Linux is fine for people like you and me who are comfortable installing our own operating system, and trouble-shooting any problems. Most 'normal' people though will continue to walk into a store, buy a laptop, and use whatever came installed.
Of course, the year of Linux on the desktop actually happened some time ago without anyone noticing. It's called ChromeOS, and that's a whole different can of worms.
While true, how much troubleshooting does windows require? Because as I sometimes use windows, it's not that much less work to get it to do what you want it to do, or solve issues, than linux.
Especially since it feels like windows tries to fight you every step of the way.
When windows needs fixing, people take it to the best buy genius bar or whatever
Most distributions require little to no troubleshooting, and if they do, someone has probably already posted the solution online. It's pretty rare these days that you run into a problem that someone else hasn't and you're stuck figuring it out yourself.
The only pain point is trying to find the Linux equivalent of the Windows apps that you commonly use. Web browsers are the exact same, but that's about it. A fair amount of apps to offer Linux counterparts though.
It depends on ehat youre trying to do. If you are teying to debloat it, of course you go out of your way, but it has the reverse problem for most drivers, where youre almost guaranteed to plug in an arbitrary USB device, and itll probably have drivers or software in the windows environment.
Linux is great. With the caveat that you specifically pick hardware that works well in Linux for it, else you have the problem of "a choice fighting you every step of the way"
Linux is easily fixed but the problem is that the issues that crop up needing to be fixed are generally not pain points on Windows. The first Arch install I did this year was busted and I thought I had broken my networking setup because it wouldn't connect, but the issue was that the system clock was wrong. Something like that may pop up in Windows but you can quickly press the sync time and date button in the settings and it'll sort itself out, while Arch requires a lot more work than just that, especially if it has no connectivity.
...I've certainly had that issue on windows as well. I had to manually set the time. Windows sync at least didn't use to always work.
I've been using Linux for like 15 years and Arch for about a decade. I've never had an issue where the system time prevents the network connection from working. That's odd.
It makes sense because all of our cryptography is based around time limits. If the system time is way off it can't verify the cryptographic signatures and it's not going to validate any certs since the time doesn't line up properly.
Yeah, true.
Every distro has ntp setup by default. New users shouldn’t use Arch…
Yeah and old users shouldn't be fucking snobs, yet here we are.
Once people get over the initial Windows indoctrination, Linux is simple to use and doesn't require tons of complex troubleshooting like people think. Before the COVID lockdown I tried for the Nth time to get my dad to use Linux. I had it installed and told him to stick with it for a few weeks (he only browses the web and plays solitaire). If he still didn't like it, I'd reenable Windows. Well that few weeks turned into 6 months. Now both he and my mom have been happy Linux users for about 2 years.
If I may ask, how do you deal with updates? Have you enabled unattended upgrades or do you update the machines yourself?
His dad just needs to put a password when asked. It's a 6-years-old kid task updating on most Linux distro.
That would be true if:
A GUI software center is used (or if the said dad is comfortable with an interactive console application)
The said dad actually realizes the importance behind updates. From my experience, many people don't.
So, unless both of above are true, the dad will never (want to) update his system because "it works as is", sticking to old versions of software, never receiving bugfixes and neglecting security.
Most distro nowadays come with a gui to update. A pop up window appears asking if you want to update/upgrade. You can press "yes" and the password of the sudoer or admin user is asked. It has been like this for over a decade. For popular distros as Ubuntu or fedora over 15 years
Is it different for your distro?
He still doesn't care to.
Yes, probably because I stick with Arch and Slackware plus a lightweight environment. The only time I saw such a GUI was when I tried out Elementary just for fun.
What I consider a problem is that the user can simply dismiss or disregard the updates notification indefinitely. I know many non-tech-savvy people who do not understand the importance of updates, so they would be inclined to do exactly that. That is why unattended upgrades are probably a better option in such cases.
The process is so simple that there is no reason to not do it. My wife is non-tech person, I installed ubuntu on her laptop and she's very happy because it's faster than windows. I have never updated it for her. She does it. Only thing I have done is the upgrade to a new ubuntu release
You're a wise (wo)man. That is exactly the case. I've shown him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to because, like you said, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Thank you for answering. I can relate to manually updating my parents' systems once in a while but at this point I'm seriously considering unattended upgrades (updating over SSH is also a good idea).
