วีดีโอ

FLATPAK

saw too many distros and clicked off. what the fuck is the point of open source then

Now just go back onto your Windows box and enjoy the "aesthetics".

to many distros, to many desktop choices and very little meaningful applications for media creation.

Steam Deck seems to be my option until a decent easy useful os in linux arrives on my doorstep. Right now its a diy nightmare for me😢

3:16 EXACTLY THIS The Linux community has mostly failed at making Linux digestible to the average consumer. Not everyone has the capacity, or time, to be an OS expert.

This is not a Linux problem. It is a licensing problem. Don't like the way someone else does it, oh just fork the project. Too many cooks in the kitchen and no head chef. It's like a bunch of anarchists running a country. Everytime someone disagrees, a new fork in the road happens. Imagine if winblows had 20 different display managers and 20 different login managers, and then you had to make a normal person weigh up between Wayland and X11. Do you think winblows would have a dominant market share if that had happened?

In some way this is true, but none of that will ever happen. It's like demanding a "hard hand" in a democracy, where everything is discussed thousands of times and a common direction vector is an average of all opinions. Everything reduced and unified will contradict with the idea of GNU/Linux, which is freedom to do whatever you want. As long as there is not one central point, which decides over the look and feel, the system will always look like a mess. And if such a central point will start to exist, it will be the end of Linux in it's essential idea. The messiness and the never ending experiment is the freedom which most users can not handle. I spoke so many times with people considered to try GNU/Linux and they never were able to understand how UI is separated from the OS and how the same system can look differently on every machine. The first thing which they came up with was to ban all "crappy" desktop environments and allow the one, which is actually good. The problem is they don't know who should decide which one is the "crappy" one and which one is good.

Yes. Try to run circles around MacOS instead of improving on windows95. Or don't and be forgotten once Google puts Android on pc's.. your choice.

You think people will switch to Linux because Win10 support is ending? Think again. All of my friends either bought new machines or don't even care about the support ending. Most people are creatures of comfort. Linux is an enthusiasts OS and so is its user and "community" base - which means we are arrogant elitists or kindly hipsters. Or the real minority, the scientists and other weirdos who actually need it to be productive. We are NEVER going mainstream. No one cares about FOSS or GNU or whatever. We are niche.

Most can't figure out how to install it. And gamerboys can't get their hardware to work. And then there is the MS and Adobe crowd. And then guys who need specialty software, like CAD. But it's the first factor that keeps it off the devices. People just won't install it.

Why do Linux users care so much about gaining market share?

What if I told you there is a world outside of videos ...

Something really good doesn't require an army of acolytes to praise its glory.

Refreshing. Odd how Google managed to turn it into something that doesn't even seem to have an command line in way less than the 33 years that brought us to dropping to the command line for everything 2 millimeter off the beaten path.

Given how some of the people who have done these "Linux Challenges" have stated they experienced things that aren't even possible (I think that's called lying?), you went easy on them. These "TH-camr pretends to use Linux for a bit to reinforce their viewers' decisions to never try anything else and rack up the likes" videos are the most irritating genre in tech-youtube. Problem is, these people embrace the duckling effect so hard, any criticism probably runs right off their back.

It's kind of amusing that what is essentially the world's most important operating system doesn't have a *truly* user friendly distro, I mean there's plenty of distros easy enough to pick up for someone who understands the difference between a shell and the kernel(ie not your average PC user), but beyond that, my dad could never install linux, while im sure he could manage a clean windows install

I think that the biggest problem is basic human nature. We have our biases and we and don't actually listen. The power of Linux is its malleability, but we users are rigid. If a new user asks what to use, we'll just go with our own preference. Personally, I use Mint despite using Linux since the turn of the century. I can use the command line and like to use it, but don't have to. I resent the implication that it is a beginner distro. It's a user-friendly general purpose distro. I recommend it because it's what I know best and inevitably, I'll be hit with follow-up questions. I may not be able to help with other configurations. I'm no different in my rigidity, but it's a recognition of limitations. Additionally, Linux zealots over-promise. Different tools have different capabilities. I don't like how Apple and Microsoft treat our equipment as theirs, but I have to sacrifice some things that those systems have like proprietary software. As far as infighting, that is human nature. That will not go away as long as a project can be branched off.

So i am not a content creator and yes there are open source versions of premier and photoshop. But my issue is that my hobbies always get skipped by almost everything and that is photography and cad. There is no alternatives to autodesk products and lightroom. because of those 2 products i am forced to retain my windows partition

Is LibreOffice really a good replacement for Word, like it doesn't quietly mess the files up?

