4 ms·

Most people don't want to "install a distro" on their desktop computer. They buy desktop computers like they buy microwave ovens: hardware + OS without any sen

by danans 1y ago

Most people don't want to "install a distro" on their desktop computer. They buy desktop computers like they buy microwave ovens: hardware + OS without any sense of distinction between the two. Then they decide what to cook in it (based on their own culinary interests). There have been only a few opportunities in the history of desktop computing for a new user-facing OS to break through, usually at the emergence of a new user paradigm (i.e mobile), and those have all been captured by big brands like Apple, MS, and Google, using either complete vertical or tightly horizontal integration, and their offerings were mostly like microwave ovens. Ironically, all 3 of those companies now offer "Linux" that you can run on top of their desktop OS's to use for software development, effectively making Linux an "app", no different than Photoshop. And that paradigm works pretty well.

thewebguyd 1y ago
> Ironically, all 3 of those companies now offer "Linux" as an environment you can run on top of their desktop OS's for software development, effectively making Linux an "app", no different from Photoshop. And that paradigm works pretty well. It does work really well, almost too well. The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say that even though it's providing a useful feature, particularly for devs, it's all an anti-competitive practice to keep people from experiencing true computing freedom, going "See - you can have all your same Linux tools right from [macOS/Windows/ChromeOS/Android] - please stay on our proprietary and telemetry infested OS, don't free yourself. OTOH, WSL was a godsend when I had to use Windows, and actually made Windows relatively pleasant to use outside of the recent copilot everywhere shenanigans. There's something nice about having an integrated Linux environment (or "app") within a polished desktop environment with access to all the big commercial software. It doesn't feel good to use, from an ideological standpoint, but damn if it isn't productive.
- danans 1y ago
  > it's all an anti-competitive practice to keep people from experiencing true computing freedom That's pretty much the history of all non-free software products, nothing specific to OS's. It turns out there isn't much of a market for computing freedom, but there is one for packaging up its innovations.

by danans 1y ago

thewebguyd 1y ago

> Ironically, all 3 of those companies now offer "Linux" as an environment you can run on top of their desktop OS's for software development, effectively making Linux an "app", no different from Photoshop. And that paradigm works pretty well. It does work really well, almost too well. The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say that even though it's providing a useful feature, particularly for devs, it's all an anti-competitive practice to keep people from experiencing true computing freedom, going "See - you can have all your same Linux tools right from [macOS/Windows/ChromeOS/Android] - please stay on our proprietary and telemetry infested OS, don't free yourself. OTOH, WSL was a godsend when I had to use Windows, and actually made Windows relatively pleasant to use outside of the recent copilot everywhere shenanigans. There's something nice about having an integrated Linux environment (or "app") within a polished desktop environment with access to all the big commercial software. It doesn't feel good to use, from an ideological standpoint, but damn if it isn't productive.

danans 1y ago
> it's all an anti-competitive practice to keep people from experiencing true computing freedom That's pretty much the history of all non-free software products, nothing specific to OS's. It turns out there isn't much of a market for computing freedom, but there is one for packaging up its innovations.