NP, I don't consider it a big issue, I kick it off whenever I'm there and it takes about 10 minutes.
His own password which makes it even simpler.
I do it for them whenever I come over every month or two (I live out of state). I could also just SSH in and do it remotely if I really wanted to. I showed my dad how to do it with the GUI package manager, but he's the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" type. Linux will run perfectly fine without updates for years.
I'm not the guy you asked, and I hope he responds because I'd like to hear his answer too, but a lot of that depends on the Linux distro you select. On rolling releases you get continuous updates automatically, not major upgrades like forced Windows Updates.
I'm OP, he runs Manjaro and I handle the updates whenever I see him, every month or so (I live out of state). I could do it over SSH but if something happens to break, it's a pain to fix. I showed him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to do it.
What do you mean, automatically? Arch is a rolling release and I have to explicitly run pacman with the correct flags to update. At the same time Debian, which is not a rolling release, has the unattended upgrades feature which installs updates automatically.
But indeed, many things depend on the distro. For example, user-centric distros such as Elementary and others provide an easy to use GUI for updating the system.
And yes, Windows Updates was (is still? not a Win user) a nightmare.
What do you mean, automatically? Arch is a rolling release and I have to explicitly run pacman with the correct flags to update. At the same time Debian, which is not a rolling release, has the unattended upgrades feature which installs updates automatically.
I was thinking Tumbleweed, Manjaro and the like which have GUI updaters, lol. @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world was pretty clear that his parents are the ultimate Linux beginners; he's not going to give them Arch or Debian out of the box and bark command lines at them.
I actually have given him Arch before, but I handled everything. They're running Manjaro.
When people are talking about Linux Desktop they usually mean GNU/Linux. Chrome OS and Android both use the Linux kernel, but they aren't GNU/Linux like we understand Linux desktop.
GNU/Linux needs a company that will create a Macintosh equivalent. A company that will design quality hardware. Restrict the hardware they support tightly, but highly optimise the drivers in their devices. Selling their equipment with a distro that's well supported with bug testing and user support. Each update being tested on all their devices.
This would allow people to buy their devices without much thought.
I think people in the past thought this could be Ubuntu and Canonical. But their business is server, so there desktop will never get to the place it needs to be.
The steam deck is pushing Linux closer to this place. But I don't think it will be enough.
System76
PopOS?
As sadreality said, you’re describing System76.
System76 aren't there. They sell rebranded ugly generic laptops with low quality screens. They sell them for a similar prices to low end macbooks. You put the average person in front of both in a store and they are going for the macbook. Better screen, better battery life and good quality hardware.
PopOS has the best chance to be 'the Linux' desktop. But they need nicer hardware. System76 are selling laptops to Linux people, that's their market. They don't have nice hardware design to compete in the high end of the market. And they aren't cheap enough to compete in the low end.
System76 are also going after the server market. I suspect they will go the way of Ubuntu. Chasing the server market and being too distracted to follow through with their desktop ambitions.
Tell us how you really feel. xD
I wouldn’t call System76’ hardware ugly. It’s generic looking, sure, but it’s not ugly. It’s also designed by them. They used to only customize OEM systems with their own designs, but they started designing and manufacturing their own desktops a few years ago. Their first fully self designed and manufactured laptop is coming out soon. They have never just rebranded other companies’ designs though, so that’s just flat out wrong.
Their screens are fine. Have you seen them? They’re nothing to write home about, but they’re not low quality.
They have a range of laptops from $999 to $3,299, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say they’re a similar price to a low end MacBook.
They are very much not abandoning their desktop ambitions. They are putting a lot of effort and investment into their own desktop environment.
There is no company that designs all their PC hardware and all their software. Not even Apple does (but they’re probably the closest). Everyone has suppliers they work with for stuff they don’t want to design or build.
Dell and Lenovo sell Linux laptops.
