this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
244 points (93.6% liked)
Technology
59377 readers
4098 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, between the telemetry data collection, the strange hardware requirements, advertisements, bloatware, and unknown future licensing model, Linux is looking like an attractive option. At this point, I only use Windows for Office and gaming, and Linux + Proton has gotten really good lately. I don't see a reason to use Windows on my personal machine any more.
We don't use the word "Spyware" like we did twenty years ago. It's baked into Windows now.
They could bring back BonziBuddy and nobody would bat an eye
Bonzi Buddy is called Cortana now.
This needs to be a “this is her now. Feel old yet?” meme.
At this point, Bonzibuddy is damn near benign compared to what we're dealing with now.
Linux is fine for people like you and me who are comfortable installing our own operating system, and trouble-shooting any problems. Most 'normal' people though will continue to walk into a store, buy a laptop, and use whatever came installed.
Of course, the year of Linux on the desktop actually happened some time ago without anyone noticing. It's called ChromeOS, and that's a whole different can of worms.
While true, how much troubleshooting does windows require? Because as I sometimes use windows, it's not that much less work to get it to do what you want it to do, or solve issues, than linux.
Especially since it feels like windows tries to fight you every step of the way.
When windows needs fixing, people take it to the best buy genius bar or whatever
Most distributions require little to no troubleshooting, and if they do, someone has probably already posted the solution online. It's pretty rare these days that you run into a problem that someone else hasn't and you're stuck figuring it out yourself.
The only pain point is trying to find the Linux equivalent of the Windows apps that you commonly use. Web browsers are the exact same, but that's about it. A fair amount of apps to offer Linux counterparts though.
A surprising amount
It depends on ehat youre trying to do. If you are teying to debloat it, of course you go out of your way, but it has the reverse problem for most drivers, where youre almost guaranteed to plug in an arbitrary USB device, and itll probably have drivers or software in the windows environment.
Linux is great. With the caveat that you specifically pick hardware that works well in Linux for it, else you have the problem of "a choice fighting you every step of the way"
Linux is easily fixed but the problem is that the issues that crop up needing to be fixed are generally not pain points on Windows. The first Arch install I did this year was busted and I thought I had broken my networking setup because it wouldn't connect, but the issue was that the system clock was wrong. Something like that may pop up in Windows but you can quickly press the sync time and date button in the settings and it'll sort itself out, while Arch requires a lot more work than just that, especially if it has no connectivity.
...I've certainly had that issue on windows as well. I had to manually set the time. Windows sync at least didn't use to always work.
I've been using Linux for like 15 years and Arch for about a decade. I've never had an issue where the system time prevents the network connection from working. That's odd.
It makes sense because all of our cryptography is based around time limits. If the system time is way off it can't verify the cryptographic signatures and it's not going to validate any certs since the time doesn't line up properly.
Once people get over the initial Windows indoctrination, Linux is simple to use and doesn't require tons of complex troubleshooting like people think. Before the COVID lockdown I tried for the Nth time to get my dad to use Linux. I had it installed and told him to stick with it for a few weeks (he only browses the web and plays solitaire). If he still didn't like it, I'd reenable Windows. Well that few weeks turned into 6 months. Now both he and my mom have been happy Linux users for about 2 years.
If I may ask, how do you deal with updates? Have you enabled unattended upgrades or do you update the machines yourself?
His dad just needs to put a password when asked. It's a 6-years-old kid task updating on most Linux distro.
That would be true if:
So, unless both of above are true, the dad will never (want to) update his system because "it works as is", sticking to old versions of software, never receiving bugfixes and neglecting security.
Most distro nowadays come with a gui to update. A pop up window appears asking if you want to update/upgrade. You can press "yes" and the password of the sudoer or admin user is asked. It has been like this for over a decade. For popular distros as Ubuntu or fedora over 15 years
Is it different for your distro?
He still doesn't care to.
Yes, probably because I stick with Arch and Slackware plus a lightweight environment. The only time I saw such a GUI was when I tried out Elementary just for fun.
What I consider a problem is that the user can simply dismiss or disregard the updates notification indefinitely. I know many non-tech-savvy people who do not understand the importance of updates, so they would be inclined to do exactly that. That is why unattended upgrades are probably a better option in such cases.
The process is so simple that there is no reason to not do it. My wife is non-tech person, I installed ubuntu on her laptop and she's very happy because it's faster than windows. I have never updated it for her. She does it. Only thing I have done is the upgrade to a new ubuntu release
You're a wise (wo)man. That is exactly the case. I've shown him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to because, like you said, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
His own password which makes it even simpler.
