Slashdot Mirror
Why Aren't People Abandoning Windows For Linux? (slashgear.com)
- Updates on Linux are fast and "rarely call for a restart" -- and are also more complete. "Updates are typically downloaded through a 'Software Updater' application that not only checks for operating system patches, but also includes updates for the programs that you've installed from the repository."
- Windows "tries to serve a variety of markets...cramming in a scattered array of features" -- and along those lines, that Microsoft "has gradually implemented monetization schemes and methods for extracting user data." And yet you're still paying for that operating system, while Linux is less bloated and "free forever."
- "Because less people use Linux, the platform is less targeted by malware and tends to be more secure than Windows"
The article also touches on a few other points (including battery life), and predicts that problems with Windows are "bound to get worse over time and will only present more of a case for making the switch to Linux."
Long-time Slashdot reader shanen shared the article, along with some new thoughts on why people really stay with Windows:
I think the main "excuse" is the perception of reliability, which is really laughable if you've actually read the EULA. Microsoft certainly doesn't have to help anyone at all. I would argue that Windows support is neither a bug nor a feature, but just a marketing ploy.
Their original submission suggests that maybe Linux needs to buttress the perception of its reliability with a better financial model -- possibly through a new kind of crowd funding which could also be extended to all open source software, or even to journalism).
It does not come 'free' with the PC/Laptop. Even though they will need to pay eventually (upgrades/subscriptions) people still see it as free.
When you buy a Microsoft computer, you agree to use only Microsoft products, including the Windows App Store. Installing Linux is illegal tinkering, and if we catch you doing it, we will delete your data.
- James Kelly, Senior Microsoft PR Executive
...will be year of the Linux desktop. Just a few months to go but it might get there.
systemd. HTH! HAND!
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The OS doesn't really mean anything at all. The OS only exists to run software which solves specific problems to get jobs done. On paper Linux looks like, but in the real world, it just consistently falls short for desktop usage. It does GREAT in the server world, due to the reliability and performance, but these are less of a concern on the desktop.
On the desktop, we need the ability to accomplish tasks by individuals that are not computer experts and dont have experts sitting around them constantly to ask questions to. Having done tech support in a small business of people who are not tech savvy, routinely being asked how to dial an international phone number, or reply to an email, or send a FAX, these are not tasks that the Linux ecosystem are suited for.
Linux is built for tech savvy people by tech savvy people. Linux is chock full of software engineers, but lacks UX engineers in all aspects of the ecosystem.
That's it, really. I need to be able to run AutoDesk AutoCADD, Inventor, and Revit. If someone can demonstrate those (with all their built-in components, rendering, and plug-ins) running nicely with full capabilities on any type of Linux, I will happily make the switch.
And no, FreeCADD and Blender are not valid substitutes. Sorry.
Z
Lots of distributions. Lots of ways of doing things. Systemd or not. rpm or dpkg or portage or one of the other dozen or so package managers. Lots of old documentation hanging around telling you to do things that don't work any more. Binary drivers or not. X11 or Wayland. GNOME or KDE or neither.
Putting aside the argument of wasted effort, it's just confusing for the average user. Even those of us who are capable of navigating these waters may easily grow tired of the hassle.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
For the vast majority of users windows works well enough. And their PC / Laptop came with windows.
So there is no incentive to change.
The public just buys what the major tech marketing machines are selling. Very few even know there is an option and why it matters.
;)
Just my 2 cents
I manage a small network for my parents. My dad is a lung doctor, and my mom is a nurse. I cannot get their current EHR system to run under Linux (WINE) and wasn't able to get their previous EHR to run under Linux either. So, for them, I do not save the thousands of dollars that were required to be spent when Windows XP was deprecated, and thousands of dollars again now that Windows 7 is approaching it's end-of-life because I cannot run one critical desktop application under Linux.
We evaluated OpenEHR. It would have required substantial modification to be able to collect, and present, patient data in the manner that would have been useful to their medical office. My software development company could have provided these modifications. As could another, more experienced, software development company that supports OpenEHR. We came to the conclusion that those modifications would be more expensive, and risky, than the commercial licensing, and constant Windows replacement costs. The commercial solution was ready, out of the box, and (not very well, but still) supported.
