7 ms·

I grew up using Windows but have been using Linux and Mac almost exclusively for the past fifteen years; the only exposure I get to Windows is when I have to pl

I grew up using Windows but have been using Linux and Mac almost exclusively for the past fifteen years; the only exposure I get to Windows is when I have to play tech support for my parents [1]. I hated OS X when I first used it. A lot, actually. I didn't consider leaving my job over it (I couldn't have afforded it at the time even if I had wanted to), but I did think about trying to do an ultimatum with that employer to tell them to buy me a computer with Windows or let me install Linux on the Macbook (this was 2012 so it had the Intel chip). I got let go from that job before I really got a chance (which itself is a whole strange story), but regardless I really hated macOS at the time. It wasn't until a few years later and a couple jobs after that I ended up growing to really like macOS, when Mavericks released, and a few years later, I actually ended up getting a job at Apple and I refuse to allow anyone to run Windows in my house. My point is, I think people can actually learn and appreciate new platforms if they're given a chance. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530

bruce511 1y ago
I agree, people can learn and appreciate if given the chance. But they've more important things to do so changing OS is just a distraction. I know, techies love to love or hate the OS. Here there are endless threads waxing lyrical about Windows, MacOS or say dozen Linux installs. But 99% of users could care less. It's kinda like cars. Petrol heads will talk cars for ages. Engine specs. What brand of oil. Gearbox ratios. Whereas I'm like 99% of people - I get in my car to go somewhere. Pretty much the only "feature" a car needs is to make me not worry about getting there. So for 97% of people the "best" OS is the one they don't notice. The one that's invisible because they want to run a program, and it just runs. The problem with switching my mom to Linux is not the OS. It's all the programs she uses. And while they might (or might not) be "equivalent" they're not the same. And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. She's not on "a journey" of software discovery. She has arrived. Changing now is just a waste of time she could be gardening or whatever. The reason it'll never be the year for Linux Desktop is the same reason it's always been - it's not there already.
- tombert 1y ago
  I mostly agree with you, though one of the few good things about Electron taking over the desktop means that an increasing number of programs are getting direct ports to Linux. A guy can dream at least.
- sudobash1 1y ago
  > And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. I don't see Windows as having much of an edge there. Lots of things seem to change on Windows just for change's sake. I get so tired of the churn on Windows versions and finding how to disable the new crummy features. If you want to avoid relearning all the time, something simple like XFCE is going to be way better.
  - tombert 1y ago
    And Linux won't arbitrarily irrevocably brick your computer because of an automatic update. In my opinion, having your computer bricked because of an automatic update is a very large change to adapt to. I feel the need to constantly reiterate this; if someone who works on Windows Update reads this, please consider a different career, because you are categorically terrible at your job. There are plenty of jobs out there that don't involve software engineering.
    - simonask 1y ago
      > And Linux won't arbitrarily irrevocably brick your computer because of an automatic update. To the average user, it absolutely will. Unless they happen to run on particularly well-supported hardware, the days of console tinkering aren't gone, even on major distros. What's fixable to the average Linux user and what's fixable to the average person (whose job is not to run Linux) are two very, very different things.
      - tombert 1y ago
        If you run a modern distro with a modern filesystem, you can at the very least have automatic snapshots that actually work, and you can restore to a previous state if an update breaks things. The same cannot be said for Windows.
Hendrikto 1y ago
> I did think about trying to do an ultimatum with that employer to tell them to buy me a computer with Windows or let me install Linux on the Macbook > I refuse to allow anyone to run Windows in my house So you don’t care for peoples preferences unless they match your own? I don’t get that. You were in the same position. Why don’t you just let people use what they like?
- tombert 1y ago
  I can have whatever rules I want in my house. I am the one who would be playing tech support for all these computers if something breaks, and Windows is so utterly terrible that I will not touch it anymore. There are only three people in my house, two of which appear to be happy with macOS and one (me) is happy with Linux. I am not upset with the job requiring people to use macOS. That job was awful for a whole bunch of wonderful reasons, but that wasn’t one of them. If people expect me to play tech support in my house I want an OS that I understand and isn’t terrible to do it.

bruce511 1y ago

I agree, people can learn and appreciate if given the chance. But they've more important things to do so changing OS is just a distraction. I know, techies love to love or hate the OS. Here there are endless threads waxing lyrical about Windows, MacOS or say dozen Linux installs. But 99% of users could care less. It's kinda like cars. Petrol heads will talk cars for ages. Engine specs. What brand of oil. Gearbox ratios. Whereas I'm like 99% of people - I get in my car to go somewhere. Pretty much the only "feature" a car needs is to make me not worry about getting there. So for 97% of people the "best" OS is the one they don't notice. The one that's invisible because they want to run a program, and it just runs. The problem with switching my mom to Linux is not the OS. It's all the programs she uses. And while they might (or might not) be "equivalent" they're not the same. And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. She's not on "a journey" of software discovery. She has arrived. Changing now is just a waste of time she could be gardening or whatever. The reason it'll never be the year for Linux Desktop is the same reason it's always been - it's not there already.

tombert 1y ago
I mostly agree with you, though one of the few good things about Electron taking over the desktop means that an increasing number of programs are getting direct ports to Linux. A guy can dream at least.
sudobash1 1y ago
> And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. I don't see Windows as having much of an edge there. Lots of things seem to change on Windows just for change's sake. I get so tired of the churn on Windows versions and finding how to disable the new crummy features. If you want to avoid relearning all the time, something simple like XFCE is going to be way better.
- tombert 1y ago
  And Linux won't arbitrarily irrevocably brick your computer because of an automatic update. In my opinion, having your computer bricked because of an automatic update is a very large change to adapt to. I feel the need to constantly reiterate this; if someone who works on Windows Update reads this, please consider a different career, because you are categorically terrible at your job. There are plenty of jobs out there that don't involve software engineering.
  - simonask 1y ago
    > And Linux won't arbitrarily irrevocably brick your computer because of an automatic update. To the average user, it absolutely will. Unless they happen to run on particularly well-supported hardware, the days of console tinkering aren't gone, even on major distros. What's fixable to the average Linux user and what's fixable to the average person (whose job is not to run Linux) are two very, very different things.
    - tombert 1y ago
      If you run a modern distro with a modern filesystem, you can at the very least have automatic snapshots that actually work, and you can restore to a previous state if an update breaks things. The same cannot be said for Windows.

Hendrikto 1y ago

> I did think about trying to do an ultimatum with that employer to tell them to buy me a computer with Windows or let me install Linux on the Macbook > I refuse to allow anyone to run Windows in my house So you don’t care for peoples preferences unless they match your own? I don’t get that. You were in the same position. Why don’t you just let people use what they like?

tombert 1y ago
I can have whatever rules I want in my house. I am the one who would be playing tech support for all these computers if something breaks, and Windows is so utterly terrible that I will not touch it anymore. There are only three people in my house, two of which appear to be happy with macOS and one (me) is happy with Linux. I am not upset with the job requiring people to use macOS. That job was awful for a whole bunch of wonderful reasons, but that wasn’t one of them. If people expect me to play tech support in my house I want an OS that I understand and isn’t terrible to do it.