How can we make Linux more appealing as "just works"?
Let's say just like for example like MacOS. It's awesome we have so many tools but at the same time lack of some kind of standardization can seem like nothing works and you get overwhelmed. I'm asking for people that want to support Linux or not so tech-savy people.
Look at the Steam Deck as an example:
We need more Linux devices like this to gain market share.
You got it. The moment you surface the idea that there are multiple distros or DEs you've missed the goal the thread is suggesting. Presintalled, customized software built for the hardware is the way to ease people in with zero tweaking, which is crucial for newcomers.
I think this was Steve Jobs' primary skill. He could see a clear vision of the product people didn't know they wanted. Bottom to top, from the hardware to run on, to the typeface their apps used; he knew that the best user experiences happened when every level of the stack harmonized to create a very finely tuned user experience.
Unfortunately, the people who are that good usually don't work for free. We're very fortunate that Valve is choosing to open source their work and keep their SteamDeck platform an open one.
He shipped enough clunkers (and terrible design decisions) that I never bought the mythification of Jobs.
In any case, the Deck is a different beast. For one, it's the second attempt. Remember Steam Machines? But also, it's very much an iteration on pre-existing products where its biggest asset is pushing having an endless budget and first party control of the platform to use scale for a pricing advantage.
It does prove that the system itself is not the problem, in case we hadn't picked up on that with Android and ChromeOS. The issue is having a do-everything free system where some of the do-everything requires you to intervene. That's not how most people use Windows (or Android, or ChromeOS), and it's definitely not how you use any part of SteamOS unless you want to tinker past the official support, either. That's the big lesson, I think. Valve isn't even trying to push Linux, beyond their Microsoft blood feud. As with Google, it's just a convenient stepping stone in their product design.
What the mainline Linux developer community can learn from it, IMO, is that for onboarding coupling the software and hardware very closely is important and Linux should find a way to do that on more product categories, even if it is by partnering with manufacturers that won't do it themselves.
System76 is doing that these days. They put extra hardware support for their Linux distro TuxedoOS and I've heard good things.
Edit: System76 make PopOS and Tuxedo computers make TuxedoOS
I think you meant Pop!_OS (is developed by System76). TuxedoOS is developed by Tuxedo Computers, which is a European Linux focused hardware company.
That said, the point stands... there are hardware companies making Linux supported devices.
Sorry, I mixed those up. Thanks for the correction
Underlying kernel aside, I think that the Steamdeck's SteamOS is an excellent example of how "easy to use" != "smaller feature-set". I've heard countless times from apple dudes that the reason that their stuff allegedly "just works" is because of the lack of some functionally that if present would overwhelm the user. You know, as if ios and android don't share fundamentally the same user interface principles. But they do have a point, a green user can be overwhelmed when presented with a huge feature set all at once. Yet, despite SteamOS literally having a full-blown desktop environment, the UI frankly is way less confusing than my Xbox. It just goes to show that it's not about the number of features, it's about how they're presented. Power users don't mind digging into a (well designed) settings menu to enable some advanced functionality, and keeping those advanced features and settings (with reasonable defaults) hidden around the corner behind an unlocked door helps the newbie get started with confidence.
Yeah exactly.
But what about casual usage like office? The option to choose OS preinstalled on the laptops or desktop would be beneficial.
But Microsoft holds its monopolistic grip.
“People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware.”
The only way to make sure Linux works like that is to have a closed hardware environment. But it has to play nicely with other hardware and services (e.g. printers, webcams, etc + office documents, etc). It has taken a very long time for MacOS to get to this point, but people put up with Mac compromises because enough things worked smoothly.
I've just commented about this in another thread.....but I'm pretty convinced that Linux is not close to being ready for normies.
Yeah. I consider myself somewhat tech savvy (I do software development for work) and I had a really bad time installing mint on my desktop. I got it to work after a day but that was far more than a casually interested person would put up with.
To make Linux more appealing to the average person, you'd have to be able to buy a Linux PC at your local computer store. Most people can't be bothered to install a new OS.
That's also true but also impossible. Linux isn't a for profit company.
What are you even talking about? Anyone can sell a PC with pre-installed Linux. There are already several companies today so just that.
Let me clarify myself
*It's impossible to get big corporate guys attention so they ship Linux by default and it's clearly tested. For now the Valve, System76, Framework and Tuxedo are exception.
Edit: Also I was keeping in mind corporate entity behind OS.
Dell sells PC's with Linux installed.
Not in retail stores though AFAIK
Correct. I was just touching on the big corporations point since they listed some online only retailers.
It would be a real leap forward, if Linux PCs were sold in big box stores. Which is why Microsoft will do anything they can to prevent that.
The big guys won't sell Linux to consumers because of Microsoft's anticompetitive practices. That's the main thing that's holding back Linux acceptance right now. But if some big player (e.g. Valve) would take the leap, things might get interesting.
Yes exactly.
"It's impossible. Let me list 4 exceptions though"
Hahaha true 😆
But the scale is too small for now. :/
Dell have at times sold laptops with Linux pre installed.
Can you buy a Dell laptop with Linux at a retail store?
I've seen this type of question elsewhere. Why is it an issue?
Standardisation? Corporate Linux? Just like the big boys? Big fish eat little fish.
Careful what you ask for . .
Perhaps someone could make a business of it then.
Chromebooks sold well enough. Google made $30 billion on that in 2023.
Anyone willing to put together a physical Linux machine, market and support it could take a chunk of that.
No major OEM will do a consumer Linux PC because MS will punish them with Windows licence pricing. You'd have to be a newcomer that's not beholden to MS. At the same time, you'd need a shitload of cash to start a hardware business with enough volume to get into big box stores. That's why it hasn't happened yet
For me it was always a niche that wasn't taken full advantage of.
