this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
242 points (93.2% liked)
Asklemmy
43138 readers
1245 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
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
At this point, that's kinda the wrong question.
I think Linux is just as if not more capable than Windows is, but the software library has some notable gaps in it. "It can't run Adobe/Autodesk/Ubisoft" That's not Linux's fault, that's Adobe/Autodesk/Ubisoft's fault. I don't think there's a technical reason why they couldn't release AutoCAD for Linux, for example.
so, due to those gaps, it currently can't do those things.
This argument boils down to "yes it could, if someone bothered to implement it". Well... nobody has, so it can't
I think this is a misrepresentation. What more can Linux really do to get companies like this on board? It already has pretty much all anyone would need to support the platform: GUI toolkits, graphics drivers, etc. As far as I can see, Linux provides all the same functionality that other platforms do to support this, and considering that plenty of other companies support Linux just fine (Zoom, Steam, WPS office, etc.), in my opinion, it's unfair to point fingers and say Linux is bad because other actors pointedly ignore it.
No one is pointing a finger and saying Linux isn't capable, they're saying it currently cannot run certain programs which is true. Why it can't is irrelevant, to the user it just can't.
This person is literally pointing a finger and saying Linux isn't capable lmao
lots of stuff that "windows can do" is due to 3rd party software too.
Thank you! Have my upvote
If only I had a personal shitty Linux developer.
It's not that products are "to blame" for not shipping Linux/FreeBSD/RedoxOS builds. Building for a platform requires work and, for a capitalist, users to separate from their money. If the sales aren't there the builds won't be there either.
I guess the thing Windows can do here that Linux can't is "be very popular".
"linux is more capable but its just not capable of running anything"
yeah im more than capable to run a marathon. i have two legs. i am not able to run a marathon. having the means to run one doesnt put me in the same party as people that have ran a marathon.
aka linux users coping like usual
The point is, you COULD run a marathon if that's what you decide to do. But you would need to learn something new and frankly most people are too lazy to do so. And I can often fall squarely into that just like most. But I'm under no illusions that it's my lazy choice to not run a marathon.
aka most people in general