Until Linux offers better desktop application replacement support, there will be many corporate environments that depend on Windows application which cannot be migrated. WINE is not easy to get everything running under.
The software development company I use relied exclusively on Linux, and open-source software for our developments. However, that does not mean it is a good solution for everyone. Saying "everyone should use Linux" is just as wrong as saying "everyone should use Windows." There are different use cases for different technologies, and attempting to shoehorn everyone into a one-size-fits-all approach doesn't (in my experience) lead to a good outcome.
Exactly. Until any version of Linux can run Photoshop or Capture One (or as someone below said, AutoCAD), or any other mainstream software which people use on a regular basis, people are not going to use it, even if it's free.
People want to either insert a disc or download the software and get it to work. The first time.
Until this massive obstacle is removed, Linux will be relegated to its insignificance in the personal computer market.
You clearly don't understand either Linux nor Unix.
Which people would abandon Windows? I can't think of many interesting Linux projects that didn't turn into a couple of nights spent on forums and tutorials for me! That's not something most people want to deal with!
Cause slashdot is beating a dead horse.
Joking aside, Linux support has gotten better from the days when posting on a forum would be met with RTFM. It's still not enough to get folks to turn away in masses to Linux. I honestly don't know what the answer is.
It's not games. Valve went as far as to create their own flavor of Linux.
It could be apps. I find that MsOffice is still better than everything else out there. I'm great with Gimp simply because I'm too cheap to pay for Adobe products, but adding stroke to text is still a lot more difficult than it has to be (select layer, convert layer to path, etc)
It could be hardware compatibility. Some of the more "pure" distro's refuse to include binary drivers.
It could also be my cousin Vinny, who is sort of defacto tech support for aunt Jenine (I really don't have an aunt or cousin named that)
Maybe it's the ease of entry as a professional. Windows 10 basic cert is easy, Linux, not so much.
Maybe it's something I just heard in my Security+ training, that GUI's prevent mistakes.
Maybe it's the accountability, you know who you're dealing with, there's at least some central number to call for support, instead of a fragmentation of 10 different companies.
Maybe it's the government, who still swears by windows for a lot of things.
I really don't know. I know I'm typing this from Windows, in a chrome browser. I have my reasons. Having been on slash since the beginning, this question is just never answered. It's almost like Incels asking, "Why can't I get laid?"
Linux is wonderful for sure.
But it's basic issue with toppling Windows dominance over the desktop is Apps. Plain and simple.
Until developers start pushing out major Apps for Linux, it's going to remain in the shadows, running all the backend stuff like it always has. Linux simply has no hope on the desktop until it gets the App support from major companies, like Windows enjoys now.
Which leads to the second problem for Linux. Fragmentation and poor compatibility from distro to distro. There's just no standard for developers to follow, that would ensure their stuff will run as desired on any given Linux desktop. There's ton of different UIs, different display servers, different system tools, different locations for common stuff. Even the basic libraries installed on any given Linux desktop are rarely the same as they are for another one. Different versions of just about everything plagues Linux's viability for big corporation's developers.
Even Steam can be a bit of a chore to get working properly on a Linux desktop install. You gotta make sure the right libraries are in. And even when you get it working, there's absolutely no guarantee any of your games will work. They might. They might not. Windows does not suffer from this issue. You buy a piece of software/game for Windows. It will work. Period.
Don't get me wrong, Linux's various distros have come a long way in addressing compatibility and dependency issues for their software repositories. But, from my view, it's still too much of a disaster for big corps to make the investment in developing their big App suites for Linux.
Once big name corps, like Adobe and Microsoft for example, start pushing out Linux versions of their flagship products, Linux will have arrived. But until then... we're stuck with Windows.
Windows 10 has been the single best thing Microsoft has ever done for Linux. Well, that and the Vault 7 malware release from the NSA. That was the day I stopped using Windows 7 and went back to Linux. But even my dad decided to finally abandon Windows for Linux after Microsoft forcefully "upgraded" his machine to Windows 10 without his permission and then failed to properly put back one mystery DLL after downgrading back to Windows 8.
Lots of people are using Linux on their phones and tablets these days. Young people are also increasingly opting for cheap Chromebooks instead of paying out the wazoo for a Windows laptop. I'd say Linux is doing just great!