Chromebooks never really made sense outside of schools and old people.
The OS is hyper limited to essentially just a web browser, and android apps (so just a web browser). Nobody wants to buy premium hardware to use with just Chrome. But at the same time it's Chrome, so you really need at least a good chunk of RAM. So it really just limits you to the super light use cases, but those could realistically be replaced by a tablet.
The other day we saw an extremely odd device at malwart. They had a $270 laptop/tablet hybrid thing with a fairly nice OLED display, and a snapdragon CPU that should have been more that sufficient. But 128gb of EMMC storage, and 4 gigs of ram. Such wasted potential. It would make a nice RDP machine I guess.
lol wtf are you talking about? You can literally take $100 off the price of a computer just because it’s not bundled with a Winderps license - the price is straight up lower because the license cost is $0. You can order some models like this straight from Dell or Lenovo or whatever.
OEMs aren't paying $100 per license. They're also making deals with McAfee/Norton/whatever to package a bunch of extra crap on your windows laptop to lower the price further.
I don't see it as impossible. Like various brands are distributed with windows, various brands can be distributed with various Linux distros, customizable by distro and features, pre-order. These brands can work out a donation contract with distros.
Yes, but also companies say that Linux support is not worth it (gaining money and spending on the support) compared to - slapping barely working Windows port and call it a day.
For now Linux support is more like pleasant surprise than a official respected thing.
I bet when demand crosses a certain threshold, support supply will quickly follow, gatekeepers bedamned.
If you sell a Linux machine to consumers, Microsoft will screw you over on Windows licencing. No current OEM will risk that.
Contacts end and contracts begin. While it may be a good while, I think we are goingseeing large corporations like Microsoft enter autophagy.
I’m a very casual Linux user and in my experience, I’ve NEVER had a problem with a documented solution that didn’t require going down a rabbit hole of other references.
Something like this: “To get the trackpad to work with Ubuntu, make sure you’ve installed the hergelbergelXX package.” (No link, find it on your own!)
Visit the HergelBergelXX page. To install Hergelbergel on Ubuntu, you must install the framisPortistan Package Manager. (No link!)
On the FramisPortistan GitHub readme, we discover it requires the JUJU3 database system to be installed. “JUJU3 may cause conflicts with installed USB devices under Ubuntu” JUJU2, which shipped with Ubuntu, is no longer supported. Also we recommend Archie&Jughead Linux over other distributions.
And this essentially never stops.
All of this is comparatively a happy result—I actually DID post a question on linuxnoobs about getting my trackpad to work with Ubuntu… and have not had a single reply. I have no idea how to find out how to make it work.
I had similar stories getting Wireless Networking to work on some devices before. Good thing is, there are drivers for most, if not all, default hardware interfaces directly in the kernel nowadays and if a device has any sort of popularity it will be supported before long if it isn't out of the box.
I’m not talking about a long-ago problem. I’m talking about a current install of Ubuntu.
Yes, presumably on hardware that's just a bit too old or rare. Might be unlucky as Linux compatibility isn't high up on OEMs lists
Hat a problem with WLAN on a laptop when I tried to install fedora. The solution was to install Linux mint with LAN\internet and let the driver manager figure it all out.
Maybe that helps.
Simple, start teaching it in elementary school all the way up through high school. Apple did it long ago and got apple users out of those kids. Microsoft does it now, and now you have Windows users. Just need the computer education to be Linux centric from the start. It's not that it's different, it's that it's not what they grew up with and were taught.
Windows hasn't been in schools for a while. It is all Chrome OS
I think it depends. If a school has a laptop for each student, it is most certainly a Chromebook. However, a lot of schools also have a mix of systems. In elementary school, I was taught to use Microsoft Office on Windows, for instance. At my high school, all the students had Chromebooks, but there were also some labs with Windows machines; graphic design, photography, and film classes had labs full of 5K iMacs.
Chromebooks are low cost and easy to manage. Unless it is for a highly specific use I wouldn't be surprised if a school was all Chromebooks and Chromeboxes.
Also there is a public high school full of expensive macs? That's wild
Not exactly “full of” - it was more like 3 classrooms with 30 each. Still a lot of Macs, but keep in mind this was a high school of 2000 students. Also, I’m pretty sure the Macs were paid for with grants for the visual arts programs rather than standard public funding.
Atomic OSes should be evangelized more aggressively to laypersons. IMO, they’re great for 3 specific use cases:
Absolutely. Look at Aeon. I turn it on and do what I need to do.
Later I might see a quick pop up that says system has been updated. It didn’t require intervention. It didn’t even tell me it was happening, it just informed me after the fact.
If anything broke, I would never know because on the next boot if something failed it just uses the previous snapshot to boot. As far as I am concerned the system is working just like it always has.
But even as recently as this week I see people saying: immutable? No don’t make it a bad experience for them! Just recommend Ubuntu for newcomers! >:/
I installed Bluefin on my mother's laptop and it's like a Chromebook for her. She just wants to surf and consume media, and the OS stays solid and out of they way.
Atomic distros are the biggest advance for Linux in recent years.
Need hardware with it pre installed with a reason to buy other than because it has Linux
Maybe use the lack of a requirement for a Windows license to bring the price to performance ratio down
If they're really performant machines also helps break the idea Linux is only for old and slow machines, I only ever used to put it on laptops as they were reaching the end of their usefulness, the moment I put it on my pc and a new laptop it changed my perception on it entirely
I also think the majority of technical users still use windows, maybe we should concentrate on getting them first and maybe we'll see more support
On top of being preinstalled, we also need google search-able instructions that avoid the terminal altogether. People are afraid of the terminal, it doesn't matter why, it just is.
