Linux
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
view the rest of the comments
Stability and UI/UX are still lightyears ahead in Mac, and to some extent Windows. Don't get me wrong, they suck for lots of reasons, but I think Linux has a lot of catching up to do to be as usable as Mac/Windows for the ordinary user.
I think standardizing package formats, and more mature desktop managers and proprietary drivers will go a long way to fixing that though.
People find Windows easier to use because they are used to the quirks. Of course you shouldn't let a beginner try Arch, but there are plenty of beginner friendly distros. The complications often come from installing Linux in the first place but the average user will have just as much trouble installing Windows.
I think most users dont install windows period. It just comes with the computer. And if it breaks, they get a new one. Thats it.
Yes, that's my point. If people could buy Linux PCs at Best Buy or Walmart, most of them would get on with it just fine.
Agreed.
Agree. Windows has almost a forty year “quirk bake-in”. All your relatives and non-savvy friends are NOT going to learn anything new (even mac) if they can help it.
The more droolproof linux can be the easier it will be adopted. Whether or not it mimics windows is a choice, but either way we’re losing computer literacy instead of everyone being computer literate. Sadly.
It’s not even that.
By and large, most industry standard softwares are only available on Windows and macOS. Take word processing for example. It doesn’t matter if there are open source alternatives that gets it 95% of the way there. Companies by and large would not want to run the risk of that last 5% (1%, 0.01% doesn’t matter) creating a situation where there’s misunderstanding with another business entity. Companies will by and large continue to purchase and expect their employees to use these standard softwares. People will by and large continue to train themselves to use these softwares so they have employable skills so they can put food on the table.
No one cares about how easy or hard it is to install something. IT (or local brick and mortar computer retailer) takes care of all that. Whether or not it is compatible with consistently making money / putting food on the table is way more important.
Until we have Microsoft Office for Linux; Adobe Creative Suite for Linux; Autodeks AutoCAD for Linux; etc etc. not even the janky “Microsoft Office for Mac” little cousin implementation but proper actual first party for Linux releases, it is unlikely we’ll see competitive level of Linux desktop adoption.
I think Linux still prioritizes the command-line for a lot of config/setup, which can be extremely daunting for new users. In addition, there are also a million options for everything, which is great for freedom, but really confusing for newbies.
I should note that both of these things are amazing pluses for me as a power user/developer.
Have you tried Mint or something similar? You can absolutely run and install it without using the command line.
Yes but the more refined and simple it can be the better. Mint or otherwise.
I've been toying with Fedora Kinoite on a VM. Haven't opened the terminal even once. This might actually be the path for fast adoption.
I only ran Mint for a bit, but from what I've heard, it does a pretty good job with sane defaults and keeping things simple.
I'm talking more about the fact that when things break (as they always do), the easiest way to fix it is via the command line. It's something I'm super comfortable with, having used *nix systems for more than 20 years, but i think even my very smart, technically inclined friend would be frustrated if he had to do it.
For instance, I installed Debian recently, and since I wanted luks disk encryption and dual boot, I had to very carefully set up the partitions in the installer, and the interface was frankly atrocious. I was very nervous about accidentally nuking the wrong partition, unlike with a Windows install where this is pretty much impossible.
Then, of course, the Nouveau drivers didn't like my 4090, so on the first boot I had a blank screen (no signal), until grub timed out into a console. For some reason I was then thrown into a tty, so I had to
startx, install the proprietary Nvidia drivers, tweak grub to pass some kernel parameters till I got back to a semi-stable boot. Oh, and I also had to get a newer kernel and nvidia drivers from backports, since the Debian packages are ancient.I do realize that maybe Mint packages the latest proprietary nvidia drivers during the install, so maybe I would have avoided those particular issues, and I'm not sure how good Mint's partitioning interface in the installer is.
Maybe Linux will work out of the box for a majority of users and they'll never have to encounter the command line, but I'm skeptical.
I struggle to do the same things on the Mac that are trivial in Windows and Linux.
For example, I gave up on Homebrew because it was difficult to install. For one thing, it required me to set up an Apple developer account on my version of MacOS
I don't use my girlfriend's Mac book because the OS is not as intuitive, like I found out recently you have to drag the icon in to install things. Who comes up with this shit?
It just includes as a dependency the Mac command line developer tools, which can be installed pretty easily from what I remember.
And what I like is that it's a normal Unix style shell, with almost all the utilities you'd expect.
I mean that's about 100 times better than Windows' default of running an installer that isn't easily reversible.
On Linux I don't drag icons nor download random shit from my web browser, there's a software center (which I control), and I click install, and then the software is there.
Yes, software that is in a package manager is similarly easy on a Mac. There's an app store, which can be used to install the dependencies for homebrew (which is a good package manager for most of the stuff that Linux package managers maintain, including building stuff from source). Going outside of a package manager is relatively easy (but needs to be enabled, as the defaults basically discourage users from installing software not verified by Apple), but that method of software installation still beats running .exe/.msi installers downloaded from the internet, beats running random shell scripts, probably beats downloading docker containers and flatpaks, and is not that far removed from installing from the AUR or something like pip/conda: you still need to know what you're doing, and you have to trust the source/maintainer. None of that is unique to any operating system, except those that simply don't allow you to install software not reviewed/approved by the manufacturer (Apple mobile devices, Android devices by default).
You often install binaries in Linux by moving them to a directory you can call them from. Which is the same thing MacOs has you do graphically. You can do it on command line as well.
Using a Mac is much the same as Linux. Mac OS is unix and Linux is a copy of unix systems. Your just used to the windows ways that aren’t that good to start with.
Nope, I install them by choosing by package and typing using the proper cli command or clicking install
That's fair, I think Mac's extremely opinionated design that be grating at times. Also, heaven help you if you want to do something non-standard on a Mac, the system fights you every step of the way.
There isn’t much you can’t do on Mac if you use the terminal, much like Linux. It’s much better than the convoluted mess that windows settings is.
True, although you could say the same about Windows PowerShell
Not to the same extent, stuff keeps changing back.
High DPI screen support in Linux is still troublesome, especially between multiple screens with different DPI/resolution, especially between GTK and Qt programs.
And I haven't played around with Asahi yet, but it'll be hard to top the built-in power/suspend/hibernate/resume behavior and its effect on battery life (especially in being able to just count on it to work if you suspend for days, where it seamlessly switches to hibernate and starts back up very quickly). But on my old Intel MacBook, the battery life difference between MacOS and and Linux is probably two to one. Some of it is Apple's fault for refusing to document certain firmware/hardware features, but the experience is the experience.
Hopefully the success of Steam Deck will push manufacturers to increase their investment into Linux driver development. Having only used Linux servers in the past decade or so, I was pleasantly surprised when I came back to Linux desktop and realized that there were no other drivers (except Nvidia) to install since everything was baked into the kernel! Incredibly convenient!
Yeah, it's difficult to compete with a fully vertically integrated stack like Apple's, and they do lock down things so other software is always at a disadvantage. Hopefully Linux laptops become competitive so this improves.