You can get psuedo legal copies (keys purchased overseas that are grey market) for around $10-$20 bucks. If you already had Win 7 around they gave 10 away for a few years.
Free isn't enough. It needs applications. For end users that means Office (lots of folks still use the native version) and games. Steams' custom WINE doesn't run everything.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I don't run Linux as my primary native desktops (but do run it on my laptop and in a bunch of VMs). The primary reasons are:
- I rely on Quicken (not the online "my financial data is only one hacker away from being published" or "my data is gone because the vendor disappeared or just decided to delete it due to a 'retention policy' " version) and it's not available/supported on Linux (yes, I tried to run it on WINE but it was unusable from a performance standpoint and, anyway, then it's only one Quicken or WINE update away from breaking on an unsupported platform).
- I also rely on HR Block tax software (again, not the online "my financial data is only one hacker away from being published" or "my data is gone because the vendor disappeared or just decided to delete it due to a 'retention policy' " version) for my tax prep every year and, again, no Linux version exists (and, for a variety of reasons, I need to look back at taxes for many years beyond the "norm" so "working today" is not good enough).
- While BSOD used to be a modestly regular occurrence on Windows even just 15 years ago, I haven't had it happen for years on Windows (Win 8.1 Pro now), Ubuntu updates break my systems from time to time (which is one reason I run them in a VM -- just restore a checkpoint and try to isolate the problem by selective updating) - I currently have several VMs that I have to remember to uncheck the GRUB updates when doing updates or the system won't boot (yes, I'm sure I could figure out what's wrong, but it worked fine just a few months ago and I've got other things to do than dig into code that I will never update or contribute to).
Perhaps, when forced to Win 10, I will downgrade to a single Win desktop with RDP access for the family for use of essential "Windows Only" software -- but that will depend on the state of Linux desktop then (and, my hopes are not high).
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Technology is only as reliable as the understanding of the user using it.
Windows makes a BFD of updating your computer or scanning for mal ware.
Ironically the fact that updates are a big deal on Windows machines makes people aware of them. They are aware when one exists and if they haven't done it. This intrusiveness gives you the sense that as long as you stay updated Microsoft will keep your machine happy and healthy.
Linus doesn't provide that feeling.
You are never really aware if the "kernel" (scary) is upt to date or what that means or how to tell.
So it's daunting.
A linux distro with a security CLippy would give people more confidence something was out there keeping them safe and healthy
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
For many users, Outlook and Excel are the reason. Granted, the Outlook web interface is pretty good, but it does not quite equal the native client. With Excel, the Linux alternatives are poorly known and a point of (often unjustified) concern. I'll add that the Excel interface is generally better than the open source alternatives as well, particularly with things like column fills and conditional formatting.
Finally, let's think about graphics and sound, which are still sketchy way too often on Linux after all these years. Just a month ago, I watched a skilled Linux sysadmin spend days trying to get a 3-monitor setup to work properly. He ultimately succeeded, but what a nightmare!
A big part of the problem is this: The world has a near infinite number of problems out there that are all clamoring for attention: Whatever you do for work, The environment, mowing the lawn, Political Parties, taking the cat to the vet, gridlock on the drive home, What's for dinner, Today's school shooting, List of HoneyDos on the weekend, political scandal of the week, Homeybees are going extinct, the neighbors next door don't want a solar power plant built down the street, there is a rally a city hall for a righteous cause, churches asking for money, the list goes on and on and on.
The last thing you want to do when you home is spend energy trying to figure out why your computer isn't working. So it isn't a case of deliberate ignorance, it is a case of being worn out at the end of the day and not wanting to deal with another problem. Windows is a know entity that works well enough. The barrier to entry for linux is that everything looks different and acts different enough that people don't want to have to be retrained, especially then they have to use windows at work and Linux at home.
Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
Whatever the reason, relying on "it is less targeted" as your security is absolutely insane.
The real reasons are:
- People have Windows.
- People know Windows.
- Programs they buy/download work on Windows.
- Programs they use in work also work on Windows.
That's it.
There's literally nothing stopping someone nowadays selling Windows apps that are literally just Linux VMs running inside a hypervisor that happens to be on Windows. True cross-platform capability.