Currently, most solutions to linux problems come in the form of terminal commands. We would have to start creating a whole new troubleshooting forum where instructions avoid the terminal and are just lists of buttons to press in a GUI. Probably helpful screenshots too.
Of course I have no idea if some things even have GUIs at all, like configuring user groups and permissions or firewall settings, someone would need to make them. Not to mention every DE or program would need a different set of instructions, GNOME or KDE, firewalld or iptables. It'll be a lot of work.
I’m tech literate and use the command line daily. I enjoy how powerful it is but I also enjoy the ease of point and click on windows.
After a hard day coding at work I much prefer poking around windows than using a command line on Linux.
I searched but never ever found a website with Linux help specially for non IT people. This is seriously needed. Everywhere I've looked, gatekeepers with no clue about the GUI solutions, insist people use the command line for day to day user tasks. Sure things vary between desktop environments, but it's important people learn about their desktop. It's how they get comfortable, and stay. And not stuck reliant on strangers having to spoon feed them cryptic text commands each time. I'd be happy to help contribute. As I've found GUI ways to do nearly everything.
This is the biggest thing. I'm very comfortable in Bash, but that is not the norm; the second my wife needs to run
sudo apt get, she's out, fuck thatI will say part of problem is knowledgeable volunteers will almost always want to just cp and paste a command string over the docs needed to walk someone through doing it in the current version of GUI.
I've done both. Repeatable user instructions for GUIs IS NOT FUN. Maybe if we can get some automation to turn vague directions into detailed ones and better yet testable (supporting something like OpenQA) it might help lower the burden for a project to do so.
But that's several pages of point and click vs. a few lines to copy and paste,
Copy pasting strange commands people will not memorise does not solve it! To keep non IT people on Linux, they need to find out how their desktop GUI works, so they are in control and happy to stay. The aim is not to use the minimum possible time writing the tips. Thrusting an unfamiliar environment on people is sure to scare them away, and is bad usability.
Thrusting in an unfamiliar environment is how I got an STD
Do not copy and paste into Bash if you don't understand the commands you're pasting in
Who said I don't understand them? I've done point and click tutorials. They don't only take forever to follow, they also take forever to make.
Look at this monstrosity:
https://iopq.wordpress.com/2023/12/02/free-censorship-resistant-vpn-when-you-self-host-with-oracle-free-tier-and-cloudflare/
Holy shit, the copy and paste parts are the easiest parts of them all
Fair; that was mostly a general warning, not necessarily directed at you, because many people do copypaste terminal commands without knowing what they are actually doing.
As long as you understand what a command does, absolutely go for it. No point typing that shit out when somebody else already has
Honestly maybe we need something like a portable guided tour format (you the "see what's new in ..." things but from strangers for specific thing).
That's an interesting idea, but the problem with UIs is you need some kind of a format to interact with all of the toolkits and legacy programs just to be able to figure out where on the screen the button you need to click is
Right. I feel like maybe Free Desktop standard, tight integration with top toolkits (qt, gtk, etc) and a some image recognition for fall back.
you can't because it's explicitly against the whole point of having endless choices. when everyone works on something different, the quality spreads out to where it's mostly just mediocre stuff across the board.
https://xkcd.com/927
hardware compatibility is also a huge problem. for everyone that says "it works fine for me" there are a thousand others for whom it does not.
I feel like there's also the point that on Mac OS a lot of stuff "just works" because everything else just doesn't work at all. I have a number of things that just aren't going to work at all on Mac. Linux is obviously much more permissive, which leads to a lot more kinda working stuff that just wouldn't work at all on Mac.
I wouldn't say that's the only problem. We have pretty high quality stuff on Linux. The other problem is that choice always means differences between options which makes perfect integration hard or even impossible.
I get downvoted to oblivion when I point out "just works" isn't true.
You make a great point about endless choices.
No single UI, no single set of tools, those are massive barriers. And it's why Windows became the de facto standard: single UI, consistent toolset.
No so true after win 7, there's a bunch of legacy menu.
It's at least the same inconsistent toolset as everyone else. Windows 10? Ok go through this multi step process. 11? Ok this other slightly different process.
VS Linux you have 700 consistent toolsets, and 70000000 inconsistent toolsets.
Yeah but you can have default choices that are guarantee to work.
And yeah preinstalled checked hardware would be ideal.
Needs to be pre installed, most people don't know how to reset their PC, let alone install a new OS.
It's current year, I should never have to touch the terminal for anything. I don't care that it's powerful, my brain is already full of windows knowledge and I don't want to have to google what command I need to perform basic functions. Everything needs guis. If there's a gui, I can figure it out and also discover tools I didn't know about along the way, which allows me to solve future problems without going insane.
That's popular sentiment though, so how about one that I don't see often: Add options to allow windows like behavior. For example, middle click paste is the bane of my existence. I should be able to change it to middle click scroll os wide, not just in firefox. I know that there's a hacky workaround to kinda make it work, but it sucks.
"Do not let has been burden what could be." /s
I agree though, other common UX replication options would help user meet the OS where they are more. I also agree that most common system administration and user UX should be doable in a full GUI, they are just so nice for when you don't know what you are wanting but will once you see it.
I also think VUI (voice user interfaces) would bridge the gap for a lot people and NLP would cover most of the worlds population.
Honestly people keep working on and it ebs and flows in progress. Its just a lot fing work to do it well. One day we will get to doing most functions with multimodal interface support (GUI/CLI/API/VUI/NLP/BCI?).
