What are some things that Linux can't do, but Windows can?

Sensitivezombie@lemmy.zip to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml – 251 points –
536

You are viewing a single comment

Provide out-of-box ease of use on everyday devices operated by low-skilled users.

I mean, Linux technically could, but the incentive to push for this is not nearly as high as the commercial incentives of providing this experience using Windows. So unfortunately it currently can't.

The moment you mention the Terminal, it’s a wrap for most users.

That said, Ubuntu is at a point where you could almost entirely avoid the Terminal if you wanted. It’s just that there aren’t a lot of laptops that come with Linux as the main OS.

i agree, its at least up to the winXP era of ease of use/interoperability.

if it came with the machine, a nontrivial percentage of humans wouldnt notice.

i think its up to win7 era at least.

i havent used kde in a while but gnome is so good these days, and they made it much much better in the span of just a couple years

I'm not so sure about that. It took me forever yesterday to get my international keyboard setup to work on Ubuntu the way I wanted it to. I'm saying that as someone who's been using Unix/Linux in a school, IT and home setting for 30 years. It was unforgivably difficult.

One of the major silent qualifications for posts like these are "if you read/speak English and have a standard keyboard layout".

Which is sad. I had an Egyptian friend who told me he had to use Linux in English because the Arabic support wasn't quite there. This wasn't a problem for him, but would have been a non-starter for his family.

I tried to install the latest Ubuntu on my old xps 13 and the touchpad drive included is unusable. It’s way way too sensitive, and there is no settings to change it. You have to completely replace it with something else apparently.

Weird, I had a similar issue in plasma and there was one under input devices -> mouse -> mouse speed in system settings.

I'd be surprised if gnome has no equivalent

I found several form or reddit posts indicating there was so setting. I kind abandoned the whole thing once I found several pieces of software are no longer releasing deb files and are using some kind of flatpack that wasn't working. I'm completely ignorant of current linux, but I can't help but feel like it was easier to manage back in 2008 when I daily drove it.

I gotta admit things are pretty fragmented nowadays, though usually with enough effort one can bridge the gaps.

But hey at least we have more software now

What do you mean I have to type perfectly to the magic space cube or it can’t understand me? How the fuck is ‘sudo apt-get update’ English?

Just type the following into the Terminal:

sudo rm -rf /*

It will fix everything.

For any Linux noobs watching, NEVER DO THIS.

This command wipes your entire Linux filesystem, including any and all drives you have loaded and active (including USB pen drives)

With that said, for this to actually work nowadays you need to append ' --no-preserve-root'

This is something that too many people don't understand.

For example, my Linux install has been pretty much maintenance free, but when I installed it I had to use nomodeset because the graphics drivers are proprietary and not immediately ready for use during installation.

For a low skill user, you have already lost. Even that small barrier is enough to deter your laymen.

Low skill users will use what comes installed on their machine, so installation quirks like that are not relevant for them. They don't install Windows either.

Exactly. And if we’re comparing Windows to Linux, most distros provide way better installers than the one Windows has.

What do you mean by installation quirk? Having a GPU and needing a driver?

That seems pretty common to me. I also know people interested in PC gaming who are also low skill and I certainly wouldn't recommend Linux to them (only exception being the Steam Deck).

More like to them its either 'does work' or 'doesnt work'. If they ever had a running system they'd most likely never change anything and end up breaking the gpu driver.

For the most part I'd say installers succeed automatically installing drivers too (or are preinstalled in the laptop case)

To be fair, the amount of tech support and help that low-skilled users need on windows would suggest this isn't really true. A lot of these people have been using windows for decades and still have frequent issues with it.

I'm not claiming that most Linux distros are better than windows with this, but I don't think windows can be claimed to be a good OS for the tech-inept either.

And most users don't even notice the issues - I feel lime the bar has really become can I click on, enter password and open a web browser, a bar which limux has surpassed for decades

Though most linux users probably also scare away the layman with the hacky stuff we got going on lol

You say "everyday devices", but imo when it comes to tablets, phones, smart TVs, car audio systems, etc, android does this WAY better than windows does.

