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.
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 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.
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 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.
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.
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.