I appreciate the enthusiasm Linux fanboys have about this. But ain’t nobody but the most tech savvy would even consider it.
Linux is not consumer friendly, it typically involves putting in a shit load of effort to get working with your hardware, the ones that don’t still need a ton of work to make “Windows-like” and compatibility is always going to be an issue.
Yes, there have been a ton of strides toward this dream situation. But without financial incentive, making things user-friendly isn’t going to happen. In fact, much of the Linux community prides themselves on having a “difficult” OS.
Once Linux can, by default, have an easy to use interface, can natively run Android apps and windows applications, and can work with a huge range of hardware, it will never take off. Linux might get a few points of market share due to some business applications finding Linux a better option than updating HW and windows build, but those companies are going to struggle and will be even more dependent on their IT staff for the simplest of things.
Linux was hard when you had to install it from a box of floppies, download your software over a 9600 baud modem and get your documentation from a book. Back then, people that had computers knew a lot more than they do today. Most people today wouldn't be able to get a computer running if it came with a blank hard drive and a windows installer DVD because all they know how to use is a web browser.
Most people would have no issues using a computer with Linux preinstalled, especially if it has KDE, which looks very similar to windows. Hell, some people probably wouldn't know the difference as long as it had a Firefox and chrome shortcut on the desktop.
Hey míster, 1999 called, they want their Linux comment back.
Linux is easier to install than Windows. On windows 11 vs. Ubuntu Linux:
Literally last time I installed both, Linux was a 25 minute task that includes download time. Windows was a week long hell that in total cost me over 7 hours, required me to make bios changes, run VMs to try and burn the damn image and a whole lot more headaches
Out of the box, Linux will detect and support most hardware quite well. Again, can't say the same for windows where a lot of manual labour was involved.
On how it works? Even my mother can sit down and use it out of the box, talking from experience.
Is Linux perfect? By no means it is. Are there spill specialty devices out there that require extra work or may not even be supported? I'm sure there are. Does the same go for Windows? You bet your ass.
Does Linux have a better user experience than Windows? You bet your ass. No ads, no marketing BS, no money begging, no tricks, no clutter, no OS stuffed with sponsored crap, it. Just. Works.
I get it, I walked into the den and poked the bear. But I think a reality check for this kind of “Linux will take over Microsoft” is necessary. 95% of computer users don’t care about their OS and would never imagine re-installing it or installing a different one. Just the idea of thinking about an OS puts that person in the advanced user category. It took Google to mod Linux and sell it to every public school in America to get it to a 4% user base. It is clearly not something for everyone, it isn’t even for most people who use Reddit or Lemmy, and those communities are def more closely representative of people capable of using Linux.
I understand that there have been many advances to make it a usable OS for the casual person. But it isn’t. Sure, your mom might be able to use it “out of the box” but it doesn’t come in a box. The two widely adopted versions of Linux had to be heavily modified by large dev teams of Valve and Google, for very limited numbers of devices. Would Valve make a version for a non-gaming focused device, or computer at large? Would Google make a version that wasn’t in direct support of Googles products? I doubt it.
It isn’t just lack of knowledge of Linux that is holding it back. Its main demographic is nerdy computer people who are willing to, occasionally, run a shell command or hunt down the necessary things to get their webcam to work. That isn’t what Microsoft aims for, they aim for the average computer user who wants to watching videos, play games, browse the web and check their emails without thinking about any part of how or why it works.
The point you seem to be missing is that it isnt that linux is too hard for average people, it isnt id even say its easier than windows to use for people who arent deep into using windows already.
Its that installing any os is too much for regular people and Microsoft have been fighting dirty and abusing market dominance to make sure they kill pre-installed linux machines.
I get your point. I also get that the average noob is now starting to hear about Linux. I also get that the average noob had been complaining about the windows bullshit, thinking that it's a computer thing that is normal, is now learning that actually, no, it's not normal.
I've seen many a noob dipping their toes into Linux, and quite a few staying. Call it Dad's trying to fix the computer after he fixed the toaster, but still.
Also companies are more and more interested. Once people use Linux on their company computer and see how easy it is to get the same nice system on their own computer, you will see them switch
My point is: you need a critical mass and I feel (I might be wrong) that clinic is approaching that. 10 years ago many noobs didn't even know what a Linux is, today they actually do and they keep hearing there are no ads, it's free it's safer, it's easier, less bullshit... They'll come.