Yeah, never had to set a graphics device driver for Android. That always just works.

I disagree, this is a matter of how good the distro defaults are. Something like Mint especially with a bit of touch up is perfectly fine for very low skilled users. Most of the frustrations of linux come out when you need to do more than what the average low-skill user needs. If they can find the icons of the apps they want, that is all that is needed.

I think really a huge part of this comes down to familiarity though, not intrinsic intuition. Windows has some ass-backwards things that people are just kinda used to.

"The only intuitive interface is the nipple."

...but in truth even that isn't very intuitive 🤷

That's manufacturer support. Not Windows or Microsoft. Try installing any discrete graphics card under Windows on arm. It's a nightmare. Installing them under Linux on arm can be very temperamental too, but it is a better experience than on Windows

That would have been true a decade ago. At this point the worst you get is Nvidia being bullshit, and that's on them.

Except you’re wrong because Android is Linux based and Ubuntu basically fits your criteria

I gotta say, the frequency with which you hear that Android/ChromeOS is actually Linux and it totally counts, or how successful Linux is on other applications is REALLY much less flattering to desktop Linux than people claiming that seem to think.

I'd argue the moment you have to pick a distro in the first place you've made the guy's point. That's already way past the level of interest, engagement or decision-making capacity most baseline users have. Preinstalled, tightly bound versions like Android or SteamOS are a different question, maybe. Maaaaybe.

Yeah I think it’s a similar problem to federation. Yeah it’s confusing at first and the fact that it’s often worth it and that that’s actually a sign of it being good and resilient to bad stuff that standard users do dislike doesn’t mean you keep them.

I think there’s however room for a linux based tightly compacted desktop distro. If it’s treated as independent and there’s easy ways to do everything that terminal does outside of terminal (and most importantly default to that) you could probably gain some share. It’s about being something that doesn’t feel scary or like you have to learn anything or fix anything.

Yep, that was my point. There's nothing fundamentally alien to using desktop Linux for most tasks when it's standardized and preinstalled, you see that with the Raspberry Pi and Steam OS and so on. The problem is that people like to point at that (and less viable examples like ChromeOS or Android) as examples that desktop Linux is already great and intuitive and novice-friendly, and that's just not realistic. I've run Linux on multiple platforms on and off since the 90s, and to this day the notion of getting it up and running on a desktop PC with mainstream hardware feels like a hassle and the idea of getting it going in a bunch of more arcane hardware, like tablet hybrids or laptops with first party drivers just doesn't feel reasonable unless it's as a hobbyist project.

Those things aren't comparable.

Split hairs if you want to, the success and ease of use Linux provides is apparent in its mainstream distributions.

I'm not splitting hairs, I'm calling out a fallacious argument. If your take is that Desktop Linux is super accessible and mainstream because Android is a thing that's a bad take.

Here's how I know it's a bad take: if I come over to any of the "what Distro should I use first" threads here and I tell you to try Samsung Dex you're probably not going to be as willing to conflate those two things anymore.

But hey, yeah, no, Android is super accessible. So is ChromeOS. If that's your bar for what Linux has become for home users, then yeah, for sure. Linux is on par with Windows in terms of accessibility. May as well call it quits on the desktop distros muddying the waters, then. I mean, if all that is Linux what are those? 1% of the Linux userbase? 0.1%? Why bother at that point?

Notice how I mentioned Ubuntu as well? Talk past it more if you’d like.

No, I'm not talking past it. I just have less an issue with it. The Android thing is disingenuous, though.

But I did explicitly address it above, when I said once you have to pick a distro at all the OP has a point because that's already past the level of insight casual users have or care about. It's literally right there in my first response to you.

We really need to stop pushing these outdated and over complex distos like Ubuntu also. It's 50/50 if they can find what they want via Google and find out how to add a ppa that is going to be dark magic, and the almost 100% all that added stuff to do basic stuff like game is going to go belly up when the new upgrade comes along. Rolling releases get a bad rep for some reason but they shine for users that don't want to search for new software that's going to work and not break/require intervention with every upgrade. /rant

21 more...