I'm not the guy you asked, and I hope he responds because I'd like to hear his answer too, but a lot of that depends on the Linux distro you select. On rolling releases you get continuous updates automatically, not major upgrades like forced Windows Updates.
I'm OP, he runs Manjaro and I handle the updates whenever I see him, every month or so (I live out of state). I could do it over SSH but if something happens to break, it's a pain to fix. I showed him how to do it in the GUI but he doesn't care to do it.
What do you mean, automatically? Arch is a rolling release and I have to explicitly run
pacmanwith the correct flags to update. At the same time Debian, which is not a rolling release, has the unattended upgrades feature which installs updates automatically.But indeed, many things depend on the distro. For example, user-centric distros such as Elementary and others provide an easy to use GUI for updating the system.
And yes, Windows Updates was (is still? not a Win user) a nightmare.
I was thinking Tumbleweed, Manjaro and the like which have GUI updaters, lol. @pete_the_cat@lemmy.world was pretty clear that his parents are the ultimate Linux beginners; he's not going to give them Arch or Debian out of the box and bark command lines at them.
I actually have given him Arch before, but I handled everything. They're running Manjaro.
I do it for them whenever I come over every month or two (I live out of state). I could also just SSH in and do it remotely if I really wanted to. I showed my dad how to do it with the GUI package manager, but he's the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" type. Linux will run perfectly fine without updates for years.
When people are talking about Linux Desktop they usually mean GNU/Linux. Chrome OS and Android both use the Linux kernel, but they aren't GNU/Linux like we understand Linux desktop.
GNU/Linux needs a company that will create a Macintosh equivalent. A company that will design quality hardware. Restrict the hardware they support tightly, but highly optimise the drivers in their devices. Selling their equipment with a distro that's well supported with bug testing and user support. Each update being tested on all their devices.
This would allow people to buy their devices without much thought.
I think people in the past thought this could be Ubuntu and Canonical. But their business is server, so there desktop will never get to the place it needs to be.
The steam deck is pushing Linux closer to this place. But I don't think it will be enough.
System76
PopOS?
To add to that, Android is likely the overwhelming market share of Linux-based operating systems in use today. For that matter, an absolute ton of Intel CPUs have Minux installed on them too, but I wouldn't call this "on the desktop", just interesting.
Until you realize that many orgs have software that only works on windows.
Its not a great situation
Storage is super cheap these days. Just buy an extra hard drive for Windows and boot into that on the rare occasion you truly need to use Windows. Or just use a VM.
I’ve worked as a SWE at Facebook, Google, and LinkedIn, and none of the devs I worked with used Windows. Everyone either used Mac or Linux. It’s just a matter of time before the dev world bleeds out into the consumer world.
We’re a Mac shop here, but almost everyone I know still runs windows on their desktops. The few who don’t are on MacBooks and don’t have desktops.
Linux is still a minority, even among developers
Edit: I should probably clarify I mean personal desktops, not work provided.
At LinkedIn everyone had a Linux desktop that matched the server environment. Very few people actually coded on their desktop though. Most of us used a MacBook then either tested on the desktop or tested on a dev server.
At Google, almost everyone used a MacBook or their Goobuntu desktop (Google’s custom version of Ubuntu). Basically everyone would remote into their desktop to write code. Some people used Windows and some used Chromebooks.
At Facebook, most used MacBooks, the rest were pretty evenly divided between Windows and Linux (on Thinkpads). Everyone had a Linux dev server in one of the data centers to test on.
At every one of these places, the production environment is 100% Linux, so eventually, everyone had to test their code on Linux (except mobile or desktop app developers).
Again, I never worked with anyone who used Windows, but I knew there were some people who did, cause they would stick out.
Should probably clarify that I meant their home PCs, not work provided ones. Our dev is all done on Mac and then we have remote Linux dev environments for testing if needed.
Windows for development is asinine, can definitely agree there. But for home computing it still isn’t taking over.
Corporations have access to a version of windows that doesn’t have telemetry, advertisements or bloatware. Its called Enterprise Edition.
That comes at a cost premium
Cost wasn’t mentioned in the original scope. OP was saying he hates the telemetry, ads, etc. and then you stated that companies have software that needs windows to run, to which I stated that there is a version that doesn’t have OPs concerns and runs custom apps that companies use.
The subscription rumor was debunked pretty quickly. I honestly don't see that happening anytime soon, PC makers would get pretty upset (especially if they don't get a cut of the revenue).
Do it. I only use Windows to play my heavily modded copy of Skyrim and now Starfield. Everything else has been Linux for years.