In any cases with linux, drivers and partitions will be bothersome no matter what In another case with the distros, I wish people would just have Deb, ubuntu, fedora, and arch as the main four and have a addon list to change the environment. For example: you want linux mint right? When you install ubuntu there could be a option to choose a Ubuntu related distro that’ll set its settings to that distro. For desktop features there could be a app that adds in features in a desktop environment store perhaps. This’ll make linux look a lot more condensed and easier to choose distros because they don’t have to look at each seperate OS’s and choose one with a install button on a OS installer My point trying to get at is that distros and especially less recommended distros are trying to make linux look l and different when they actually aren’t different than each(looking at you steamOS). Especially with the fact that theres so much distros its overwhelming. And distros making everything look too technical for a average gamer, or a average school teacher, or a average PC user because all 3 have a common goal, they just want it to work without needing technical skills for every simple thing

My linux distros recommendation for beginners: - Arch linux - Ubuntu server - Buildroot Just kidding, I don't daily drive linux so I don't get to suggest.

I remember first approaching Linux about 15 (maybe more) years ago, when distros were limited, and applications/software less available. I wanted to learn about it, and perhaps move from Windows to Linux. I found a couple of forums, and went here to find answers to my questions. While not entirely a noob to operating systems, Linux was new. I was greeted with derision and snobbery, big time. I'd ask a question and be told to just go try it, not having any idea what "it" was or how to try it, or just not let the door hit me in the a-- as I left. So, I just went away. Since then, Ubunutu, Mint, and a couple more decent distros have arrived, and I use Linux on my "play" machines along with a decent quantity of applications. It seems to work pretty well by itself, although there are still a few problems that are hard to solve, but I can do most stuff without that much effort. I don't mind the occasional console window, hell, I sometimes use them with Windows, but I have a background in software applications and can write fairly simple apps in VB and Python. Linux has come a long way, but the above is true. To take over from Microsoft or Apple, Linux needs to be Ron Popeil's "set it and forget it."

Simple, it's apps.

fedora silverblue

Sorry, couldn't hear you from the memes. Can you speak like a NOT-child? Thanks.

Windows is more so the outsider to me.

Linux is way ahead of Windows, IMO.

Just make a Linux that looks like windows :P

I am average os user and I still stick to Ubuntu unity. It looks good, distinct enough from other OSes, i like side menu, which is somehow not popular on other linuxes, I like global menu (I remember not liking it when I first tried Linux but I came to love it). It's not difficult to use. There might be some flaws but as just pc user who uses Libre Office, Mozilla and some pdf reader, those flaws are too technical for me to notice. I did have problems with driver installations, but my laptop is outdated, so it's not really a Linux problem and lack of some category of programs (CAD /CAM software) is definitely the reason I keep dual boot.

Linux user here, I do NOT want to grow the market share; I like the market just the way it is, ie. without the unimaginative box limited people that inhabit the windows/mac space.

The ISS is a non-argument. The very issue with Linux is what made it end up on a space station, its inability to stick to being one thing, and do it well. Instead, you have to mess around with it for hours-weeks-months so it can be adequate for any one thing, because of how much it doesn't have anything in the way of abstraction layers that already make presumptions about the hardware it will be running on, and that agnostic approach is the source of all of its issues. Mass-market success hinges on standardization and predictability so that the average user can rely on a consistent experience without extensive customization. That's what Linux doesn't have, and that's what makes it, being a custom OS, better suited for custom hardware. That same versatility makes it a liability. As for my background, I followed and intermittently used Linux since Fedora 2. I used a barebones version of Ubuntu on my netbook in 2008 and I've been using Antergos in 2018, now Ubuntu server is running on my headless server. Would I want it on my desktop? Absolutely not, I can install any single Windows software in less than 10 clicks after I googled its name to get to the download page, on hardware I wouldn't have to worry about being compatible, on hardware I have chosen for a use-case, not specific software, Windows is taking care of the compatibility for me. When I need to install something big on Linux, the easy tutorial is forty minutes long on youtube.

You don't see Windows users reading a manual about their OS because every time something is wrong the go to Geek Squad and spend money to get it fixed instead of fixing it themselves for free.

- multiple monitors do not work - gui scaling does not work (and no granularity between 100 and 200 %) - text is not clear (pathetic font rendering, no hinting, poor antialiasing, small line spacing) - poor gui design (relevant elements spread apart, unintuitive behavior) - graphics drivers require separate installation - wifi drivers require separate installation - printers drivers require separate installation - desktop environment freezes - poor mouse acceleration - changing monitor brightness does not work - multiple ways to install applications (snap vs packages vs downloading from web) - (dis)connecting usb causes kernel panic (i have had only one bsod in decade) - frequently asks for password - no granularity for permissions (you can do nothing or you can do too much) - when anything breaks, there is no chance of fixing it (on windows, you restart the pc, and it just works) - missing good software - for clarity: i am software developer. I manage a linux server running websites, databases, game servers, many scripts. I use linux for testing my software. I have tried several distributions, and most have failed horribly. I will rather tolerate any bullshit that microsoft brings to windows than deal with the mess on linux. - linux is great for servers. but it just does not belong to desktops.

Maybe if Windows wasn't such a train wreck of a bad option there wouldn't be so many people that want to jump ship.

Nah people do not want to Pick a distro. They don't even want an os. Frankly I do not want an os. I want the software I use to be working. That simple. Anything I want works on windows. Allmost nothing works on linux. Or i would need more distros installed and reboot for things. Linux genuannnnnly sux. That simple.

