To be real Linux is far from ready to be an all in all viable alternative to windows.
The fact that it has a hundred desktops. An absence of major software like ms office. Adobe and autodesk suites, and not being able to avoid the command line when shit hits the fan. Will make users choose to purchase new hardware rather than make the jump.
I bet Linux will make a 2% after win 10 end of support.
Are you referring to distros? Just pick one that’s widely used and that’s it.
An absence of major software like ms office. Adobe and autodesk suites
You can use it online. Or, even better, use something like LibreOffice. For adobe and autodesk you’re SOL but that’s very intentional and it sucks. The only solution is a VM.
and not being able to avoid the command line when shit hits the fan.
I don’t really get this. You can’t avoid using cmd on windows either when shit goes wrong. There’s nothing strange there.
Despite your valid counterpoints, those are all still hurdles that will drive away general adoption, especially when there are people surviving digitally entirely off of a smart phone and tablet. We see similar complaints from people about simply picking a lemmy instance. How can we expect them to navigate the more complex landscape of distros?
I don’t mind it, it’s not a big hurdle for me, but it is undeniably a hurdle for the average person. They aren’t tech literate.
I also can’t remember the last time I had to use cmd or PowerShell to troubleshoot or configure stuff on my home Windows box (my primary desktop still). When I first customized the install media, and when I configured it post install. I was tearing out core components like Cortana search, and preinstalling updates to the iso. Not anything critical to actual usability.
The key settings are almost all available through the UI. All of the ads that make headlines are controlled by a single switch in the settings menu, which hasn’t been reset by updates like people keep saying it does.
You really only have to get into the guts for stuff like disabling web search, killing preinstalled apps, and the like.
I automate shit through PowerShell for a living (effectively). Cmd and PoSh are good for automating stuff, working on batches of stuff at once, and for interacting with certain stuff in Azure that you usually would never touch.
Oh no, I can’t interact with deleted mailboxes that are aging off behind the scenes without using PowerShell! That’s totally the same as Linux’s reliance on the terminal.
There are a few GUI programs that let you do that without ever having to interact with the cmd or run a script. + a lot of GUIs are self explanatory and come with a lot of guardrails to not let you mess with your system.
It really depends on your use-case, your criticism is valid though. In general it would be way better for new users to not learn about it as something that gets slapped onto a Windows machine, but on fair grounds for comparison (meaning on a machine from hardware vendors like System76, Tuxedo, Slimbook etc).
For Software it really is a hen-and-egg problem. Big companies won’t support Linux until enough people are there, and enough people won’t come until known software is available. This however changes gradually; The Software Store is receiving payment features in the future (almost any distro uses Flatpaks in the background), so there will be more viable paths to monetize your software product for companies. Meanwhile the amount of users rises more and more for years now thanks to 1. Valves push with SteamOS + Hardware and 2. India and China who got comparably high Linux userbases (I think in India it’s 13% of all desktop PCs).
So yeah, not there yet. But not “far from ready”, really. It just needs some software improvements that are in the works, and for the device vendors to become more known.
What most Linux advocates hate to admit is that the abundance of distributions discourages software makers from supporting Linux. Because then they will have to deal with bugs specific to each distribution, desktop environment, window manager, x.org or Wayland, and thousands of other variables. Imagine having to spin up a different virtual environment for each use case. It’s a nightmare that isn’t worth it for them.
I don’t think that’s the main problem, as on the inside (meaning backends) most things are rather standardized (ignoring legacy stuff) and any distro not adhering to those modern standards can be - purely from an economic aspect, NOT a nerd or enthusiast aspect - safely ignored. I do concur that choice paralysis indeed is a problem though.
The modern stack is pretty straight-forward: Flatpak and Snap for distribution, GTK4 (opt. with or without libadwaita) or Qt6 for the UI, Gnome and KDE to take care for proper integration, and stuff like Wayland, Pipewire and the XDG specs to focus on in technical aspects. All the documents necessary to work on fully functioning apps to publish via both Flatpak and Snap are there (not saying everything is perfect, just that it’s properly working). Distro-specific bugs will also be either prevented by the new sandboxing or are to be fixed by the distro in 99% of all cases, not the app author. What’s really missing right now is a way to sell it through those hubs.
