4 ms·

> Linux Respects Its Users Maybe I'm just ranting, but Ubuntu seems to be by far the most common distro for Windows users, and they're definitely not perfect i

> Linux Respects Its Users Maybe I'm just ranting, but Ubuntu seems to be by far the most common distro for Windows users, and they're definitely not perfect in this respect. I've been running Linux as my main OS for about 20 years and I can't rid myself of snaps. Synaptic will show that the package provided by Mozilla is the latest version and the snap is the installed version. If I reinstall, it goes back to the Mozilla package, only to mysteriously show the snap is the installed version within a few days. I don't want to bring up the discussion of the Snap Store again, but this experience is pretty much what you get with Windows, just on a much smaller scale. I'd strongly encourage Windows users to install Mint or some other friendly alternative rather than going with the standard recommendation.

tcmart14 2y ago
Ubuntu lost me over a decade ago or about a decade ago when I did an install and saw Amazon ads in the DE. The good news is, as you highlight, today there are quiet a few good distros, some that are not that much more of a hassle then Ubuntu for people to get up and going.
- newzisforsukas 2y ago
  https://askubuntu.com/a/1309580 https://askubuntu.com/a/1309580
newzisforsukas 2y ago
https://www.kubuntuforums.net/forum/general/documentation/how-to-s/662503-how-to-set-priority-for-a-ppa-i-e-using-firefox-without-snapd https://www.kubuntuforums.net/forum/general/documentation/ho...
directevolve 2y ago
I switched to Ubuntu from Windows gradually over the last two years and have now dropped Windows entirely. I agree, Ubuntu isn't perfect, but I was a Windows user for about 25 years and the difference in terms of control is night and day. By the end, it was like Windows was shoving me into things like OneDrive that I hadn't (at least deliberately) installed, didn't want to use, and didn't understand. This set me up for a risk of breaking things when I'd treat it like the regular Windows filesystem, and eventually I did break Windows and had to reinstall. I've had none of these problems with Ubuntu. I wouldn't be surprised if alternative Linuxes are even better, but I'm satisfied enough with Ubuntu that trying alternatives isn't a priority.
gitaarik 2y ago
Use Linux Mint, it's Ubuntu without snap and some other crap.
boneitis 2y ago
I'm guessing most those people are just late and came in after the couple "exoduses" of sorts of people jumping ship from Ubuntu to the offshoot projects (Mint, etc.). As far as my memory and perception of the situation go, there was a time where Ubuntu was #1 on distrowatch and couldn't conceivably be dethroned. Then, they added the spyware in '12 and snaps in '16, neither of which were by any measure without controversy, IMO. (And, spoiler alert -- they have since tumbled down from that position.)
lnx01 2y ago
Removing snaps is trivial.
- bravetraveler 2y ago
  As is accidentally bringing them back. Choosing another distribution is also trivial. Results in less work and represents the wider ecosystem, too. Canonical does what Canonical wants.
dbg31415 2y ago
And the whole wildly inconsistent UI elements of Linux shows it doesn't respect users. You have one default app that does things one way (say, with a "Save" button, and a nice "Settings successfully changed!" message), and another that does things a totally different way (say, with an auto-save and no message that it's been saved). Linux respects developers, in that it allows the people who make aspects of Linux to do anything any way they way -- but without consistency of UX, is it really respectful of users? Or does it just leave them at the mercy of the devs who often give the impression that they don't care about the user at all and can't be bothered to build anything consistently, or re-factor old code to bring it up to modern consistencies, or put even show a little empathy for users who aren't also advanced software developers. Not everyone wants to learn how to build a car just to drive a car. (Disclosure... My exposure to Linux is running various distributions on my Raspberry Pi side projects... Pi Hole, Retro Gaming, silly home automation toys. I tried to set up my elderly parents with Mint Linux and that was a complete disaster.)
- squidbeak 2y ago
  Is Windows any different in this regard? Windows itself (at least 10, I haven't used 11) has very different UI elements for something as crucial as its own settings, and third party programs very often have wildly different UI styles.
- bitcharmer 2y ago
  It looks like you don't understand what Linux is at all. It's just a kernel that other distributions build on top of to create an OS. You have multiple "UIs" available in that space, like gnome, kde and others. I have no idea how having choice and being able to customize your desktop experience is a bad thing but I guess some people won't be happy no matter what.
  - dbg31415 2y ago
    Inside of any one distribution of Linux is what feels like a prom dress made out of fabric remnants. It feels like they don't have UX designers planning the workflows (or even involved). And that's largely because they don't, right? They have developers building some stuff and doing it however they want, and not really following any sort of enforced brand or style guidelines. Mostly the various Linux distros still feel like "model train sets" -- built by one guy, for one guy to enjoy alone in his basement. It's work to build something as part of a larger team... designers, developers... then you'd need a manager... and probably some sales people to keep it all funded... easier to just avoid all that stuff and build a model train set. (= Most of the distros don't take kindly to UX people or product people giving suggestions on GitHub, or other places. It's very much a "if you aren't a dev, we don't want your input" type situation. "You don't get to tell us what to build, not here, not outside of work..." and until Linux makes a real effort to include a variety of people (especially designers!) in the build process, the results will always be the same.
AndyKelley 2y ago
Everything makes sense if you take a moment to understand the business structure of these projects. Microsoft is a publicly traded, for-profit company. Canonical Ltd (Ubuntu) is a privately held, for-profit company. The Linux Foundation is a 501(c)(6) non-profit organization. Software in the Public Interest (Debian) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. See the pattern?
bitcharmer 2y ago
Yup, a 20+ years Linux user here. Most of that time I used Ubuntu but their insistence on shoving shitty snap system down everyone's throats broke the camel's back for me. Switched to Fedora two years ago. Another great example how a clueless business person can mess up otherwise great software.
- bravetraveler 2y ago
  Ditto - long-time user here. Ubuntu was my intro... and for probably 200 of my classmates. Those free CDs were incredible in the time of dial-up. This lasted longer than you think for most of America. My rural area and many others didn't get affordable ISDN/DSL/cable until the early 2000s. Anyway, I didn't stick with them too long. This insistent nature of theirs goes back that long. It was a bit more acceptable, if not something to encourage, given the smaller size of the community. Fedora/Red Hat are generally, in my opinion, better participants. That said, with what happened RE: CentOS [releases] to Stream... I truly, honest to goodness, worry for Fedora. It might be next for some other business-minded shenanigans. Technically/version-wise, whatever - I use Fedora! I'm not worried about new software. Upgrading, especially without testing, isn't compelled. I'm more worried about new/unfriendly policies to the community; the systems I'm well in control of!

