regular usage I don't even need to tinker with anything. Although I like the terminal and prefer using it, I can totally see how an average user can get by without touching it at all. I need only to tinker a little to get certain games running, and that's all.
surgical_fire 4y ago
> -) I worked on the Steam Deck as CTO of one of Valve's contractors on the project. Glad you like it. Not who you're responding to, but I am extremely grateful for the work that was put to make gaming on Linux possible. I may not own a Steam Deck, but it's development allowed me to switch entirely to Linux without looking back.

JohnFen 4y ago

> To the average user, linux is not in any state to be a useable, daily driver desktop. I've switched about a dozen average users to Linux from Windows, and they have all been happy with the change and have not switched back. Based on that, I say that Linux absolutely is usable as a daily driver desktop. The only place I can see where Linux might not be the right choice is with a certain class of gamer -- but those gamers are not "average users". > The #1 problem with the linux desktop is that there is no single linux desktop That's a strength, not a weakness. For the user want a windows-like desktop? Done. Does the user want something more to their style of working? Done. Not being locked into the desktop means that if your objection to desktop linux is the UX, there's probably a different desktop that will make you happier.

jabradoodle 4y ago
If it takes someone to show you how, it is not there yet. I know many technical people who can't be bothered to deal with Linux on the desktop due to driver issues et al For it to be ready to be a mainstream desktop, it needs to just work.
- sho_hn 4y ago
  > If it takes someone to show you how, it is not there yet. How many average users install Windows by themselves? Most people just take their Windows laptop to a store/service provider for maintenance, buy a new PC because "the old one is slow now" or have their nerdy fam member once a year remove mal/spy/adware and run a reg cleaner. And yes, show them things. Like OP, I've converted many family members over the years to Linux desktops, and as the resident nerdy family member, the amount of maintenance and assistance I need to provide has gone down very decently vs. supporting family Windows sytems. My 70+ mother in law has no problems using a Linux desktop to run her book club and other things she needs to do, but is far less likely to accidentally install malware. I used to come back to these systems a year later and find a system tray full of 20 new icons, a stack of 5 new browser toolbars, ad popups and "install new version" popups galore and other horrific stuff that needed hours to clean up or required a wipe and reinstall. There's a lot of Windows users on the fence about Linux that absolutely underestimate how technical they are and how much active and passive maintenance they do on their Windows systems. Are you a tech user who reads The Verge or Ars Technica and knows in advance about that bad new option in the new Win11 update that you will switch of day 0? Do you have your mental laundry list of five settings you change in every new Windows system you acquire? Most Windows users are and do not. The truth is, a lot of people have a working body of knowledge about how to admin and keep alive a Windows system, and a Linux switch requires re-learning and re-acquiring similar knowledge at times. And it's absolutely fine if you don't have the time to do that. There's value to that existing body of knowledge, and there is a switching cost. Some people have better things to do than installing Linux. But Windows is not magically maintenance/upkeep/difficulty-free.