You’re absolutely spot on. Unfortunately no one here is willing to accept it.
the ones that don’t still need a ton of work to make “Windows-like”
I appreciate the enthusiasm Linux fanboys have about this. But ain’t nobody but the most tech savvy would even consider it.
Linux is not consumer friendly, it typically involves putting in a shit load of effort to get working with your hardware, the ones that don’t still need a ton of work to make “Windows-like” and compatibility is always going to be an issue.
Yes, there have been a ton of strides toward this dream situation. But without financial incentive, making things user-friendly isn’t going to happen. In fact, much of the Linux community prides themselves on having a “difficult” OS.
Once Linux can, by default, have an easy to use interface, can natively run Android apps and windows applications, and can work with a huge range of hardware, it will never take off. Linux might get a few points of market share due to some business applications finding Linux a better option than updating HW and windows build, but those companies are going to struggle and will be even more dependent on their IT staff for the simplest of things.
Linux was hard when you had to install it from a box of floppies, download your software over a 9600 baud modem and get your documentation from a book. Back then, people that had computers knew a lot more than they do today. Most people today wouldn't be able to get a computer running if it came with a blank hard drive and a windows installer DVD because all they know how to use is a web browser.
Most people would have no issues using a computer with Linux preinstalled, especially if it has KDE, which looks very similar to windows. Hell, some people probably wouldn't know the difference as long as it had a Firefox and chrome shortcut on the desktop.
Hey míster, 1999 called, they want their Linux comment back.
Linux is easier to install than Windows. On windows 11 vs. Ubuntu Linux:
Literally last time I installed both, Linux was a 25 minute task that includes download time. Windows was a week long hell that in total cost me over 7 hours, required me to make bios changes, run VMs to try and burn the damn image and a whole lot more headaches
Out of the box, Linux will detect and support most hardware quite well. Again, can't say the same for windows where a lot of manual labour was involved.
On how it works? Even my mother can sit down and use it out of the box, talking from experience.
Is Linux perfect? By no means it is. Are there spill specialty devices out there that require extra work or may not even be supported? I'm sure there are. Does the same go for Windows? You bet your ass.
Does Linux have a better user experience than Windows? You bet your ass. No ads, no marketing BS, no money begging, no tricks, no clutter, no OS stuffed with sponsored crap, it. Just. Works.
I get it, I walked into the den and poked the bear. But I think a reality check for this kind of “Linux will take over Microsoft” is necessary. 95% of computer users don’t care about their OS and would never imagine re-installing it or installing a different one. Just the idea of thinking about an OS puts that person in the advanced user category. It took Google to mod Linux and sell it to every public school in America to get it to a 4% user base. It is clearly not something for everyone, it isn’t even for most people who use Reddit or Lemmy, and those communities are def more closely representative of people capable of using Linux.
I understand that there have been many advances to make it a usable OS for the casual person. But it isn’t. Sure, your mom might be able to use it “out of the box” but it doesn’t come in a box. The two widely adopted versions of Linux had to be heavily modified by large dev teams of Valve and Google, for very limited numbers of devices. Would Valve make a version for a non-gaming focused device, or computer at large? Would Google make a version that wasn’t in direct support of Googles products? I doubt it.
It isn’t just lack of knowledge of Linux that is holding it back. Its main demographic is nerdy computer people who are willing to, occasionally, run a shell command or hunt down the necessary things to get their webcam to work. That isn’t what Microsoft aims for, they aim for the average computer user who wants to watching videos, play games, browse the web and check their emails without thinking about any part of how or why it works.
The point you seem to be missing is that it isnt that linux is too hard for average people, it isnt id even say its easier than windows to use for people who arent deep into using windows already.
Its that installing any os is too much for regular people and Microsoft have been fighting dirty and abusing market dominance to make sure they kill pre-installed linux machines.
I get your point. I also get that the average noob is now starting to hear about Linux. I also get that the average noob had been complaining about the windows bullshit, thinking that it's a computer thing that is normal, is now learning that actually, no, it's not normal.
I've seen many a noob dipping their toes into Linux, and quite a few staying. Call it Dad's trying to fix the computer after he fixed the toaster, but still.
Also companies are more and more interested. Once people use Linux on their company computer and see how easy it is to get the same nice system on their own computer, you will see them switch
My point is: you need a critical mass and I feel (I might be wrong) that clinic is approaching that. 10 years ago many noobs didn't even know what a Linux is, today they actually do and they keep hearing there are no ads, it's free it's safer, it's easier, less bullshit... They'll come.
You’re absolutely spot on. Unfortunately no one here is willing to accept it.
Perhaps that's where you're going wrong?