this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
1364 points (98.7% liked)
Memes
45907 readers
1729 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I still don't understand the Linux memes.
It's like squirting lemon in your eye is the point, and if you don't do it you're one of them. Maybe I'm just not bitter enough in life to get it.
Edit: Oh...
to be fair the 3 first points only apply to arch, the same people to say "i use arch btw" so you know they also hate themselfs
edit: 50% of devs use linux so the 4th point isn't that true
Arch is as hard as math rock is math.
Oh, I down graded to arch because I couldn't be bothered with Gentoo any more
I don't use Arch, but I still think that Windows is, if not the absolute worst for your machine, then it at least ranks highly in that category:-).
Excuse you! But also I do hate myself
Obligatory "I use Arch, btw" comment. I've been using Arch for years and, honestly, it isn't that much of a pain. It mostly works with the defaults, installation is really easy now with archinstall, and there's a ton of software ready to install from the repos or the AUR. Besides, the arch wiki is amazing and has solutions for many of the problems you'll ever have.
Rant incoming, so ignore if you're just here for the memes.
The Linux community as a whole seems to still be delusional about the real world outside power users, and it hasn't changed much in the last 25 years from everything I've seen. Distros have come and gone, some better than others, but the community as a whole is still living in a fantasy world about the "year of the Linux desktop". And it's the reason quite frankly that Linux in it's current form will never be a daily driver for the average user. Even though it would actually work for probably 30-40% of the population that just uses a web browser without any issue out of the box, as soon as they have an issue, the community would be impossible to find actual useful help from for these users. There are enough toxic Linux users to anyone that doesn't know the basics. It's almost as toxic as the League of Legends community with some distros. That leaves a permanent bad taste for all of Linux for the average user that comes across just one of these posts. Not to mention little to no support from places like Geek Squad, which is where the real average users take their systems. Even checking online themselves is heading out of average user territory in the first place.
The other main issue is that there are productivity mainstays on Windows that don't have a true Linux version. There are Linux alternatives but they quite frankly aren't the same, and the average user doesn't want to have to deal learning something new or with file format differences and not being able to just do what they already do.
My mother for instance several years ago tried to switch to a Chromebook when she needed a new laptop. She only uses a web browser and Microsoft Word through Google Drive and Gmail. Seems like a Chromebook would be a good fit for an ultra portable and lightweight system with WiFi 90% of the time. She is definitely able to search the internet well and find answers on her own, she is better than the average user due to learning from me breaking things constantly as I grew up. So even her handling of the situation would be more than many users. This was before the stripped down online versions of Office apps existed, so you had Google Docs, and the Linux alternatives like OpenOffice, which did not seamlessly support DOC/DOCX files for users who primarily work with those and need to have those types to send. Even now though the web version of Office is stripped down, some of that stuff just isn't available without the full software. Google Docs was essentially not compatible with regular Word documents at the time, everything had to be converted to Google's format and then exported back to a DOC, and constantly having to remember to save files as an alternate format just to send them off to others for further edits or distribution from their systems was a lot of unnecessary work, easily forgotten that just wasted time. Not to mention getting her head around the idea of cloud storage vs local storage if there was no WiFi available for some reason. Google Drive on Windows has a nice visual indicator of backed up stuff, and it's all stored locally by default as well. It just works for the average user. This is something that Apple does extremely well with their walled garden. They hide the magic and user is never the wiser because it just works for them without getting in the way, you just HAVE to use their system for that experience.
Those are the issues the average person already knows how to do with Windows and even OSX with the current applications they use daily. Switching to Linux is not just changing the look of the computer and the engine under the hood, there are other usability changes as well. Individually they aren't a big deal, but adding them all up, the average user just ends up deciding another Windows system is easier or trying OSX instead to go with their iPhone. Unless the user has someone they know personally that is willing to help those users with every tiny issue, without complaint, or they are savvy enough to handle a good internet search for specific error information and find a community willing to be just as helpful, avoiding the toxic users, they're just going to decide it's bad generally and stop using it, probably forever.
Linux must be objectively better than Windows in major ways to get the average person to jump ship and learn something new, dealing with all the small issues and differences they'll come across.
The various Linux communities need to be careful what they wish for IMO, would it be great for market share to get onboard with Linux? Absolutely.
But like you said, things will have to be dumbed down and hidden extensively.
At the same time whenever a piece of Linux software or distro takes ANY step whatsoever in this direction, the backlash from the community can get rather large. They're trying to have their cake and eat it too.