More GUI front ends for stuff. This takes away the need to understand command line tools and syntax, and makes the out-of-the-box experience feel more like it just works.
SUSE / OpenSUSE has this. You can open Yast2 GUI utilities and access all the GUI utils like Windows old Command Center. Hardware, package and driver installs, add hardware and configure, network, enable services and tweak parameter, printer tools, mess with boot options or kernel parameters, etc. The average user would never need to touch CLI
Exactly. That's Windows' secret. Give us a control center where it's easy to control NetworkManager, Pipewire, systemd, and other parts of the OS, and give them not-so-technical names. That's one of the keys to Windows' success. Others involve EEE and anticompetitive practices but we don't want Linux going that way now, do we?
It's not that Windows isn't complicated, it's just that there's a GUI for everything.
Yip. I was trying to find a useful front end to manage the audio settings on my focusrite audio interface. Pipewire has the functions and capability to set the sample rate and buffet size on the fly but I failed to find a gui until for it that wasn't part of some other complicated thing. When I suggested the Devs of pipewire should provide a GUI I was politely shot down. The reasons given were; it takes too long, and Linux users don't mind the CMD line. I think this is a mind-set that needs to evolve.
Most people have had great answers coming from the company side of things. I'll take it from the standpoint of individuals like us helping someone linux curious see the light, while still having the "just works" experience.
Do not give them any choices. None. Put them on your stable distro of choice for a new user, call whatever that is "Linux", and be on your way.
But why? Isn't that antithetical to everything we value? Yes and no. We value choice almost above anything else, but that doesn't "just work" for most people. Which of those do you value more?
No-one who buys a PC with windows preinstalled gets any choice at all... and had the preinstalled malware cme with it.
That's true. Most are perfectly fine provided they have a computer ready to use. Straight out of the box. Immediately. The lack of choice itself is comforting. Everything moves forward. No lateral motion.
We must provide them that type of "thing that just works". Constantly move forward. What is comfortable. What is familiar.
Thank you thank you thank you for posing this question.
This is the biggest issue by far with open source stuff in general, and as a non-programmer who wants to use more and more of it, user unfriendliness hamstrings so much.
I don't know the answers but I can tell you for a fact that if open source in general is serious about broader adoption, this needs to be occupying 50% of everybody's open source discussion time, at least.
What I know is the standard "fuck you read my 19 pages of 1s and 0s" is the wrong answer.
Maybe good design is just really hard. I don't know, I've never tried to do it. Seems like the sort of thing that might take three thousands iterations.
Whether any OS could ever just work isn’t even going to solve the issue.
Getting OEMs to sell laptops and desktops in Best Buy (or the like) that have Linux installed and is properly supported — that is what will help solve the issue.
having it just work is a necessary step to gett there
When there exists an operating system that can satisfy that qualification, I'll concede the point. Until then, OEM and retail support is what matters.
Maybe we are too used to Linux working on anything but with some imperfection.
And yet it again leads to oficial supported hardware.
Software, 1,000%. I love linux and daily drive it. But when I have videos to edit, photos to rework, or collateral to design I have a windows laptop with professional grade tools to do the job.
I'm sorry, gimp is hot garbage. There isn't a pro-grade, open source video editing tool or anything close. Inkscape is useable in a pinch. Scribus is useless.
Not everyone is a multimedia creative professional, but most software on linux never quite have the features you need, are no longer maintained, or will be useful in ten years.
That said, I'd still rather break out the laptop when doing client work than daily drive MacOS or Windows 11. Either way the barrier for most users is that linux almost works.
At least we have Bitwig for music production now (if you can work out how to use it.. I still haven't had the time :-/ )
Do you use open source professional grade video editing tools on Windows? Almost certainly not, so why would it be a requirement for Linux?
What we need is companies producing Linux builds of professional grade closed source software. And if the trend of Microsoft making terrible decisions and Linux use increasing, it might actually happen.
This kind of opens up its own point: people need to accept that non-free software isn't the devil. It actually can be really good for a community to have large entities investing real, actual USD dollars into it, and creating products and services that people want to pay for. It absolutely shouldn't be the only option, FOSS is a beautiful thing and I love that the Unix community puts a huge emphasis on it. But, without some heavy hitters putting some money on the table, Linux/BSD will always be niche. They won't go away, but they won't blow up either.
Gimp works really well, just that it is destructive editting.
As for the software not having features or not being useful, part of that comes down to: if a company offers a linux version make sure you use it. For a proprietary MCAD and PLM system from Siemens, we had a unix version, then windows, then when Linux was viable with support on SUSE and RHEL we had the exact software OEM aerospace and Automotive engineers used for design and management. Trouble is not enough companies used it to make supporting it a worthwhile effort, so they ditched the GUI desktop support. You can still run the few years old version. Maybe it will come back with Linux rising from 1-2% to 4.5% ; if that trend continues
The way to get Linux more appealing is to get proprietary software makers, like Adobe, Microsoft (Office), you know the actual things people need to do their job, to make software for Linux. Steam Deck is a good example of this, it works because Steam ported the games to Linux...
In some ways this is true. However, I feel like in the case of Adobe, someone needs to take another shot at a good FOSS image editor. Adobe is really starting to mess itself with generative AI; knowing many artists, they hate generative AI image tech as a threat to their job, so I find it weird that Adobe is alienating one of their largest user bases. I find it weird how Inkscape is really good and has evolved (I actually switched to it from Adobe Illustrator and don´t regret it), while GIMP has barely changed in 10 years.
I get that some parts of an image editor are complex, but at some point, it's just a chain of mathematical operations. Maybe I'm wrong, but when I get the time, it's almost tempting to take a stab at the issue.