The reason I don't run Linux on my main machine? It already runs Windows, and I can put Linux in a VM. 50% of my servers in work are Windows, 50% are Linux. Because some things have to be Windows (e.g. Exchange), and some things can be Linux.
But they all run on a Windows Hyper-V server (despite the underlying hardware supporting Red Hat) because people are familiar with Windows and I have to assume someone else will take my network over. Literally my entire working relationship with people in the same position as me has found one person who runs Linux as anything other than a toy to say they've done so - and most of them don't run it at all (except incidentally, e.g. Android phones, etc.).
There are major in-roads (e.g. Chromebooks) but pretty much the underlying OS matters not one bit at all. As we go on, even the app layer doesn't matter as everything moves online.
Fact is, at that point, people don't need to care what they are running. They could run them all, at the same time, on the same machine. Dual-booting was something we did before processors could support proper virtualisation. Nowadays even the cheapest laptop supports virtualisation extensions and could run on anything.
Why doesn't it? Because people *literally don't care* about the OS they are using, could use, or what some application uses. They just want to click, install, work. Same way that I honestly couldn't give a shit whether my car engine was a classic piston or Wankel engine. I just want it to start, drive me somewhere, and get repaired by someone else.
Anything else is literally trivia.
How many times does it have to be explained before it finally sinks in ?
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more . . . . .
It isn't because we like Microsoft. It isn't because we hate Linux.
( I use both depending on what I'm doing )
We don't abandon Windows for one simple reason:
MANY OF THE APPLICATIONS WE USE DON'T EXIST ON LINUX.
It's the same damn problem VR has. Developers don't want to commit resources to something that so few use while, at the same time, so few will consider it because very little is developed for it.
Some have Linux versions ( like Maya ) but, for the most part, many of the professional / commercial applications I use on a daily basis do not.
There may be some open source alternatives but, none of them quite stack up to their established commercial brethren.
This, and only this, is why ( like it or not ) I am f*cking stuck with Windows.
In case you're curious and you want to go find me some free, open-source version *** that performs as well as any of the following ***, here's my list:
The entire Adobe CC suite
Maya & various Maya Plugins ( covered, it works in Linux too )
Zbrush
Rhinocerous 3D w/ Brazil
Substance Designer / Painter
Keyshot
Capture One Pro
Cubase Pro
Sibelius
Various Musical Instrument Libraries
The driver that ties my synth to the DAW
The day all the above developers create a Linux version, I'll switch.
Until then, Windows it is.
I have used Windows 10, macOS, Linux (lots of flavors, including Mint, Debian, Fedora, Manjaro, and various Ubuntus). Right now I am reasonable convinced that Windows is the best solution for me, although I miss Linux often. The biggest issue for me is the availability of software. Here are some immediate ones that come to mind:
1) The software I use to prepare my taxes (the browser version is more expensive if you can believe that)
2) Skype for business (necessary for my work at my university)
3) Acrobat Reader (necessary for some tax paperwork that requires submission by PDF)
4) Microsoft Office
5) iTunes (because I have an iPhone)
I bought a lifetime license for Crossover Linux because I wanted to support the Wine project. Wine will allow me to get by with an older version of Office (rather well, actually) and some other useful software (like the Epson wireless projection utility). The other items on my list don't work well with the latest version of Crossover. Many of the programs that I run in Linux (Thunderbird, Geany, Eclipse, wxMaxima, Octave, VLC, just to name a few) have Windows versions that work exactly the same way.
Windows also has better search from the start menu for documents and applications, something that only KDE seems to do well, and KDE has its own problems. Don't get me wrong, I spend a lot of time removing all of the asinine parts of Windows 10 from a Powershell session when I do a clean install, but that's not much different than the scripts I use to configure Linux distributions after I install. The addition of the Windows Subsystem for Linux also provides a lot of missing functionality (although it is much slower).
I know the VM solution will probably come up here, but I feel that if I have to use a Windows VM for certain tasks and a Linux host for others, I'm forced to configure two systems for my personal machine and that's time I don't have.
