Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

itvision.altervista.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 472 posts

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#151

Post by zahlman »

teruakohatu wrote: post #25
perihelions wrote: post #4

- "The vast majority of applications exist only for Windows, and speaking of games, Linux hasn't seen any AAA titles for many years now," The vast majority of AAA titles run seamlessly on Linux. Per protondb[0], ≥80% of the top 10, top 100, and top 1000 are rated "platinum" or "gold" for Linux functioning (by users). [0] https://www.protondb.com/

Wine/proton work so well at this point it may as well just be considered just another runtime environment (like Java or the .Net vm).

I'm seeing a lot of endorsement of Wine ITT, which is strange to me because the Linux Mint forums constantly seem to trash it whenever it comes up. (I'm not particularly interested in any programs that would need it.)

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#152

Post by misanthr0pe »

some people like Harleys because they feel cool and they feel like Brando and they don't mind taking their bike to a mechanic when it breaks down.

some people like BMWs because they are well engineered and relatively easy to fix if you don't mind reading a manual and getting your hands dirty.

neither is better or worse. it's just taste.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#153

Post by zahlman »

sys_64738 wrote: post #51
jmclnx wrote: post #32

When I see the articles I believe the title should be "Linux is not Windows so I do not like it". I have used Linux for just shy of 30 years. It is different than Windows and far more powerful. It is just that people do not want to learn different things. Plus Linux has no spyware. These days, you can do anything on Linux that you do on Windows, except for some 3d Gaming. And that is because hardware vendors refuse t…

> It is just that people do not want to learn different things The differences from Windows versions 7 to 10 to 11 are substantial. To me it seemed like a consistent desktop experience from Linux Mint is much better for those who do not want change at all.

Agreed. Going from Mint 20 to 22, the experience in Cinnamon (/ Muffin / LightDM / Nemo stack) is a ton more stable, and there's a lot more readily available customization that's a lot nicer to do overall (notwithstanding the bits that are hidden in a binary file designed for `dconf`).

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#154

Post by gfhfhjhf »

lyu07282 wrote: post #46
the__alchemist wrote: post #6

I've been patiently trying a distro of Linux every other year for the past 20... Someday. The general trend: Things work well from a native install. When you start installing software and drivers, the OS gets totalled , sooner or later. > What's worse is that software compiled for the current version of Linux X will not necessarily work for the current version of Linux Y. Linux distros insist that all the software mu…

Could you give examples for what bricked your system when you "start installing software and drivers" or when you were forced to compile C code as a user? Because this all sound so alien to me, I've been using Linux for over 20 years and everything has gotten so much smoother over the years that all this criticism feels completely ignorant to me.

Linux user here: there was an issue with systemd that could brick your system if you RM -rf / ... It would also delete your uefi volume....

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#155

Post by jakebasile »

perihelions wrote: post #4

- "The vast majority of applications exist only for Windows, and speaking of games, Linux hasn't seen any AAA titles for many years now," The vast majority of AAA titles run seamlessly on Linux. Per protondb[0], ≥80% of the top 10, top 100, and top 1000 are rated "platinum" or "gold" for Linux functioning (by users). [0] https://www.protondb.com/

I've only accidentally (via a GeForce Now trial before I gave Steam Remote Play another try) played a video game on a Windows computer in the past two years.

The only games that routinely cause problems are those with ridiculous kernel-level anticheat, and I am not interested in those games.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#156

Post by Koshkin »

How is it that Linux is ready for huge swaths of industrial applications and yet it somehow isn’t ready for the desktop? Personally, I have been enjoying “Linux on the desktop” for years now, and I find the distribution that I use exceedingly user-friendly (in its default configuration anyway); hell, it’s less confusing and annoying than Windows (not sure about how it compares with the recent versions of MacOS, an older one drove me crazy enough I wiped it out and installed Linux in its place); not to say anything about the trustworthiness…

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#157

Post by zahlman »

the__alchemist wrote: post #6

I've been patiently trying a distro of Linux every other year for the past 20... Someday. The general trend: Things work well from a native install. When you start installing software and drivers, the OS gets totalled , sooner or later. > What's worse is that software compiled for the current version of Linux X will not necessarily work for the current version of Linux Y. Linux distros insist that all the software mu…

> Forcing a user to compile C code is a bad user experience; it often fails due to linking or other dependency-related errors.