To add to that, Android is likely the overwhelming market share of Linux-based operating systems in use today. For that matter, an absolute ton of Intel CPUs have Minux installed on them too, but I wouldn't call this "on the desktop", just interesting.
Imagine sounding this elitist because of an operating system you use
Linux is fine for people like you and me who are comfortable installing our own operating system, and trouble-shooting any problems. Most 'normal' people though will continue to walk into a store, buy a laptop, and use whatever came installed.
Of course, the year of Linux on the desktop actually happened some time ago without anyone noticing. It's called ChromeOS, and that's a whole different can of worms.
While true, how much troubleshooting does windows require? Because as I sometimes use windows, it's not that much less work to get it to do what you want it to do, or solve issues, than linux.
Especially since it feels like windows tries to fight you every step of the way.
When windows needs fixing, people take it to the best buy genius bar or whatever
Most distributions require little to no troubleshooting, and if they do, someone has probably already posted the solution online. It's pretty rare these days that you run into a problem that someone else hasn't and you're stuck figuring it out yourself.
The only pain point is trying to find the Linux equivalent of the Windows apps that you commonly use. Web browsers are the exact same, but that's about it. A fair amount of apps to offer Linux counterparts though.
It depends on ehat youre trying to do. If you are teying to debloat it, of course you go out of your way, but it has the reverse problem for most drivers, where youre almost guaranteed to plug in an arbitrary USB device, and itll probably have drivers or software in the windows environment.
Linux is great. With the caveat that you specifically pick hardware that works well in Linux for it, else you have the problem of "a choice fighting you every step of the way"
Linux is easily fixed but the problem is that the issues that crop up needing to be fixed are generally not pain points on Windows. The first Arch install I did this year was busted and I thought I had broken my networking setup because it wouldn't connect, but the issue was that the system clock was wrong. Something like that may pop up in Windows but you can quickly press the sync time and date button in the settings and it'll sort itself out, while Arch requires a lot more work than just that, especially if it has no connectivity.
...I've certainly had that issue on windows as well. I had to manually set the time. Windows sync at least didn't use to always work.
I've been using Linux for like 15 years and Arch for about a decade. I've never had an issue where the system time prevents the network connection from working. That's odd.
It makes sense because all of our cryptography is based around time limits. If the system time is way off it can't verify the cryptographic signatures and it's not going to validate any certs since the time doesn't line up properly.
Yeah, true.
Every distro has ntp setup by default. New users shouldn’t use Arch…
Yeah and old users shouldn't be fucking snobs, yet here we are.
Once people get over the initial Windows indoctrination, Linux is simple to use and doesn't require tons of complex troubleshooting like people think. Before the COVID lockdown I tried for the Nth time to get my dad to use Linux. I had it installed and told him to stick with it for a few weeks (he only browses the web and plays solitaire). If he still didn't like it, I'd reenable Windows. Well that few weeks turned into 6 months. Now both he and my mom have been happy Linux users for about 2 years.
If I may ask, how do you deal with updates? Have you enabled unattended upgrades or do you update the machines yourself?
His dad just needs to put a password when asked. It's a 6-years-old kid task updating on most Linux distro.
That would be true if:
So, unless both of above are true, the dad will never (want to) update his system because "it works as is", sticking to old versions of software, never receiving bugfixes and neglecting security.
Most distro nowadays come with a gui to update. A pop up window appears asking if you want to update/upgrade. You can press "yes" and the password of the sudoer or admin user is asked. It has been like this for over a decade. For popular distros as Ubuntu or fedora over 15 years
Is it different for your distro?
He still doesn't care to.
Yes, probably because I stick with Arch and Slackware plus a lightweight environment. The only time I saw such a GUI was when I tried out Elementary just for fun.
What I consider a problem is that the user can simply dismiss or disregard the updates notification indefinitely. I know many non-tech-savvy people who do not understand the importance of updates, so they would be inclined to do exactly that. That is why unattended upgrades are probably a better option in such cases.
The process is so simple that there is no reason to not do it. My wife is non-tech person, I installed ubuntu on her laptop and she's very happy because it's faster than windows. I have never updated it for her. She does it. Only thing I have done is the upgrade to a new ubuntu release
You're a wise (wo)man. That is exactly the case. I've shown him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to because, like you said, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Thank you for answering. I can relate to manually updating my parents' systems once in a while but at this point I'm seriously considering unattended upgrades (updating over SSH is also a good idea).