Eventually there’ll be sufficient pressure on all sides so common technical necessities will be defined that distros will have to adhere to if they want to receive app support (which is very much possible given the sandboxing around Flatpaks and Snaps). Until then every company keeps freely defining what they support. Right now they usually go two or three big ones, namely Ubuntu, RHEL+Fedora and perhaps SteamOS. Some also go for OpenSuse, probably because they use SLES for their own machines.
Meanwhile commercially developed distros - meaning stuff like Pop!_OS (System76 devices), SlimbookOS (Slimbook devices), Tuxedo OS (Tuxedo Computers) - all use Flatpaks, and as they all integrate it as intended apps work on them as they do on any other distro that uses the modern stack. So customers don’t have to think too much about it.
tl;dr…
Don’t give new users too many options (avoids choice paralysis) but 1 or 2 modern ones or whatever a hardware vendor offers, and don’t expect developers to target distros that do not want to fully support either Flatpaks or Snaps. Then we’re already on a good way.
@Natanox@mtchristo
>Flatpak and Snap for distribution, GTK4 (opt. with or without libadwaita) or Qt6 for the UI, Gnome and KDE to take care for proper integration, and stuff like Wayland, Pipewire
I do not have anything of this in my system and will not install any app that requires to support all of this.
Flatpak even cannot work without namespaces (which is not enabled in kernel defconfig). If you want to make flatpak default option to distribute apps, first make sure it does not require enabling some (possibly insecure) kernel configurations and work on default kernel
Wayland (in current implementation) is error. Flatpak/snap is error.
Before all of this, all we need to make app work is some x11 libraries, so app can bundle it’s needed portable toolkit and run without any additional requirements. Now we cannot just provide wayland-client, because app cannot draw with it. It needs opengl, which needs many libraries, which… cannot be provided in compatible way, so you need container bullshit that runs other distro inside… only to run some graphical app that draws few buttons…
Really, i’ll prefer using windows, not this bullshit.
Now flatpak causes people ignoring new glibc compatibility bugs, so it soon will be impossible to build portable binary for glibc systems… Even now Portable Executable (windows exe) is most portable way to distribute software for linux, because wine gives compatibilty that glibc cannot (or jusn do not want). And sometimes wine even have less memory overhead than flatpak/snap
I do not have anything of this in my system and will not install any app that requires to support all of this.
What are you using, a potato? Any modern distro comes with those. Without GTK4 and Qt6 barely anything even runs, lol.
I mean, you can reject literally everything of this new technology stack, but that doesn’t change the fact it’s things are working now. If you stay with old tech don’t be surprised if things stop working though, the world will move even if you prefer to stand still. However if you want to be taken serious in your criticism please inform yourself on what you’re criticize. Neither Flatpak nor Snap run “another distro inside”. What you’re talking about is stuff like Docker or Distrobox. Those are neither the default on user systems nor should they be, only very few distros aimed at enthusiasts and professionals ship them by default.
There are also multiple ways to ship portable apps, the best known of them would be AppImage. That one simply isn’t recommendable due to a lack of maintenance and security issues (they simply don’t fix the libfuse2 issue).
It’s not like everything was great in ye’ olden days anyway. There literally are FOUR different backends for desktop notifications, Pulseaudio is a friggin’ trainwreck and don’t even get me started on Xorg configuration. Every desktop environment very much did their own thing and once you installed an app using f.e. GTK2 on a KDE3 system the whole thing looked like it recently insulted Mike Tyson since there was no proper config available / it lacked the icon theme / the font broke everything / it didn’t like your hairstyle. Likewise running older software more often than not was a real pain as they expected an environment with obsolete libraries etc.
Like it or not, Flatpak and Snap already are the standard. So is Wayland (and it works like a charm by now), and Pipewire is a god damn godsend after meddling with Pulseaudio all those years. And from a developer’s perspective it’s so nice to have a controllable environment to work with, i.e. Flatpak and Snap. Of those two only Snap generates huge overheads btw, it’s a known problem with Canonicals approach (one of many). Still, technology like that is what Linux needs for the future.