While I don't disagree with you about the potential of those alternatives they won't cut it for the average graphic designer... usually not due to the lack of features but most likely because of the network effects / dominant position that Adobe holds over their field. People who need to collaborate with others and are pressured to get stuff done can't afford the slightest compatibility issue.
True. Industry entrenchment would be a big issue. I can think of two ways to try to fight it. The less viable option would be trying for PSD support, which would be a lot of work. The other option would be to write a Photoshop plugin to allow working with the new file format in Photoshop. This might be annoying to end users having to deal with the format, but also easier developer-wise because you could make sure Photoshop handles rendering right; you'd just need a way to warn about operations in Photoshop that can't be converted to the new FOSS program's native format.
Looks at the current state of Microsoft and Adobe
I'm good.
Anyway you can't really do much about a company not supporting Linux. Either find an alternative or don't use Linux.
Software-wise, it seems that the relatively fast adoption of flatpaks and other containerized formats somewhat solves the typical dependency hell that was so common in Linux just a few years back (and to some extent still is an issue today depending on your distro and use case). The hardware support side is a little harder. That's going to be up to vendors to play nice with the Kernel team and/or introduce reasonable userland software that doesn't break the golden rule. Until Linux gets more market share the latter isn't likely to happen. A nice side benefit of the emergence of immutable and/or atomic distros is that users can play around and try things with much lower risk of bricking their systems, so I'd also consider that a step closer in the "it just works" department.
I think it should be: "Software that is yours"
Overall, I think more focus should be put on consolidating similar projects.
Do we really need 6 different window managers that follow the same design logic?
Do we really need each major distro to have its own package manager?
How many image and PDF viewers do we need? How many music players?
Can we convince Ubuntu that no one wants snaps and they are wasting developer resources.
The freed up capacity should be focused on better windows app compatibility. Something akin to Valve's push in gaming.
While I understand the sentiment, we have to understand that Open Source developers work on projects that motivate them.
So, we can have a single example of each of these but they do necessarily get any more devs. In fact, if you take economic theory ( competition for example ), it is likely they attract less attention individually than they do competing as part of an ecosystem.
It would certainly help on the user acceptance and commercial software side where choice is an impediment. But, if we are just talking resources, limiting the number of projects only works if you pay people to work on them.
Why was each of these projects started ( eg. window managers )? The answer is simple. It is because the founding developer did not like any of the existing options.
I don't have much of a problem with the small open source projects that are generally very good at filling gaps or addressing niches.
I think most of the waste is coming for the development done by the large open source houses. The canonical and red hats of the world. They should stick to what they are doing well, which is the foundational stuff.
From a non techy perspective, having what is used and installed being secure is a big one. I am new to Linux Mint. Mostly user friendly until something gets corrupted or suddenly can not be verified.
Looking for why is not always simple, and there are some explanations/instructions easier to understand than others.
I preface most of my searches with Linux mint (whatever I am searching for) for dummies. This helps some.
I have been forced to use mac now for like a year, and I don't get the whole "just works" opinion of it. Like I have had so many issues with just basic stuff. Turning off mouse acceleration and the mouse still feels all slimy. Highest mouse speed is so slow and setting it higher requires some crazy tricks, which also does not work consistently through boots. It can't wake up a lot of monitors, I have to turn them off and on manually. If it cannot connect to a monitor properly but tries, it like disables your keyboard for a few seconds while trying. Some items in the settings menu take a long time to load, as in if I reboot, log in, open settings, there is no mouse settings.
BazziteOS is really straightforward. Newbies can just jump on there.
This. I've tried around 10 distros. Bazzite is exacly that.
I've heard so many good things about Bazzite that when they release a COSMIC version (I'm a tiling WM user), I'm at least trying it out, and switching if I like it.
If I haven't heard of it, then the average Windows user definitely hasn't heard of it.
While you are correct, Bazzite is a drop-in OS replacement for Steamdeck and Asus ROG Ally, so there's a lot of potential for more people hearing about it as it gets more popular.
As others have said, macOS does not “just work” anymore.
I am primary tech support for a few “normy” users including my mother and wife. My wife, the more technical and capable of the two, uses macOS. My mother uses Windows. My wife requires substantially more tech support. Worse, the issues are often complete mysteries to me like “why is everything so slow” and it turning out that some OS level process is consuming huge amounts of memory and / or CPU. Web searches reveal lots of people with similar issues but no real insight into what to do about it or why it is happening. I have moved OS versions just to solve this kind of crap on Mac. Another problem is software not working on older versions of the OS.
I am no Windows lover but, once I show my mother how to do something, I never hear from her. Every once in a while I stop by to marvel at how many updates need to be applied but that is about it. She is in the Windows 10 that I installed for her many years ago now. It just works.
Kinda don't think you can its one of the beauties of Linux, there's so many different flavors of it. Best thing that would've helped me as a beginner would've been like a collection of all the wiki's and basic knowledge in a single space instead of searching through different sites for a problem or terminal commands, which I bet exists but I just never looked too hard. Also documentation of common problems would've been big for me (especially for older devices) like drivers no longer being supported by kernels and solutions like using the open source version instead.
The problem is, that no operating system "just works". It also highly depend on what the person wants to achieve, and if there are any pre experience with computers or even relying on existing software or specific hardware. My recommendation is not to tell people the illusion of "just works" and be honest upfront. People should learn how it works, what to expect and if tradeoffs, time and resources are worth it.
Same is true for the other way too. Does Windows "just works"? Especially if someone switches from Linux to Windows.