IMO Linux is great the way it is, low market share and all, and we all know what happens when something starts catching on with the general public...
I switched to Ubuntu years ago after getting frustrated with Windows. It took some getting used to, but I love it and wouldn't go back.
I'm not a programmer. I don't game on my computer. I pretty much just use a web browser. Occasionally I'll install a new program.
I'm just tech savvy enough to figure out how to do stuff by googling. Most of the how to guides are over my head, but there's usually a very remedial one that I can understand.
Ubuntu has served my needs perfectly. It's stable, simple, and runs like a dream on my older laptop.
Lemmy is my first exposure to the Linux community. I was surprised at the hate Ubuntu gets.
I think the main issue is too much fragmentation within Linux. There's the whole choosing the distro, choosing a desktop environment (or window manager), figuring out how to use the packages for your distro, etc. Then you have issues like some software being too outdated for your distro or not packaged at all so you look into Flatpak but it's a whole other system on your computer to have to keep track of and maintain or the software you need is not there either so you have to compile from source. There also comes the issue of getting help when something breaks. There's hundreds of different little bits in every single distro that makes it a pain in the ass to fix sometimes unless you're using one of the few large distros where the guides actually work.
I really don't think Linux will become truly mainstream for the every day user until there is a proper "default" experience like what Windows and MacOS provide. Sure some people will say use this distro and this desktop environment and it'd just work but that forces the common person to trust the other person online and that common person has to make a choice. If their first experience on Linux is bad, they'll just throw it off altogether and go back to Windows or MacOS. Everyone has a different first experience with Linux.
I'm not saying strip Linux of all configurability. I'm saying there needs to be a focus on a standard Linux distro with a standardized desktop environment and standardized overall user experience. If the user wants to change any of it, they're free to do so like anyone can with Linux right now. Also, the user should be able to manage the system entirely through a simple GUI. If the user has to for any reason go into a terminal, Linux has failed at being usable by the common person.
I say this as a person who uses Arch (btw) on my laptops and desktop and Debian 12 and Proxmox 8 for my servers and RHEL 8 at work. I really love Linux but I just can't in good faith recommend it to a person who wants to just use their damn computer unless they're willing to put up with the massive fragmentation and lack of support in the community.
Tl;dr Linux doesn't have a "default" experience like Windows or MacOS so a common user will struggle to even get started or look for help/advice
I've used Ubuntu for a few minutes for work and realized I was too lazy to learn a lot of stuff. All my coworkers used the console and I just wanted to use the UI...
Kde plasma does a good job at giving you gui options for console tasks.
System updates and software installs are done in their discover app i believe.
Nobody gives a shit.
I do :)
Ubuntu is probably one of the easiest for the average user to jump into coming from Windows. It is designed around the GUI and to be close to a drop in replacement much more than many other distros. Linux needs to be usable 100% without the console or it will never be a true competitor for Windows. The average user sees a terminal and had no idea what to do, or what to stay away from. They are 100% reliant on the OS to prevent them from breaking things. Look at all the issues users had with learning to approve system changes via basic security like UAC prompts that just need approval, not even their password, compared to something like sudo.
Granted a big part of that was lazy developers assuming and using admin privileges they didn't actually need for their programs, because the proper way to do things was a bit harder. Something Microsoft had been telling developers for over a decade they needed to stop doing. So many applications prompted every time they were used, because of shitty applications. As soon as a basic security screen was added, those applications became annoying for the end user, and Windows got the blame from the average user because of shitty devs and Microsoft's complete lack of being able to explain things to non-power users.
I switched from Windows to Ubuntu years ago after getting frustrated with Windows.
It took some getting used to, but I love it now!
I'm not a programmer or especially tech savvy, but I'm old enough to have used DOS when that was occasionally necessary in Windows.
I recommend Ubuntu to anyone looking for a Windows alternative.
Agreed
Seems 99% of posts on Lemmy, regardless of content, will have some goblin schilling Linux. I don’t have anything against Linux but I will never adopt it, mostly because WHY? What the fuck is the benefit of Linux?
There are some benefits in some circumstances, but a lot of people who use linux do so not because of any tangible benefit, but because they support open source, and don't like the idea of one (arguably a couple) big corporation having a monopoly of that magnitude and deciding alone the way tech should evolve.
Speaking for myself, I'm from a developing country, and I mostly use dated tech, some of which don't even support windows anymore, and it gives me the possibility of extending the lifespan of my stuff. This is the main tangible benefit for me.