NP, I don't consider it a big issue, I kick it off whenever I'm there and it takes about 10 minutes.
His own password which makes it even simpler.
I do it for them whenever I come over every month or two (I live out of state). I could also just SSH in and do it remotely if I really wanted to. I showed my dad how to do it with the GUI package manager, but he's the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" type. Linux will run perfectly fine without updates for years.
I'm not the guy you asked, and I hope he responds because I'd like to hear his answer too, but a lot of that depends on the Linux distro you select. On rolling releases you get continuous updates automatically, not major upgrades like forced Windows Updates.
I'm OP, he runs Manjaro and I handle the updates whenever I see him, every month or so (I live out of state). I could do it over SSH but if something happens to break, it's a pain to fix. I showed him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to do it.
What do you mean, automatically? Arch is a rolling release and I have to explicitly run
pacmanwith the correct flags to update. At the same time Debian, which is not a rolling release, has the unattended upgrades feature which installs updates automatically.But indeed, many things depend on the distro. For example, user-centric distros such as Elementary and others provide an easy to use GUI for updating the system.
And yes, Windows Updates was (is still? not a Win user) a nightmare.
I was thinking Tumbleweed, Manjaro and the like which have GUI updaters, lol. @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world was pretty clear that his parents are the ultimate Linux beginners; he's not going to give them Arch or Debian out of the box and bark command lines at them.
I actually have given him Arch before, but I handled everything. They're running Manjaro.
When people are talking about Linux Desktop they usually mean GNU/Linux. Chrome OS and Android both use the Linux kernel, but they aren't GNU/Linux like we understand Linux desktop.
GNU/Linux needs a company that will create a Macintosh equivalent. A company that will design quality hardware. Restrict the hardware they support tightly, but highly optimise the drivers in their devices. Selling their equipment with a distro that's well supported with bug testing and user support. Each update being tested on all their devices.
This would allow people to buy their devices without much thought.
I think people in the past thought this could be Ubuntu and Canonical. But their business is server, so there desktop will never get to the place it needs to be.
The steam deck is pushing Linux closer to this place. But I don't think it will be enough.
System76
PopOS?
As sadreality said, you’re describing System76.
System76 aren't there. They sell rebranded ugly generic laptops with low quality screens. They sell them for a similar prices to low end macbooks. You put the average person in front of both in a store and they are going for the macbook. Better screen, better battery life and good quality hardware.
PopOS has the best chance to be 'the Linux' desktop. But they need nicer hardware. System76 are selling laptops to Linux people, that's their market. They don't have nice hardware design to compete in the high end of the market. And they aren't cheap enough to compete in the low end.
System76 are also going after the server market. I suspect they will go the way of Ubuntu. Chasing the server market and being too distracted to follow through with their desktop ambitions.
Tell us how you really feel. xD
I wouldn’t call System76’ hardware ugly. It’s generic looking, sure, but it’s not ugly. It’s also designed by them. They used to only customize OEM systems with their own designs, but they started designing and manufacturing their own desktops a few years ago. Their first fully self designed and manufactured laptop is coming out soon. They have never just rebranded other companies’ designs though, so that’s just flat out wrong.
Their screens are fine. Have you seen them? They’re nothing to write home about, but they’re not low quality.
They have a range of laptops from $999 to $3,299, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say they’re a similar price to a low end MacBook.
They are very much not abandoning their desktop ambitions. They are putting a lot of effort and investment into their own desktop environment.
There is no company that designs all their PC hardware and all their software. Not even Apple does (but they’re probably the closest). Everyone has suppliers they work with for stuff they don’t want to design or build.
Dell and Lenovo sell Linux laptops.
To add to that, Android is likely the overwhelming market share of Linux-based operating systems in use today. For that matter, an absolute ton of Intel CPUs have Minux installed on them too, but I wouldn't call this "on the desktop", just interesting.
Imagine sounding this elitist because of an operating system you use