Chrome OS is made to run one application: Google Chrome. If you want to run an application other than Google Chrome, you need a different operating system. And if the Chromebook you own was manufactured before Crostini, that isn't likely to happen.
Most Chromebooks support Android apps
Only if they're from Google Play Store. In order to sideload Android applications onto a Chromebook, you have to put the Chromebook in developer mode, and a Chromebook in developer mode will prompt whoever turns it on to wipe all data.
I've thought about this recently, and it goes something like this: I think there are some rings which help categorize whether using Linux makes sense...
Ring 1: Development Applications.
IDEs
Text editors
Compilers
Ring 2: Server Applications.
Web Servers
Routers/Firewalls
Storage/Data Transfer
Databases
Ring 3: Lowest-Common-Denominator Desktop Applications.
Desktop Window Environments
Productivity/Office Suites
Web Browsers
Mail Clients
IM Clients
Audio/Video Players
Ring 4: High Level Desktop Applications.
Audio/Video Editing
Architecture
Finance Software
Legal Software
Medical Software
Point of Sale Software
etc....
Rings 1 and 2 are things that software developers tend to know a lot about, making it very easy to code them well. In most cases, software fitting into those categories are superior to Windows-only applications. The LAMP stack is basically the default for web hosting at this point, and plenty of software-based routers run on Linux or BSD while doing that on Windows is almost comical to suggest.
Ring 3 is pretty mature in general at this point, but it's pretty easy to need a particular function in Excel that isn't available in Calc or some such. The more complex the needs are for a particular application, the more likely the Linux equivalent is going to be a bit of a problem. Even if it can handle it, the learning curve makes it undesirable without an even bigger reason to do it.
Ring 4 is hit-or-miss. Content creation creeps along on Linux, but it's far from mature, and lots of plugins aren't available for the platform. Plenty of line-of-business software *needs* some sort of commercial support, and it's the chicken-and-egg problem that everyone runs Windows because their vendors require it, but none of the vendors make Linux software because virtually none of their clients are running Linux on the desktop. Lots of high profile use cases simply require Windows (or possibly OSX) because there's no reason to develop for what will likely be a support nightmare, and even if one vendor tries to standardize support on Ubuntu, everyone's SoL if the next vendor standardizes on CentOS.
On the dubiously-good side for Linux adoption, the everything-in-a-web-browser trend makes the number of software titles requiring support to decrease as time marches on, making it easier to switch. However, anybody arguing that it's easy to switch has clearly never worked in tier 1 tech support.
All I want is a computer that can securely have a browser, run emulators for my old school video game roms, play my mp3 collection and play all my movies ripped from DVDs. Can Linux handle all these basic tasks?
The Xubuntu operating system runs (among other things) Firefox browser, VLC media player, Mesen and FCEUX for NES ROMs, Mesen-S and bsnes-plus for Super NES ROMs, and mGBA for Game Boy and Game Boy Advance ROMs. Install Wine, and it also runs BGB for Game Boy debugging, j0CC-FamiTracker for composing chiptune music, and OpenMPT for composing sample-based sequenced music.
Even if people wanted to distributing non-trivial commercial software for Linux it's impossible without releasing a dozen different versions to target a sufficiently wide range of distros and versions.
I thought you just needed to make a build for Flatpak or perhaps for Steam Runtime. What am I missing?
I wish I could buy a new laptop or desktop computer off the shelf at Staples or Costco and bring it home and have it boot up into some version of Linux instead of MS Windows.
Then buy your laptop somewhere other than Staples or Costco. Buy one at System76 or ThinkPenguin. Tell both of them that they lost your business because they offered nothing but Windows.
If all you do is email, web browsing, word processing and spreadsheets, linux is fine
For CAD, CAM, electronic design, PCB layout, image editing, video editing, music production, and other specialized stuff, you NEED windows
Please don't tell me that there are alternatives for all of these on linux. Yeah, they exist. but they are not even in the parking lot of the ballpark of the same quality
If you need Cubase, Altium, Solidworks, etc... there is no choice
You don't compile on binary Linux distro. You just install and then the installer does its thing and the program is ready.
Provided the application that you want to use happens to be in your distribution's repository. Many distributions reject certain categories of application on principle. For example, Fedora rejects video game console emulators out of fear that Nintendo might cause Red Hat to spend money on a legal defense.