Rather, we should teach the reasons to switch and encourage that decision. In example why it matters to have control over your system, rather than the company has control over it (MacOS and Windows) or why spying on you is bad (Windows). And encourage giving up something you are used to (and maybe paid). Sometimes its okay to use a program that is not as good as Photoshop. Sometimes its okay to give up playing a videogame you like (and maybe associated with friends playing that game with you). But most people are not ready to do it, because that is associated with lowering quality of life.
I switched in 2008 from Windows XP to Ubuntu. I know these struggles. And they are not over yet. This is an ongoing task between my brother and me too, and he was using the Steam Deck, but decided to go with Windows 11 with the recent build. It was almost there, but there is always a butt. I say, don't tell people that "Linux just works". No operating system "just works".
I hate to say this, but windows rarely breaks itself from updates. basic things like the desktop, audio and the lock screen is essentially never broken after an update.
yeah it may reset the audio settings and other such things, and I don't know how do they manage to do that, but that's relatively simple to revert.
probably it's just thanks to old, battle tested code though. can't wait for Linux desktop systems to reach that point
Most common Linux distributions focused on stability do not randomly break with updates. That's usually not an issue. Basic things like Desktop and audio or lock screen are also never broken after an update. But it depends on the Linux operating system you are using (there are thousands of Linux operating systems and they can vastly differ) and what hardware and habits you have. Windows biggest strength is that it gets the most support from developers and being basically only one distribution to target.
But calling Windows "battle tested code" is a bit of stretch. Windows is full of problems and I had my own issues due to updates of Windows (when I was using it in dual boot). Also in Linux I can update and do not boot until I want to boot. I can decide not to update. Overall I have more trust in Linux updates (even using on Archlinux) than Windows updates. Microsoft constantly fucks up updates. And they even introduce and install stuff you don't know or want to.
An old story of mine buying Civilization 6 at launch on Windows was unplayable. After days and contacting support, turned out it was a Skype installer that was installed with a Windows update without my knowledge. And it was just an installer to install Skype, not even running. Removing it made my game Civilization 6 playable. I never had such an issue on Linux.
I tried switching to Linux many years ago (forgot what distro). It was hell.
I don't remember the specifics anymore, but I remember encountering issues almost every step of the way. Driver support, not being able to find the right buttons, etc. Searching for fixes usually led me down a rabbit hole of "oh cool this user on this forum said in another thread that I just need to install Gobbledegook... But what is it and how do I install it?" and of course a bunch of things require CLI which I'm not fantastic at. Unfortunately I gave up after a week.
Compared to that, Windows really "just works". I have had my share of frustrations, but it's usually with stuff that's comparatively an edge case when compared to the problems I had with Linux. I don't like that I'm giving money/data to a megacorp, but the price of that is convenience. I don't churn my own butter, I don't build my own car, I don't want to think too much about how my OS works under the hood.
Also, Linux does not auto-update itself, and that's bad mostly when looking at the programs (like the web browser) that did that automatically, and here it can't anymore.
I understand that most users don't update their system and the utils they downloaded, but that's essential for a web browser.
I was considering that I should just install Firefox as the fatpak for everyone, instead of the core package manager, for this and other reasons, but my users have so little memory in their old machines that it's already barely necessary.
The issue starts at the fact that it's difficult to find a computer sold by a common major distributor with Linux already installed, nor does Linux have any marketing aside from word of mouth to compete with the aggressive Microsoft/Apple duopoly.
The threshold to entry begins at simply having the technical prowess to install an alternative operating system on one's computer, which I don't believe a good majority of people are even capable of. Before that, people also need an incentive to transition in the first place. They've probably been using their current OS for a good portion of their life and are more than comfortable with it without putting themselves through another learning curve.
The average person isn't considering an alternative to what they're already using, and if they are, it usually isn't Linux. The biggest problem isn't appeal or ease of use; it's exposure and immediate accessibility.
That said, performance and simplicity would be an excellent selling point for Linux. It would be absolutely worth banking on the open-source nature of it to appeal to a growing demographic of people interested in privacy-oriented tech as well.
MacOS being a bad example here since Apple only needs to make its OS work on a very small set of hardware that they control wheras Linux (and Windows, yes) need to work on probably hundreds of thousand if not millions of devices (including Macs 👌) with at least the same amount of peripherals combined in almost any imaginable way. That's a completely different task.
Linux is a tool that big corporate entities have profited greatly from for many years, and will continue to. Same with BSD, Apache, Docker, MySQL, Postgres, SSH...
Valve, Sys76, Framework, etc. Are proving that using Linux to serve an end user market is also profitable, and are capable of supporting enterprise use-cases.
I understand that there may be specific problems to solve wrt improving adoptability, usability, compatibility, etc., but Linux is doing more than ok within the context of the FOSS ecosystem (and increasingly without).
Your thinking is slightly skewed, IMHO. Linux doesn't have an inherent incentive to compete with MacOS or MS, and if it did, it would be subject to the same pressures that encourage bad behavior like spying on users, creating walled gardens, and so forth.
But Linux is open source? So if hypothetically so distro adopted spying al la windows couldn’t people just change distros? tbh I also think the question is slightly confusing as I don’t understand why OP thinks Mac OS is not standardized but I digress.
Yeah sure, a distro could start spying on users. How easy it would be would depend on their distribution model, and how willing they are to violate the GPL.
It is very hard, time consuming and boring to iron out those finishing issues in any software product. You need team of people being paid for that.
When doing it for fun, I just go until it works and until it is fun. As soon as I come to those last 20% I never touch it anymore.
So ai doubt it will happen until more companies start paying decelopera to do it. But I don't see the business model in that, so I doubt it will get better fast.
After getting used to KDE I still need to use windows for work. People think big companies iron out all the bugs but they really don't. We're just so used to our default OS that we don't notice the bugs we deal with every single session.
