no ones running linux mint on a server, and most consumers wont run debian or whatever. the point of different distros is different target audiences.
Well aware, but Mint also isn't broadly consumer ready. It's ready for power users who don't mind going into a command line occasionally, or people who have their whole machine locked down and administered by someone else.
Android kind of disagrees with you though
Android's a pretty big fork of desktop Linux, and it's not even that usable without Google Play Services, nor is it particularly usable as a desktop operating system.
Android obviously isn’t a good desktop operating system, but it doesn't fit the description of
an industrial OS not well suited for the average desktop user
it absolutely fits the second part of that sentence:
OS not well suited for the average desktop user
You're literally just getting hung up on the word industrial and making a pointless semantic argument. Android also isn't a viable consumer OS without the closed source Google Play Services bundle
The fact that Android is not an “industrial OS” proves that Linux is not just an “industrial OS”. The fact that Android is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user” does not prove that a Linux is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user”, so of course I didn’t use it to prove that point.
Even so, you seem to take issue with the point that I did make. Is it, or is it not, “an industrial OS”? They’re your words, don’t come complaining to me because you chose them poorly.
Android also isn't a viable consumer OS without the closed source Google Play Services bundle
This is patently false. The fact that Google Play isn’t even available in one of Android’s biggest markets, China, should have been a clue.
Bonus:
The average desktop user seems to be digging those newfangled Chromebooks. What say you about those devices?
Would you consider BSD to be “an industrial OS not suited for the average desktop user?” Because, cards on the table, the BSD and Linux kernels are quite similar in the grand scheme of things, and one of them has a 17% desktop/laptop market share.
maybe normal users should just get over it, and use the command line once in a while. its really not as hard as people make it out to be, if youre just running basic commands.
How about, no. I want my computer to work for me. I don't want to work for my computer. This is why the majority of programmers out there, people who clearly can use the command line, use Windows.
Bringing us back to my original comment about Linux desktop users being unable to accept that it's not consumer ready.
you do realize that people can learn new things. im tired of treating people as clueless 'consumers' who just 'arent tech savvy'. learn the basics of how to use a computer, such as copy/paste, and know how to troubleshoot. thats all im asking.
this wouldnt be too big of a problem if it were something like switching people from ubuntu to arch, or xorg to wayland (as examples of intra-community arguments). but the alternative to linux (for consumers) is windows or mac, which are actively harmful to our society. its not just a matter of linux being easier, faster, simpler, more extensible, or anything, although it is. its about people understanding what corporations are using them for, and the common sense to recognize this.
I know and use Linux as a desktop. I constantly switch back to Windows because Linux flaws aren't worth my time. It's not about clueless consumers. It's about not dealing with an os that actively makes it harder to use your computer than the competition.
And the rest of society is tired of nerds saying garbage like "why doesn't every single consumer spend a week taking a training course to learn how to use my crappy UX" instead of spending the time to make an intuitive UX that doesn't need a week long training course.
intuition is subjective
No, it's not, the fundamentals of UX are rooted in human psychology and the way our brains respond to basic patterns like grouping and hierarchies.
How is it not? You never have to go in a terminal 99% of the time (and on Windows there are those cases as well). The only reasons I use the terminal is either to edit my Nix Flake and rebuild switch, which is only because I use NixOS and would not be required on Mint, to use Distrobox, which wouldn't be needed on Mint as 90% of Linux app are either Deb Packages, Flatpaks or Appimages or simply because I find it easier to do some power-user stuff in there. But for the average user on Mint, they wouldn't even need to touch the terminal.
How is it not?
This sentence is a great example of why it's not:
90% of Linux app are either Deb Packages, Flatpaks or Appimages
exe, msi, sh... It's honestly not very difficult to get the difference between debs and other formats, and you don't have to either. You open the app store or download a .deb from a webpage and you're done.
There's bits where Linux is too fragmented, but for most distros with a good appstore setup, this flat out isn't one of them.
I switched recently and it took a while to be a 'power user' again, but the mainstream functionality works and makes sense about the same as Windows.