People are in general idiots, hey i been using windows my entire life, now i want to switch to linux, because linux is free, and that means that whatever i can do in windows i can do in linux, and everything is the same :) Think again, and then maybe RTFM, its there for a reason :) For all those who wonder, NO you're not gonna pass any MS desktop certification without, yup you guessed it....

I can’t use, Linux on my Surface Pro X period. It would run, but I paid to get an LTE laptop I should be able to use LTE that’s why I haven’t used Linux in such a long time.

I Switched from My Wife to Linux years ago and i never looked back !

I'm an IT professional since the 1980ies, I installed my first Linux in 1993 (Yggdrasil), and at first I had quite some hopes for Linux to become something on the desktop. Obviously this didn't happen, and I'm still using Windows (trying out Linux from time to time, only to be frustrated again and again). Why is that? Well, frankly, it's not primarily any technical reason but mostly the Linux community that keeps on preventing any success of Linux on the desktop: - They are actively hostile against proprietary software, that's why Adobe scrapped their plans to port all of their apps to Linux. Yes, that was the fault of the Linux community. - Many in the community either don't care whether Linux gets a greater share of the desktop, or they are actively against that happening because they want to remain nerds in their nerddom, unmolested by the unwashed masses of Windows users. - The Linux community mostly lives in a bubble where everybody "knows" that Microsoft is "evil" and hated by everybody, everybody "knows" that users want to chose their desktop manager etc., everybody "knows" that Gimp is like totally an alternative to Photoshop, and so on. - Linux is still best-suited for people for whom the OS is the application - people who love to replace parts of the OS with something else and always configure stuff while actual applications are not that important. - Freedom to chose: Regular users want *one* standardized plattform on which to run the applications they chose. Linux on the desktop is focused on chosing between similar-but-not-quite-identical plattforms - similar enough that nobody outside the nerd circle understands why anyone should bother, different enough that you can't just have one Linux version of an application or a driver. The result: Windows: One "distribution". A gazillion apps. MacOs: One "distribution". A mountain of apps. Linux: Dozens of distributions. Gimp.

I like Linux but dont like to search the web forever to fix simple problems. And the scrip language is also not intuitive

Too many distros is not a problem. It is freedom

Honestly if every game was supported by Linux tables could turn real bad for Microsoft

Just install Mint, don't bother with the terminal and forget the horrors of Windows. Mint is better than Windows but if I ever buy a Mac then I would probably use that OS. Linux/Unix is the base of IOS and Android so no need to be frightened by silly TH-cam vids.

In Linux, the Linux community hands over a research problem to a user already struggling with compatibility issues.

lots of people still have faith in big companies. they must know what they are doing right!

The fact there are like hundreds of editors each with inscrutable names like nano or vi and the same for every other tool available... talking about *intentional* obfuscation of simplest tasks. And everything has dependencies with some versions not being compatible with certain other versions, more arcane knowledge required. Then those exact versions are found on certain exact repositories which also have to be guessed. Gotta say a desktop distr. like mint with a proper GUI is servicable after all firefox looks the same everywhere. But beware doing something that wasn't intended or running into a problem with the OS. It was the closest thing to click something and it works but every casual user I proposed it to as a replacement for the EoL Windows 10 refused.

Linux never can't replace MacOS and Windows because It has no Regular/Basic Applications and also not Organised.

Linux has not only Adobe Issue, Linux has mostly important Printers Driver Issue 😭

Sorry Dude, but you sound like a spoiled kid complaining about things but unwilling to get your hands dirty to do anything about it!. I've been using Linux since the early 1990s and as my primary OS since the early 2000s, and you're making the same observations that other have made since I first started messing around with it nearly 30 years ago. But here's the deal, you are comparing the polish of paid for apps on proprietary operating systems where developers are paid handsomely for their efforts, against open source distros where the vast majority of code is written by volunteers who give their work away for free!!! You want Wayland to be 100% compatible with Xorg, but that's never going to happen. As Wayland becomes the de facto standard app will be rewritten to be compatible or they'll fall out of favor. It's that simple. It's the same thing that happened years earlier when Xorg became the standard when it was forked from XFree86. It's also how it worked when Alsa became the sound standard from OSS, and when Pulse Audio took over from Alsa, and it's how PipeWire is now becoming the standard replacing Pulse Audio. Now as to limiting the number of Distros, again who are you going to tell to stop development? Most distros are run by volunteer developers with a common interest but earn little to no money for their efforts. Ubuntu, Redhat, and SUSE are probably the most successful of the commercial distros, but the majority of distros are non-profit acts of love by their developers. For someone who is claiming to be a Linux advocate you're missing the most important aspect of the open source community, that the source code is freely available for anyone who has the desire and motivation to make any changes or improvements they like as long as they openly publish those changes for everyone else to see and use. It's not that the OS and software is free to use, which is just secondary to having the source code open sourced.