But hey, ultimately Linux gives you the choice. If you want to stay in your niche I hope it suits you well.
To be real Linux is far from ready to be an all in all viable alternative to windows.
The fact that it has a hundred desktops. An absence of major software like ms office. Adobe and autodesk suites, and not being able to avoid the command line when shit hits the fan. Will make users choose to purchase new hardware rather than make the jump.
I bet Linux will make a 2% after win 10 end of support.
Are you referring to distros? Just pick one that’s widely used and that’s it.
You can use it online. Or, even better, use something like LibreOffice. For adobe and autodesk you’re SOL but that’s very intentional and it sucks. The only solution is a VM.
I don’t really get this. You can’t avoid using cmd on windows either when shit goes wrong. There’s nothing strange there.
Despite your valid counterpoints, those are all still hurdles that will drive away general adoption, especially when there are people surviving digitally entirely off of a smart phone and tablet. We see similar complaints from people about simply picking a lemmy instance. How can we expect them to navigate the more complex landscape of distros?
I don’t mind it, it’s not a big hurdle for me, but it is undeniably a hurdle for the average person. They aren’t tech literate.
I also can’t remember the last time I had to use cmd or PowerShell to troubleshoot or configure stuff on my home Windows box (my primary desktop still). When I first customized the install media, and when I configured it post install. I was tearing out core components like Cortana search, and preinstalling updates to the iso. Not anything critical to actual usability.
The key settings are almost all available through the UI. All of the ads that make headlines are controlled by a single switch in the settings menu, which hasn’t been reset by updates like people keep saying it does.
You really only have to get into the guts for stuff like disabling web search, killing preinstalled apps, and the like.
I automate shit through PowerShell for a living (effectively). Cmd and PoSh are good for automating stuff, working on batches of stuff at once, and for interacting with certain stuff in Azure that you usually would never touch.
Oh no, I can’t interact with deleted mailboxes that are aging off behind the scenes without using PowerShell! That’s totally the same as Linux’s reliance on the terminal.
You can’t even use Windows without running some sort of cleanup script that stops half the crap on it.
There are a few GUI programs that let you do that without ever having to interact with the cmd or run a script. + a lot of GUIs are self explanatory and come with a lot of guardrails to not let you mess with your system.
It really depends on your use-case, your criticism is valid though. In general it would be way better for new users to not learn about it as something that gets slapped onto a Windows machine, but on fair grounds for comparison (meaning on a machine from hardware vendors like System76, Tuxedo, Slimbook etc).
For Software it really is a hen-and-egg problem. Big companies won’t support Linux until enough people are there, and enough people won’t come until known software is available. This however changes gradually; The Software Store is receiving payment features in the future (almost any distro uses Flatpaks in the background), so there will be more viable paths to monetize your software product for companies. Meanwhile the amount of users rises more and more for years now thanks to 1. Valves push with SteamOS + Hardware and 2. India and China who got comparably high Linux userbases (I think in India it’s 13% of all desktop PCs).
So yeah, not there yet. But not “far from ready”, really. It just needs some software improvements that are in the works, and for the device vendors to become more known.
What most Linux advocates hate to admit is that the abundance of distributions discourages software makers from supporting Linux. Because then they will have to deal with bugs specific to each distribution, desktop environment, window manager, x.org or Wayland, and thousands of other variables. Imagine having to spin up a different virtual environment for each use case. It’s a nightmare that isn’t worth it for them.
I don’t think that’s the main problem, as on the inside (meaning backends) most things are rather standardized (ignoring legacy stuff) and any distro not adhering to those modern standards can be - purely from an economic aspect, NOT a nerd or enthusiast aspect - safely ignored. I do concur that choice paralysis indeed is a problem though.
The modern stack is pretty straight-forward: Flatpak and Snap for distribution, GTK4 (opt. with or without libadwaita) or Qt6 for the UI, Gnome and KDE to take care for proper integration, and stuff like Wayland, Pipewire and the XDG specs to focus on in technical aspects. All the documents necessary to work on fully functioning apps to publish via both Flatpak and Snap are there (not saying everything is perfect, just that it’s properly working). Distro-specific bugs will also be either prevented by the new sandboxing or are to be fixed by the distro in 99% of all cases, not the app author. What’s really missing right now is a way to sell it through those hubs.