I've had no failures building major projects like CPython (multiple versions) as long as I RTFM and ensure that clearly identified build dependencies are installed first.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#158

Post by em-bee »

scarface_74 wrote: post #135
pr337h4m wrote: post #88

The main reason why Linux on the desktop has never gone mainstream is that it is extremely difficult to find a good laptop that comes with Linux preinstalled, where the OEM is responsible for ensuring a seamless experience, as any bugs in WiFi, audio, drivers, peripherals, etc. is the OEM's responsibility, not the consumer's. 99% of computer users will never consider replacing the operating system that came installed…

The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons? I was forced to use Windows for a year as a developer. I threw WSL2 on it and it was fine . I installed Docker desktop for Windows and it worked fine for Linux. But especially on the Mac, while I have to download updated commands, it is genuinely certified UNIX. On both Macs and Windows I also ge…

The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons?

it's free.

it's stable.

it's easier to use.

it doesn't have adds.

it uses less resources.

it runs on older hardware.

it doesn't contain spyware.

it doesn't violate my privacy.

it includes more powerful features.

it offers more alternatives for the GUI.

i can trust it because the kernel has been audited.

it is way easier to configure to my personal preferences.

it allows me to replace or remove any application that i don't like.

Mac [...] is genuinely certified UNIX

why should any normal person care about that? UNIX is dead. Linux would be a genuinely certified UNIX if anyone would bother to pay for the certification. in fact, at some point someone did: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/293396/is-there-a-l...

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#159

Post by IgorPartola »

ryao wrote: post #147
IgorPartola wrote: post #57

The main criticism I see as valid here is first point: software distribution is tricky. For macOS and Windows you basically have a model where you can go to a website, download a binary, install it, and it runs. Most Linux distros won’t jive with that very well. And because every Linux distro uses a different theme and one of a dozen UI libraries/DEs/etc. the downloaded GUI application will look bad because it won’t…

The “go to a website, download a binary, install it, and it runs” model has significant security issues. The security issues are twofold. One is that you could easily be tricked into installing malware. Two is that you will never be able to keep up with security updates, leaving yourself vulnerable to being compromised by flaws in network applications. Making that model of software distribution difficult is a feature…

I fully understand that. And yet until you can convince Debian to include a copy of Adobe Photoshop in their repository you will cut off a significant amount of desktop users. How do you propose to solve that problem?

(Yes of course the solution is to fund Gimp until it’s better than Photoshop by so much that the industry switches. It was the solution 20 years ago too. Adobe has run away with this market. Photoshop is but one of many applications desktop users need.)

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#160

Post by IgorPartola »

Karellen wrote: post #112
IgorPartola wrote: post #57

The main criticism I see as valid here is first point: software distribution is tricky. For macOS and Windows you basically have a model where you can go to a website, download a binary, install it, and it runs. Most Linux distros won’t jive with that very well. And because every Linux distro uses a different theme and one of a dozen UI libraries/DEs/etc. the downloaded GUI application will look bad because it won’t…

> And because every Linux distro uses a different theme and one of a dozen UI libraries/DEs/etc. the downloaded GUI application will look bad because it won’t fit in. Most apps/DEs/etc. use either GTK or Qt. If your application uses GTK or Qt, it will use the user's preferred GTK/Qt theme by default, and fit in with all the other GTK/Qt apps on their system. Sure, you might get unlucky, and your GTK app won't look gr…

So the world consists of apps like Slack, and Photoshop, and Final Cut Pro and none of them are written in Qt or GTK or any of the other libraries you mention. Any one of those applications has more installs than Debian on a desktop (this is an educated guesstimate).
Post reply on HN