I have been a Linux user for many years with quite a few different distros and I have to agree with the other guy. I am running Xubuntu right now and nothing 'just works'. A lot of the programs I want to use don't have documentation. Sometimes you have to read the source code even to know what the program is for. In general Linux program documentation is just utter rubbish compared to most Windows programs. They almost always assume that you have the technical expertise of someone who writes compilers for a living.
Very few program installers bother to add menu or desktop launcher entries and it is by no means easy to do that manually. Many programs are from somewhat to very out of date if you try to just do an 'apt install x' and Ubuntu flavours have one of the best software repositories in the Linux world. Really only Arch Linux can compete. So you have to google the program and hope they have a ppa and many don't and even when they do they are sometimes out of date and when you try to install an out of date ppa it screws up the entire software installation system until you fix the problem which is by no means easy or straightforward.
Installing programs on Linux is often like wrestling an alligator naked. It's almost always a massive massive struggle and yes it isn't that unusual for you to be expected to compile from source and without any instructions on how to do so. Sometimes you get lucky and there is a Snap or Appimage or Flatpack which makes the installation more like Windows, sort of automagical when it works which it doesn't always. Frequently such packages cause problems when you actually try to run the program because the program was not originally written with that sort of installation in mind or because the installer hasn't been updated for 3 years.
Overall I like Linux better than Windows, but that is only because Windows sucks so very very badly because Microsoft is one of the worst software companies on the planet. But Windows at least has consistent single click installs that really do almost always just work and when someone bothers to write a Windows program they nearly always at least tell you what the program is supposed to do and very very often even tell you how to install and run it. I hate to say this but I think at least some people who love Linux love it because it is so difficult to use. I think it's kind of an ego thing. Like they want to feel superior to the retardo Window users who would not have a chance in hell of running even the easiest 'desktop' Linux distro. It makes some people feel so very elite, but that's not what an operating system is for.
After the Windows 10 OS-as-Adware debacle I decided to finally make a serious effort at doing everything except gaming in Linux, but the people who write Linux software don't make that easy. So many of them are like, "Uh yeah I wrote this free program (it's free so stfu and don't complain!), but I don't give even the slightest fuck if even a single person besides myself ever uses it. Really. I. Don't. Care! So go read my uncommented source code with 100 different source files if you want to know how to use it or how to install it (compile from source baby!) or even what it is actually for. If you want to know why I wrote it you can go fuck yourself. No really. Go buy commercial software if you don't like it. Oh there is almost never any commercial software for Linux? Then go run Windows if you want documentation." That last bit is my point. Windows developers usually write docs or even manuals (Manuals OMG!).
I have spent weeks trying to figure out how to compile from source a linux web server I really would like to use, but I can't for the life of me figure it out. It is a massive puzzle or mystery. And no there isn't a binary available. So I had to just give up. There is however a Windows version available and I am pretty sure installing *that* version of the server would be a piece of cake. I have a Linux server though so that doesn't help me. It is open source and I have the source code so I could presum
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Speaking as someone who has dual booted since around 1993 (Yggdrail plug and play Linux) ...
... These costs must be offset by something that is specific to Linux, and the things that Linux advocates speak of when talking to Windows users are often not meaningful or interesting to the latter. So the typical Windows user sees no gain.
... the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) reduces the number of such things. Various *nix tools or utilities that fit a particular task better than their Windows counterparts are now conveniently available from the Microsoft Store for free. Note that some long time Linux users are finding that WSL lets them have their *nix toolchain under Windows, that's pretty convenient for cross platform development. Kind of a repeat of what we saw with Mac OS X and the BSD console and posix API being available. Such things just make Linux less special than it used to be. In 1993 when I started using Linux it seemed a godsend, I wished I had it for undergraduate CS studies. Fortunately I had it for grad school. But today, its just less special.
Primarily, there are a lot of people that need an app or utility that is only available for Windows.
Some will argue that there are FOSS replacements for the functionality provided by these apps but most of these FOSS replacements are not Linux specific and run under Windows too. Someone wanting to save money by using Gimp does not need Linux.
Secondarily there is the network effect. As the dominant OS Windows just has more people you can ask questions, ask for help. Same for those dominant non-FOSS apps.