I barely have to use the commandline, that's more for power users. And that's on Arch (after configuring everything the way I want). On distros like Mint it's not even necessary after a fresh install. I used to help people with their pc, and to my surprise I came across Linux Mint multiple times, at older people no less.
no ones running linux mint on a server, and most consumers wont run debian or whatever. the point of different distros is different target audiences.
Well aware, but Mint also isn't broadly consumer ready. It's ready for power users who don't mind going into a command line occasionally, or people who have their whole machine locked down and administered by someone else.
Android kind of disagrees with you though
Android's a pretty big fork of desktop Linux, and it's not even that usable without Google Play Services, nor is it particularly usable as a desktop operating system.
Android obviously isn’t a good desktop operating system, but it doesn't fit the description of
it absolutely fits the second part of that sentence:
You're literally just getting hung up on the word industrial and making a pointless semantic argument. Android also isn't a viable consumer OS without the closed source Google Play Services bundle
The fact that Android is not an “industrial OS” proves that Linux is not just an “industrial OS”. The fact that Android is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user” does not prove that a Linux is an “OS not well suited to the average desktop user”, so of course I didn’t use it to prove that point.
Even so, you seem to take issue with the point that I did make. Is it, or is it not, “an industrial OS”? They’re your words, don’t come complaining to me because you chose them poorly.
This is patently false. The fact that Google Play isn’t even available in one of Android’s biggest markets, China, should have been a clue.
Bonus:
maybe normal users should just get over it, and use the command line once in a while. its really not as hard as people make it out to be, if youre just running basic commands.
How about, no. I want my computer to work for me. I don't want to work for my computer. This is why the majority of programmers out there, people who clearly can use the command line, use Windows.
Bringing us back to my original comment about Linux desktop users being unable to accept that it's not consumer ready.
you do realize that people can learn new things. im tired of treating people as clueless 'consumers' who just 'arent tech savvy'. learn the basics of how to use a computer, such as copy/paste, and know how to troubleshoot. thats all im asking.
this wouldnt be too big of a problem if it were something like switching people from ubuntu to arch, or xorg to wayland (as examples of intra-community arguments). but the alternative to linux (for consumers) is windows or mac, which are actively harmful to our society. its not just a matter of linux being easier, faster, simpler, more extensible, or anything, although it is. its about people understanding what corporations are using them for, and the common sense to recognize this.
I know and use Linux as a desktop. I constantly switch back to Windows because Linux flaws aren't worth my time. It's not about clueless consumers. It's about not dealing with an os that actively makes it harder to use your computer than the competition.
And the rest of society is tired of nerds saying garbage like "why doesn't every single consumer spend a week taking a training course to learn how to use my crappy UX" instead of spending the time to make an intuitive UX that doesn't need a week long training course.
intuition is subjective
No, it's not, the fundamentals of UX are rooted in human psychology and the way our brains respond to basic patterns like grouping and hierarchies.
How is it not? You never have to go in a terminal 99% of the time (and on Windows there are those cases as well). The only reasons I use the terminal is either to edit my Nix Flake and
rebuild switch, which is only because I use NixOS and would not be required on Mint, to use Distrobox, which wouldn't be needed on Mint as 90% of Linux app are either Deb Packages, Flatpaks or Appimages or simply because I find it easier to do some power-user stuff in there. But for the average user on Mint, they wouldn't even need to touch the terminal.This sentence is a great example of why it's not:
exe, msi, sh... It's honestly not very difficult to get the difference between debs and other formats, and you don't have to either. You open the app store or download a .deb from a webpage and you're done.
There's bits where Linux is too fragmented, but for most distros with a good appstore setup, this flat out isn't one of them.
I switched recently and it took a while to be a 'power user' again, but the mainstream functionality works and makes sense about the same as Windows.
I barely have to use the commandline, that's more for power users. And that's on Arch (after configuring everything the way I want). On distros like Mint it's not even necessary after a fresh install. I used to help people with their pc, and to my surprise I came across Linux Mint multiple times, at older people no less.