Eventually there’ll be sufficient pressure on all sides so common technical necessities will be defined that distros will have to adhere to if they want to receive app support (which is very much possible given the sandboxing around Flatpaks and Snaps). Until then every company keeps freely defining what they support. Right now they usually go two or three big ones, namely Ubuntu, RHEL+Fedora and perhaps SteamOS. Some also go for OpenSuse, probably because they use SLES for their own machines.
Meanwhile commercially developed distros - meaning stuff like Pop!_OS (System76 devices), SlimbookOS (Slimbook devices), Tuxedo OS (Tuxedo Computers) - all use Flatpaks, and as they all integrate it as intended apps work on them as they do on any other distro that uses the modern stack. So customers don’t have to think too much about it.
tl;dr… Don’t give new users too many options (avoids choice paralysis) but 1 or 2 modern ones or whatever a hardware vendor offers, and don’t expect developers to target distros that do not want to fully support either Flatpaks or Snaps. Then we’re already on a good way.
@Natanox @mtchristo
>Flatpak and Snap for distribution, GTK4 (opt. with or without libadwaita) or Qt6 for the UI, Gnome and KDE to take care for proper integration, and stuff like Wayland, Pipewire
I do not have anything of this in my system and will not install any app that requires to support all of this.
Flatpak even cannot work without namespaces (which is not enabled in kernel defconfig). If you want to make flatpak default option to distribute apps, first make sure it does not require enabling some (possibly insecure) kernel configurations and work on default kernel
Wayland (in current implementation) is error. Flatpak/snap is error.
Before all of this, all we need to make app work is some x11 libraries, so app can bundle it’s needed portable toolkit and run without any additional requirements. Now we cannot just provide wayland-client, because app cannot draw with it. It needs opengl, which needs many libraries, which… cannot be provided in compatible way, so you need container bullshit that runs other distro inside… only to run some graphical app that draws few buttons…
Really, i’ll prefer using windows, not this bullshit.
Now flatpak causes people ignoring new glibc compatibility bugs, so it soon will be impossible to build portable binary for glibc systems… Even now Portable Executable (windows exe) is most portable way to distribute software for linux, because wine gives compatibilty that glibc cannot (or jusn do not want). And sometimes wine even have less memory overhead than flatpak/snap
What are you using, a potato? Any modern distro comes with those. Without GTK4 and Qt6 barely anything even runs, lol.
I mean, you can reject literally everything of this new technology stack, but that doesn’t change the fact it’s things are working now. If you stay with old tech don’t be surprised if things stop working though, the world will move even if you prefer to stand still. However if you want to be taken serious in your criticism please inform yourself on what you’re criticize. Neither Flatpak nor Snap run “another distro inside”. What you’re talking about is stuff like Docker or Distrobox. Those are neither the default on user systems nor should they be, only very few distros aimed at enthusiasts and professionals ship them by default.
There are also multiple ways to ship portable apps, the best known of them would be AppImage. That one simply isn’t recommendable due to a lack of maintenance and security issues (they simply don’t fix the libfuse2 issue).
It’s not like everything was great in ye’ olden days anyway. There literally are FOUR different backends for desktop notifications, Pulseaudio is a friggin’ trainwreck and don’t even get me started on Xorg configuration. Every desktop environment very much did their own thing and once you installed an app using f.e. GTK2 on a KDE3 system the whole thing looked like it recently insulted Mike Tyson since there was no proper config available / it lacked the icon theme / the font broke everything / it didn’t like your hairstyle. Likewise running older software more often than not was a real pain as they expected an environment with obsolete libraries etc.
Like it or not, Flatpak and Snap already are the standard. So is Wayland (and it works like a charm by now), and Pipewire is a god damn godsend after meddling with Pulseaudio all those years. And from a developer’s perspective it’s so nice to have a controllable environment to work with, i.e. Flatpak and Snap. Of those two only Snap generates huge overheads btw, it’s a known problem with Canonicals approach (one of many). Still, technology like that is what Linux needs for the future.
But hey, ultimately Linux gives you the choice. If you want to stay in your niche I hope it suits you well.