Related to this is virtually any hardware gizmo you might want to buy will be supported by Windows. Linux, maybe not.
In short there is a cost from switching to Linux, software availability, what others are using, compatibility,
Regarding things specific to Linux
To be VERY VERY clear, the above is strictly discussing the typical user desktop. If you want to discuss embedded or server environment, of *nix based workstation use, things are quite different than the consumer desktop.
A myth. It is well known that Linux users are generally willing to pay more than average for game titles. I do not doubt that Linux users also earn more on average.
A vanishingly small minority of Linux users refuse to ever pay for software. Contrast this with the mass hordes of Windows users who habitually steal their software, every last bit of it.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
anyone with an IQ of 120 or less is going to have very serious problems installing and using it and that means most of our species.
I've got a USB stick in a drawer with a Kubuntu install on it. Plug it in, boot up, click "install", and it does it in about 10 minutes. If that's scary, you can click the other tile and just run it off the USB stick. It's like 85% as good as installing it.
Making that bootable stick is the hardest part. You have to download a program from the internet, insert a USB stick, and run the installer.
Most of our species aren't doing more on any device than what you listed. And anyone doing more than that is going to have to learn something, even on Windows.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Depending on the industry and where a business is in its growth, there is an increasing number of applications that are going the way of web-based access (which are generally not OS dependent). However, centralized administration and enterprise-level scalability with ease of administration are critically important aspects, all of in which Microsoft excels (and no one else compares. And, even when not considering these factors, some industries line of business applications only exist as Windows applications (in example, think dental software).
When it comes to these things, Microsoft wins. No one comes close to matching up. That is simply the fact. However, when it comes to deep back-end implementations (storage, databases, networking, SIEM, backup appliances, and other) Linux-based systems have significant enough advantages to win over a Windows-based system. This isn't always the case but from what I have seen this is applicable to most cases. Microsoft is trying to regain some territory in this area with the advent of Windows Server 2019 through new and some improved datacenter-centric features and functions.
If Linux wants to win the Desktop, Linux will have to win in business first. Linux already has a place in the server arena, but to win it all Linux will have to put on a marketing hat, improve its productizationability, and get vendors to support Linux (good luck with that - it isn't cost effective for all but for applications in the enterprise-class that are mission critical, and most businesses are nowhere near being 'enterprise-class'). In addition to vendors, Linux is going to have to step out of the primitive free-for-all anti-communism mentality and pick up game with lucrative, powerful, easy to administer and manage, centralized feature and functionality sets on a level high enough to give Active Directory & Gang a run for the money. This kind of thing is not going to be free (it is impossible to support these kind of feature sets for free without any form of continued active development and enterprise-level support). You're going to have to bring in these "big brother" features that all the fear mongerers in the Linux community despise.
It's like 85% as good as installing it.
You see it's crap like that that gives Linux a bad name. No it's not 85% as good. It's barely 20% as good. It gives you a nice OS wonderfully out of date with a complicated system to store resident files while at the same time being painfully slow.
Running Linux from a USB stick has it's place but claiming it's 85% of anything even remotely resembling a desktop workspace just serves to reinforce the idea that opensource zealots are just pushing an agenda rather than actually presenting a serious product.
The proposition was "Linux users want free". Which is bullshit. Linux users want freedom, there's a slight difference.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Windows users don't realize you have a plethora of desktop options, including making your own if no others appease your likes. It is the most common reason I hear people say they wont switch
With Steam Play, A shit ton. There is also a good hand full of native AAA titles there is a wiki somewhere dedicated to it if your're really curious. Steam is the best thing to happen to Linux in a long time, they are giving incentive to the people stuck on windows for gaming a reason to switch and abandon the torture.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/l...
https://davidyat.es/2016/09/08...
https://ubuntuforums.org/showt...
https://www.reddit.com/r/VFIO/...
https://bufferoverflow.io/gpu-...
http://vfio.blogspot.com/2015/...
https://www.se7ensins.com/foru...
There is literally 100 guides to this, whoever told you you need more than a $100 GPU and a cpu that supports VFIO lied to you and you should never trust another word they say.