tcmart14 2y ago

Ubuntu lost me over a decade ago or about a decade ago when I did an install and saw Amazon ads in the DE. The good news is, as you highlight, today there are quiet a few good distros, some that are not that much more of a hassle then Ubuntu for people to get up and going.

newzisforsukas 2y ago
https://askubuntu.com/a/1309580 https://askubuntu.com/a/1309580

newzisforsukas 2y ago

https://www.kubuntuforums.net/forum/general/documentation/how-to-s/662503-how-to-set-priority-for-a-ppa-i-e-using-firefox-without-snapd https://www.kubuntuforums.net/forum/general/documentation/ho...

directevolve 2y ago

I switched to Ubuntu from Windows gradually over the last two years and have now dropped Windows entirely. I agree, Ubuntu isn't perfect, but I was a Windows user for about 25 years and the difference in terms of control is night and day. By the end, it was like Windows was shoving me into things like OneDrive that I hadn't (at least deliberately) installed, didn't want to use, and didn't understand. This set me up for a risk of breaking things when I'd treat it like the regular Windows filesystem, and eventually I did break Windows and had to reinstall. I've had none of these problems with Ubuntu. I wouldn't be surprised if alternative Linuxes are even better, but I'm satisfied enough with Ubuntu that trying alternatives isn't a priority.

gitaarik 2y ago

Use Linux Mint, it's Ubuntu without snap and some other crap.

boneitis 2y ago

I'm guessing most those people are just late and came in after the couple "exoduses" of sorts of people jumping ship from Ubuntu to the offshoot projects (Mint, etc.). As far as my memory and perception of the situation go, there was a time where Ubuntu was #1 on distrowatch and couldn't conceivably be dethroned. Then, they added the spyware in '12 and snaps in '16, neither of which were by any measure without controversy, IMO. (And, spoiler alert -- they have since tumbled down from that position.)

