this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
643 points (92.8% liked)

linuxmemes

20483 readers
959 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (37 children)

I want to use linux and will use it when two conditions are met:
-All my work software and the games I play the most all work on it (without requiring me to re-buy shit I already own to get a linux compatable version)
-Its user friendly enough that asking which version I should use as a beginner doesn't result in all the linux users immediately descending into the thread equivelent of a cartoon fight cloud with random limbs flailing around.

Edit: Some feedback on the feedback:
-Apparently some of the linux versions are super user friendly but advice about this is totally inconsistent, some of the advice doesn't even actually name a specific version or versions.
-"It all works fine you just need to install thing A through thing B and then use it to run thing C in order to run this one single program from windows" is not as encouraging as you think it is. The thought of potentially going through that for every piece of software is at least for me a big reason for not switching yet and I suspect for a lot of other people too.
-The reference page for what games work on linux is helpful though some things on it only work if you use the steam version which is the precise reason for my not wanting to re-buy things comment.

Edit: Additional question.
Is it mandatory to use the terminal for everything? Everytime I see people talk about linux or look stuff up about it the terminal seems to be everywhere. I'm somewhat familiar with the windows command line (which I assume is the terminals equivelent) but having to use that just to install software (as opposed to just running a .exe) seems really daunting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (9 children)

If a piece of software requires you to re-buy itself for a different platform why would you use such an application? I don't get why people choose to torture themselves when there are SO many alternatives to literally anything.

Edit: thanks for the clarification on the re-buying part. Doesn't apply to you then ʘ‿ʘ

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

@nolight @CheeseNoodle I believe one use-case for those licensed paid programs are the business who truly need some trustworthy software and dedicated support. The FOSS might be great for personal use, but maybe LibreOffice doesn't fit every company's needs

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Also an important aspect for companies is liability. If the app they paid money for screws up customer data they have someone on the hook for that. If the FOSS version does the most they have on the hook is the 40 year old dude living in his parent's basement maintaining the project they used. Not much money to be got there for damages.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

I agree, though I think LibreOffice is not a great example as there's very little room for error and something that you would need "dedicated support" for. That's how I see it anyway. Never worked in an office.

However, the majority of companies that require using paid proprietary software also require the use of Windows itself. A safe bet in this situation would be to just set up a VM for work and use Linux for everything else.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)