Or you are me. You buy a modern XPS, the same one that dell sells with linux. Only you buy it with windows because it was cheaper (wtf why was it cheaper?). Then you download the latest ubuntu and put it on a usb stick. It fails to launch, so you google and find out you need to add kernel options in order for the install to work.
So you do that and now you can get it to launch, but it's so slow it's almost unusable. You struggle through that and finally get your install. Then you realize that even though you have 16GB of ram, for some reason it only made a 1gb swap partition and now you can't just close the notebook lid and come back to it later, because what you come back to is a kernel panic.
So now you start over and do a custom format to get the right sized swap partition. This time everything works but 3-4 times you get a kernel panic on resume and you don't know why. More research determines it's because your notebook has a nvidia/intel hybrid graphics and even though nvidia is disabled it's still loading a kernel mod that is causing this instability. So now you are in the terminal and you need to add kernel options that you worked for others until you find the one that works for you.
Now you finally have a working notebook and you think, "This is totally ready for my mom to use". I'll give her the ubuntu install media.
This is a flat out lie. Install chrome, uses GPU out of the box for rendering, same with Firefox which comes preinstalled on 90% of distros.
I have no idea why you're downloading and double-clicking .deb files. We've had package managers for a long time now. Your issue isn't that linux doesn't work well, it's that it doesn't work like you think it does. That speaks nothing to how well it works, and everything to difficult it is to teach people that microsoft's way isn't the best way to do things.
Maybe this needs to be said more bluntly, you can get all your facts right, but in the end nobody cares! Suzy in purchasing has and never will think about how best to do things with a computer. She wants to complete a task, the computer is a tool and the less time it spends in her way the happier she is.
Pretty much any average user can download and install linux, and do most of what they currently do in Windows out of the box.
You've never worked with any average users then. Average users are sketchy with downloading and installing browser extensions. You are NOT looking at the 95% of the user base here. Users don't give 1 second of thought to the process of I need an OS, and then a browser and my office productivity package before I can do what I want. When they walk up to a computer they will ask does it have internet, or can I use Word/Excel/Powerpoint on it. Many users will want Quickbooks or QuickTax. Even if they can get a techy friend to download and install linux for them as you describe, they aren't going to be able to do any of those out of the box except use internet(unless they get unlucky and even that needs some tweaking too). MS Office and the Quicken toolsets aren't available under Linux period. I know you may reply with OpenOffice, but users will reject that and demand the computer just be put back the way it was when it was working. Try moving users from MS Office 2010 to MS Office 2016 and listen to how many have problems adjusting and missing things they used to be able to find. You have NO idea what users need or are interested in trying to do for themselves.
It's sometimes rather baffling how disconnected from what users actually use their computers for the average slashdotter is.
Indeed. Users can just download Linux, install it, and use it out of the box. Yep, the disconnect is baffling.
Native games or through Steamplay with Proton? I'm primarily use my PS4 for games, but I have tried a couple of games through Steamplay: Star Trek Online and Fallout 3.
Here's a database of games tested with Proton, which ones do or do not work. The number of working games keeps increasing over time
https://www.protondb.com/
And here's the native Linux/SteamOS games page on Steam:
https://store.steampowered.com...
I have heard that Microsoft used the BSD stack for their networking. If so, msft must have worked overtime to make it suck. BSD has good networking IMO.
Workgroups, homegroups, only having selective versions of Windows that can join a domain. It's a mess, and getting worse.
Aside from that, in my experience, msft networking just does not reliably work. Copy a large number file from one box to another, and many of the files may get dropped; or it may crap out halfway through. There are ways to do this more reliably, but you should not have to use special hacks.
I was recently asked to help somebody move her files from an XP box, to a Windows 10 home version box. She wants the XP box set up so she can go through it, and copy what she wants where she wants. Should be nothing to it, but it's actually a pain. Put both versions of windows on a workgroup, have full admin privileges. But windows will not allow some directories to be shared. I am not the only person who has noticed this. Windows forums are filed with similar complaints.
Msft offers help pages on this sort of thing. But msft's documentation simply does not work. Msft instructs users to follow a particular procedure, but the OS will not allow it. Crap documentation for a crap OS.
I am not looking for help on this. Just posting my opinion.