lnx01 2y ago

Removing snaps is trivial.

bravetraveler 2y ago
As is accidentally bringing them back. Choosing another distribution is also trivial. Results in less work and represents the wider ecosystem, too. Canonical does what Canonical wants.

dbg31415 2y ago

And the whole wildly inconsistent UI elements of Linux shows it doesn't respect users. You have one default app that does things one way (say, with a "Save" button, and a nice "Settings successfully changed!" message), and another that does things a totally different way (say, with an auto-save and no message that it's been saved). Linux respects developers, in that it allows the people who make aspects of Linux to do anything any way they way -- but without consistency of UX, is it really respectful of users? Or does it just leave them at the mercy of the devs who often give the impression that they don't care about the user at all and can't be bothered to build anything consistently, or re-factor old code to bring it up to modern consistencies, or put even show a little empathy for users who aren't also advanced software developers. Not everyone wants to learn how to build a car just to drive a car. (Disclosure... My exposure to Linux is running various distributions on my Raspberry Pi side projects... Pi Hole, Retro Gaming, silly home automation toys. I tried to set up my elderly parents with Mint Linux and that was a complete disaster.)

squidbeak 2y ago
Is Windows any different in this regard? Windows itself (at least 10, I haven't used 11) has very different UI elements for something as crucial as its own settings, and third party programs very often have wildly different UI styles.
bitcharmer 2y ago
It looks like you don't understand what Linux is at all. It's just a kernel that other distributions build on top of to create an OS. You have multiple "UIs" available in that space, like gnome, kde and others. I have no idea how having choice and being able to customize your desktop experience is a bad thing but I guess some people won't be happy no matter what.
- dbg31415 2y ago
  Inside of any one distribution of Linux is what feels like a prom dress made out of fabric remnants. It feels like they don't have UX designers planning the workflows (or even involved). And that's largely because they don't, right? They have developers building some stuff and doing it however they want, and not really following any sort of enforced brand or style guidelines. Mostly the various Linux distros still feel like "model train sets" -- built by one guy, for one guy to enjoy alone in his basement. It's work to build something as part of a larger team... designers, developers... then you'd need a manager... and probably some sales people to keep it all funded... easier to just avoid all that stuff and build a model train set. (= Most of the distros don't take kindly to UX people or product people giving suggestions on GitHub, or other places. It's very much a "if you aren't a dev, we don't want your input" type situation. "You don't get to tell us what to build, not here, not outside of work..." and until Linux makes a real effort to include a variety of people (especially designers!) in the build process, the results will always be the same.

AndyKelley 2y ago

Everything makes sense if you take a moment to understand the business structure of these projects. Microsoft is a publicly traded, for-profit company. Canonical Ltd (Ubuntu) is a privately held, for-profit company. The Linux Foundation is a 501(c)(6) non-profit organization. Software in the Public Interest (Debian) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. See the pattern?

bitcharmer 2y ago

Yup, a 20+ years Linux user here. Most of that time I used Ubuntu but their insistence on shoving shitty snap system down everyone's throats broke the camel's back for me. Switched to Fedora two years ago. Another great example how a clueless business person can mess up otherwise great software.

bravetraveler 2y ago
Ditto - long-time user here. Ubuntu was my intro... and for probably 200 of my classmates. Those free CDs were incredible in the time of dial-up. This lasted longer than you think for most of America. My rural area and many others didn't get affordable ISDN/DSL/cable until the early 2000s. Anyway, I didn't stick with them too long. This insistent nature of theirs goes back that long. It was a bit more acceptable, if not something to encourage, given the smaller size of the community. Fedora/Red Hat are generally, in my opinion, better participants. That said, with what happened RE: CentOS [releases] to Stream... I truly, honest to goodness, worry for Fedora. It might be next for some other business-minded shenanigans. Technically/version-wise, whatever - I use Fedora! I'm not worried about new software. Upgrading, especially without testing, isn't compelled. I'm more worried about new/unfriendly policies to the community; the systems I'm well in control of!