Windows has tons of buggy base functionality but users just work around it. KDE's base functionality is actually quite solid by comparison. You only run into issues with more technical compositor stuff that an average user would probably not interact with.
It would be nice if it was possible to simply go to a website, check off on the stuff you want and then get a full package.
I liked the idea of AV Linux, because it comes in a bundle of stuff that I need, but it also comes with a lot stuff that I don't need, and I'm not sure the desktop is my choice. It also didn't really work at the time I tried it.(Some years ago).
So.. if I, a stupid user, could simply go to a website, check mark at the desktop, check off which office package, music apps, browser, etc.etc. and then get a download of that in one go where it's all set-up and works, it would be a lot easier than having to go through the process of installing the OS and then installing/removing apps, and then making it work..
Like, let's say I want a PC just for music creation, I should be able to download the the OS with the DAW of my choice, all the VSTis and potentially also the most common free sound banks. In one file.
If I wanted an office PC, I should be able to get the OS, the office suite of choice and all the misc. PDF tools, email client and whatnot of choice. All in one go.
Windows and macOS sort of came with everything before, but these days they're just as annoying to set up as any Linux distribution. Linux as a whole could take advantage of that situation by offering a prepackaged but custom installation.
Of course it would also help if someone made a Linux installer for windows, so users didn't have to use windows to create a bootable USB. I think this is the step that normal users hesitate on. I don't know if it's possible, but it ought to be possible from software to partion the disc and install dual boot or something.
Like Ninite but for distros. Man....that sounds so easy of a concept. Shocking that no one has made that.
ChromeOS does this well because it's android, a walled garden that users aren't allowed to break. You can buy it at Walmart, and it works well.
Other big "consumer" distro projects (Debian, Ubuntu, fedora, rhel, etc) are similar, especially if you're installing stable releases on hardware that is supported.
The question for me is what do users want their OS to do? My guess is internet, office, print, scan, photos, games, updates, and get out of the way. Almost all big distros will give you that experience already, as long as you don't expect to play Windows games or pick a specialized gaming distro.
Users who want to step outside using supported repos are back to googling for a solution when things are broken, and should see themselves as part of the tech-savvy group that need to fend for themselves.
An easy way to import/export Flatpaks would be really convenient. On Windows, I can easily move around software using a usb drive to a computer that may not be connected to the internet. I'd have no clue how to do that on Linux aside from AppImages
But due to fragmentation etc. I'd guess that such portable flatpaks would be huge, as they'd need to carry all dependencies in case the other end is missing some
For all its faults at least you don't need to chmod+x on windows. Ironic since linux is usually more permissable.
So reading all of your responses
Does anyone have more?
By promoting the distros that have this as a goal, such as Mint.
I would suggest Ubuntu in this category, but... eww..
Fedora Kinote just works.
More appealing? Linux runs basically all server infrastructure where even Microsoft bent the knee for Azure & Windows Subsystem for Linux. If we are talking about Desktop Linux, it will remain popular with those building software for easier/better dev tooling & wanting to better understand the systems their production code is run on. As software becomes more intergral to our lives & knowing how to write/debug it rises, folks will slowly keep trickling in as the have for decades where more & more software is treating Linux (& the web, & since BSDs, et al. are running similar software such as GTK they are also included) as a primary target. The other desktop OSs continue to shoot themselves in the foot injecting ads into the OS or denying system-level access to the machine you own.
A would say a better focus is mobile Linux… as casual users have migrated away from desktop OSs, where Android & iOS’s walls are holding them captive.
Mac OS is not a "just works" experience. It is heavily tied to icloud and Apple services and everything is janky.
Maybe if Mac OS matured a bit I would consider using it but for now it is in a broken unusable state.
If you appreciate autonomy, avoid MacOS. Their whole business model is to suck you into their technological ecosystem. The fact that their stuff works in any way outside of their expensive, walled garden is unintentional.
I was going to refute your comment but to be honest I use it largely because of those features. I’ve used MacOS for over 30 years and recently bought an AMD workstation for development work when my MacBook didn’t cut it anymore. It would be a good experiment to try an all local MacOS experience to see how it stacks up and I think it would probably be ok. You can install a lot of desktop apps using Brew to keep your system up to date. The main advantage that Mac has over Linux is that a lot of corporate software is available that otherwise can only be obtained on Windows. When I realized that windows in a VM on Linux wasn’t for me I more or less converted my Linux machine to a server for most use cases.
I think that the proliferation of software/app centers is a great development when it comes to package management. Guides should mention them as an option to install whatever packages are needed, as a lot of people are clearly afraid of terminals.
Which leads to the “more GUI tools” point, which I'm sure everyone knows by now.
Also, you know how Windows update is so aggressive with getting you to update? That's for a reason.
Immutable distros like Silverblue or Bazzite are the only path I see that can work for normies. However flatpak itself has to mature more, theming anomalies need to be dealt with somehow for example.
Mint is only good to ease a technically inclined person into the linux world.
I think Linux works so good right now, that most of the appeal will come from third party vendors supporting Linux. The few anticheats and big apps like photoshop and sony vegas are used by many and are still a big obstacle which Linux can't magically fix that easily.
What I've also noticed makes it appeal a lot to the people around me, is that when suggesting Linux, I also offer them tech support free of charge for whatever problem they have.
Fedora has been "just working" for me for the last couple of years. It is my go to for older relatives for that very reason.
I will be checking this thread out later for potential idiot proof distros
My vote is always for plain ol Debian. If you don't need a bleeding edge system, Debian will just work.
What about for Nvidia gaming though?
