3 ms·

>I've been running Linux on my home desktop since around 1999 Personal anecdotes are not statistics or cases representative for the average user or business. W

>I've been running Linux on my home desktop since around 1999 Personal anecdotes are not statistics or cases representative for the average user or business. What others do with their systems and their requirements and apps could be very different than yours. You think if Linux was that usable at everything in 1999 companies and individuals wouldn't have loves to use that instead of paying thousand of dollars to Microsoft? Just because you could set it up and use it in 1999 doesn't mean it was the norm. Some people know how to change their own oil while most don't and don't care to since they prefer to pay someone else to do it as they have other hobbies than learning to tinker with their car. Similarly some people like you like to thinker and find out how to get Linux to work in 1999 while most prefer to just pay to use Windows NT/MacOS and get to work.

shiroiushi 2y ago
>Similarly some people like you like to thinker and find out how to get Linux to work in 1999 while most prefer to just pay to use Windows NT/MacOS and get to work. We're not talking about regular people here. Try reading the prior messages for context before commenting. We're talking about people who claim to be IT professionals. If they were really as smart as they claimed, they could have done the same thing I did easily. They didn't, not because they loved Windows that much (maybe they did, maybe they didn't, it's irrelevant), but because it was seen as essential for their career.
krzyk 2y ago
> You think if Linux was that usable at everything in 1999 companies and individuals wouldn't have loves to use that instead of paying thousand of dollars to Microsoft? Inertia is a strong force in corporations. I wouldn't count on reason there, inertia triumphs it. Personal anecdotes is something that shows it can be done. In few corps I worked since 2004 I was also able to switch windows to linux (as many other developers there) and we didn't loose functionality. But I get it that for people that work mostly in excel it would be a blocker, as it doesn't have Linux version - so not all work could be done on Linux. But having options is good. My current corp decided to give people a choice (after a decade of asking for it) and since 2 years we can choose between Windows, macOS and Linux. (I'm still amazed that most developers chose macOS, as it is less power user friendly than Windows). Before I was the only one with Linux, now there are > 20% of us. And possibly more in the future when hardware will be upgaded.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >Personal anecdotes is something that shows it can be done. Some people have built their own car from scratch in their garage that they use to drive to work, but it's unrealistic most people do that at scale, even though someone proved it's possible. The same way, why aren't you building your own car to daily drive and instead paying Ford/Toyota? Someone proved it's possible. > In few corps I worked since 2004 I was also able to switch windows to linux The vast majority of Windows/MacOS users are not SW-developers, nor to they have any deeper interest in tinkering with computers and learn Linux. They're content with what they're already familiar with. You keep taking highly niche technical cases from your SW dev bubble and trying to extrapolate that experience as being mainstream when you're far from it. The photo studio or flower shop down the road in 2004 was no way gonna switch to Linux even if it was technically possible.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >You keep taking highly niche technical cases from your SW dev bubble and trying to extrapolate that experience as being mainstream Why is it so hard for you to understand that we're not talking about average users here?
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  The cost of a Windows license as a fraction of what it costs to staff a position in a corporate environment is not enough that it gets noticed or worried about. The costs of using Linux in terms of not being able to use standard software, not being able to hire administrators, having to train users who are unfamiliar with it, etc. just dwarfs any savings in license costs.

shiroiushi 2y ago

>Similarly some people like you like to thinker and find out how to get Linux to work in 1999 while most prefer to just pay to use Windows NT/MacOS and get to work. We're not talking about regular people here. Try reading the prior messages for context before commenting. We're talking about people who claim to be IT professionals. If they were really as smart as they claimed, they could have done the same thing I did easily. They didn't, not because they loved Windows that much (maybe they did, maybe they didn't, it's irrelevant), but because it was seen as essential for their career.

krzyk 2y ago

> You think if Linux was that usable at everything in 1999 companies and individuals wouldn't have loves to use that instead of paying thousand of dollars to Microsoft? Inertia is a strong force in corporations. I wouldn't count on reason there, inertia triumphs it. Personal anecdotes is something that shows it can be done. In few corps I worked since 2004 I was also able to switch windows to linux (as many other developers there) and we didn't loose functionality. But I get it that for people that work mostly in excel it would be a blocker, as it doesn't have Linux version - so not all work could be done on Linux. But having options is good. My current corp decided to give people a choice (after a decade of asking for it) and since 2 years we can choose between Windows, macOS and Linux. (I'm still amazed that most developers chose macOS, as it is less power user friendly than Windows). Before I was the only one with Linux, now there are > 20% of us. And possibly more in the future when hardware will be upgaded.

Rinzler89 2y ago
>Personal anecdotes is something that shows it can be done. Some people have built their own car from scratch in their garage that they use to drive to work, but it's unrealistic most people do that at scale, even though someone proved it's possible. The same way, why aren't you building your own car to daily drive and instead paying Ford/Toyota? Someone proved it's possible. > In few corps I worked since 2004 I was also able to switch windows to linux The vast majority of Windows/MacOS users are not SW-developers, nor to they have any deeper interest in tinkering with computers and learn Linux. They're content with what they're already familiar with. You keep taking highly niche technical cases from your SW dev bubble and trying to extrapolate that experience as being mainstream when you're far from it. The photo studio or flower shop down the road in 2004 was no way gonna switch to Linux even if it was technically possible.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >You keep taking highly niche technical cases from your SW dev bubble and trying to extrapolate that experience as being mainstream Why is it so hard for you to understand that we're not talking about average users here?
SoftTalker 2y ago
The cost of a Windows license as a fraction of what it costs to staff a position in a corporate environment is not enough that it gets noticed or worried about. The costs of using Linux in terms of not being able to use standard software, not being able to hire administrators, having to train users who are unfamiliar with it, etc. just dwarfs any savings in license costs.