Bazzite. Idiot proof Nvidia gaming. I've installed it for a few Windows-using friends and they've had no complaints.
https://bazzite.gg/
You have my attention and curiosity. I do believe I will be installing this on my second hard drive
Good S0ix support. At the moment, Linux mostly fails to sleep correctly on modern S0ix laptops, which happens to be most modern laptops.
This means the battery drains incredibly fast, and S0ix features aren't being used, which is unfortunate as it has potential for quick wake, lid closed actions and limiting battery drain while asleep (since S0ix can eventually hibernate automatically from a sleep state)
Also the boot loader could be improved, systemd-boot needs to support secure boot natively so we can be rid of the slow, ancient and scary-looking GRUB.
It depends on which user and their workflow. For example, Graphics Designer use Photoshop compare to GIMP because of native CMYK for printing as well as non-destructive effects. Most people will be fine using GIMP.
I bring this up as I tend to see people on Lemmy and even in online space that talks about open source that would bitch about "normies" being too stubborn for not trying Linux or any open-source projects in general but never think about how much compromise they had to do if they do go down the open-source route.
Automatic updates are essential. and unfortunately, it should not be an option to keep an old version of something, because through shared libraries it will hold back the entire system. fatpaks should be used for those programs.
Fortunately it's getting there, like KDE is working on it too, but it's still got a long way.
It does just work for normal users.
Normies use the installed os. Just install a browser and office suite, thats all the need and care about.
Standardization = monopoly risks. It's not worth it in the first place.
Let's say something like systemd standarization.
Such stuff is almost perfectly standardized on Linux (and the risks are there too).
List me what is standardized on Linux.
I'm not that much of an expert but I know display protocols, init system and audio protocol (there are 2 but the new standard supports stuff made for the older one) are standardized.
They are getting closer to this but also I think those projects emerged from being old and unorganized so they want to do it decently.
By telling users to change their mindset, by showing em how control is important and how the "just werks" mentality imposed by Microsoft is more detrimental than anything.
"Just works" is not a mentality imposed by Microsoft, and has nothing to do with loss of control. It's simply (a consequence of) the idea that things which can be automated, should be. It is about good defaults, not lack of options.
It was literally the tag line for Windows 98 I think!
The gag was that it just (barely) works.
Linux actually needs to just work first
I don't think we do, but that's a feature, not a bug. Here's why:
There was a great post a few days ago about how Linux is a digital 3rd Space. It's about spending time cultivating the system and building a relationship with it, instead of expecting it to be transparent while you use it. This creates a positive relationship with your computer and OS, seeing it as more a labor of love than an impediment to being as productive as possible (the capitalist mindset).
Nothing "just works." That's a marketing phrase. Windows and Mac only "just work" if the most you ever do is web-browsing and note-taking in notepad. Anything else and you incite cognitive dissonance: hold onto the delusion at the price of doing what you're trying to do, or accept that these systems aren't as good as their marketing? The same thread I mentioned earlier talked about how we give Linux more lenience because of the relationship we have with it, instead of seeing it as just a tool for productivity.
Having a barrier of entry keeps general purpose communities like this from being flooded with off-topic discourse that achieves nothing. And no, I'm not just talking about the Yahoo Answers-level questions like "how to change volume Linux????" Think stuff like "What's the most stargender-friendly Linux distro?" and "How do we make Linux profitable?" and "what Linux distro would Daddy Trump use?" and "where my other Linux simping /pol/t*rds at (socialist Stallman****rs BTFO)???" Even if there is absolutely perfect moderation and you never see these posts directly, these people would still be coming in and finding ways that skirt the rules to inject this discourse into these communities; and instead of being dismissed as trolls, there would be many, many people who think we should hear them out (or at least defend their right to Free Speech).
Finally, it already "just works" for the aforementioned note-taking and web-browsing. The only thing that's stopping more not so tech-savvy people is that it's not the de facto pre-installed OS on the PC you pick up from Best Buy (and not Walmart, because you want people to think you're tech-savvy, so you go to the place with a dedicated "geek squad"). The only way it starts combating Windows in this domain is by marketing agreements with mainstream hardware manufacturers (like Dell and HP); this means that the organization responsible for representing Linux would need the money to make such agreements... Which would mean turning it into a for-profit OS. Which would necessitate closing the source. Which would mean it just becomes another proprietary OS that stands for all that Linux is against.
And this ladies and gentlemen is what is wrong with Linux and its communities.
Technological gatekeeping is THE major problem in the Linux world. You use Linux to use Linux. You intentionally do not want people that you consider "below" you to use Linux or even be present in your communities.
Most people use computers to get something done. Be it development, gaming, consuming multimedia, or just "web browsing" (which you intentionally use to degrade people "just" doing that). They do not use computers to use computers. They don't need to and should need to. If you want to do this, good for you.
But stop trying to gatekeep people out of it. That's just an a****** behaviour.
No, but I do want my communities to stay on-topic and not be derailed by Discourse™
Who I consider beneath me is wholly unrelated to their ability to use a computer, and entirely related to their ability to engage with others in a mature fashion, especially those they disagree with.
I realize most people use computers for more than web-browsing, but ask anybody who games, uses multimedia software, or develops how often they have issues with their workflow.
No I don't. Can you quote where I did so, or is it just a vibe you got when reading in the pretentious dickwad tone you seem to be projecting onto me?
I'm not, you're projecting that onto me again. If you want to use Linux, use Linux. Come here and talk about how you use Linux, or ask whatever questions about Linux you want. If you don't want to use Linux, or don't want to to talk about Linux, take it to the appropriate community.
If keeping communities on-topic and troll-free is "gatekeeping," then I don't give a fuck how you feel about it.