Why Linux remains unpopular?

[Asking4Id]

Eh, not much of a cause behind it. Just look at how many games are available for Windows and you can see how people will prefer it to Linux (even though Linux can also run a lot of stuff).

[LouigiVerona]

Because ultimately Linux is an operating system for tinkering with technology. It's a hobbyist paradise, with some exceptions (server-ware and such). If you want to get things done, a lot of it is simply unavailable on Linux. And I am speaking of professional and semi-professional software, be it music production, video production, image editing, sound editing, game frameworks, architecture suits, and so on, so on, so on.

 

While there are some programs that can sort of do the job, the commercial world is moving forward much faster than any hobbyist open source projects. Therefore, Linux is destined to always be catching up.

 

That's not necessarily bad. I am a Linux user of 10+ years. If you know what you are getting into, and if you take advantage of WINE and cross-platform packages, you might actually find the setup that will work for you. But other than that - I doubt there will ever be a year of Linux on desktop.

[UncleTito]

@Murdoch I downgraded to 7 even though my laptop came preinstalled with 10 solely because 10 reminded me of the unholy bastard child that was 8. 

[wallabra]

Linux runs most of the good Windows games, with decent compatibility most of the time, thanks to Wine. It runs Unreal Tournament almost as good as native! So to me it's game.

[Kronecker–Capelli]

Just a funny picture WHICH DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY TRUTH IN ANY FORM. If we talking only about Linux, of course.

[wallabra]

Windows XP start menu button: cwick me daddy owo

[Gez]

I like that the Internet icon is a little grim reaper figure.

 

At least, that's how I decided to see it.

[Murdoch]

1 hour ago, UncleTito said:

@Murdoch I downgraded to 7 even though my laptop came preinstalled with 10 solely because 10 reminded me of the unholy bastard child that was 8. 

 

Oh yes, 8 was a bastard. Even I got confused by that thing at times. When 8 was still a thing, regardless of why it was bought in I would offer to install classic shell for people to make it more like Windows 7, plus tweak a few file associations so you almost never saw the so called "Modern UI". I think I was turned down maybe 5 - 6 times total. Everyone else was like "Dear Jesus, do it."

[Doomkid]

If you just like to slap your keyboard, play video games, watch YouTube and send e-mails (if you're 100) then Windows has all you need. This covers a solid 90% of the market.

 

If you have too much money and don't know how to spend it, Apple has you covered.

 

If you actually want to get serious - that's where Linux steps in. Every time I see a Doom server cluster running on any non-Linux OS, it's a laggy, unplayable hunk of crap.

 

Quote

In the area of desktop and laptop computers, Microsoft Windows is generally above 70% in most markets and at 77% globally, Apple's macOS at around 13%, Google's ChromeOS at about 6% (in the US) and Linux at around 2%. All these figures vary somewhat in different markets, and depending on how they are gathered.

For public Internet servers, Linux is generally counted as dominant, powering about twice the number of hosts as Windows Server – which is trailed by many smaller players including traditional mainframe OSes.

The supercomputer field is completely dominated by Linux – with 100% of the TOP500 now running on this OS.

[Murdoch]

3 hours ago, Doomkid said:

 

If you have too much money and don't know how to spend it, Apple has you covered.

 

Lol yup. Hate working on Macs with a violent passion. Those new iMacs especially are essentially unfixable.

[ketmar]

i wonder why this (OP question) even matters. if you want to use proprietary software, go with windows/macos. if you want to invest your time into learning the system, and don't want to pay, use GNU/Linux. all those systems are popular among their respective users. but those systems have different idiologies, and therefore different target audiences. trying to make a thing "popular" at a wrong target audience won't do anything good.

 

p.s.: but apple sux! ;-)

[Graf Zahl]

58 minutes ago, ketmar said:

 but those systems have different idiologies, and therefore different target audiences. trying to make a thing "popular" at a wrong target audience won't do anything good.

 

See, and that *is* the problem with Linux! Why does it even *need* an ideology? All it needs to be is a good OS for the desktop - not getting mired in this stuff - what I previously called turf wars. Why do I always get the feeling that if I invest in Linux I have to live and breathe this free software ideology or be branded an outcast?

 

Best case in point: NVidia's graphics drivers. No, they do not want to reveal their trade secrets, as is their goddamn right, but that seems to be an unacceptable proposition for the Linux opinion makers who seem to be intent on not compromising to make it as hard as possible for such software to exist.

 

No wonder it's not gaining traction, because that's a first grade turn-off for commercial developers.

 

 

[Slipgate Tourist]

I would love to get rid of the garbage that is Windows 10 (privacy nightmare, horrible design, adverts,...) but I enjoy gaming so it's a necessary evil to keep it installed on my gaming PC.

 

I installed Mint on an old laptop recently and I'm pretty happy with it. It runs much smoother than before (came with W8 pre-installed) and it's perfect for what I use it for which is mainly undemanding stuff like watching movies, listening to music and such.

Edited February 17, 2020 by Slipgate Tourist

[Cacodemon345]

In Windows, I could just use the GUI interface to add/change/delete env vars. In Linux, you need to dig the init scripts for that, one of the another issues.

 

BTW, I found this: https://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html (read the disclaimer first, some are true, some are half-true and some are outright false; this is not to spread FUDs/propaganda/whatever and the text colors should be noted as well).

[ketmar]

2 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

See, and that *is* the problem with Linux!

absolutely not a problem: GNU/Linux does exactly what we (devs and its users) wanted it to do. problems suddenly appears when people from other camps came to GNU/Linux and start telling us how we should shape our OS so they could like it. like if we care at all. we want free and open source OS, and free and open source apps, so we can build what we like. and we have it. the last thing i want is "free windows", because windows is absolutely unusable for me.

 

but most people want "free windows", not GNU/Linux. and some idiots from GNU/Linux camp keep telling people that they'll get "free windows" after the switch. of course, this is not the case, and people become frustrated. the trick is that people who can create "free windows" aren't interested in windows, they're creating the system they want. and others should just stop telling people that "linux is just like windows, only it is free". GNU/Linux is different. and yes, ideology's playing a huge role in that difference. we don't want some corporation to control our system, we don't want software we cannot inspect and change. and we're happy with what we built. just don't tell us how we should turn our system into windows "to be successful", we aren't interested in such "success".

[Gez]

2 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

See, and that *is* the problem with Linux! Why does it even *need* an ideology? All it needs to be is a good OS for the desktop - not getting mired in this stuff - what I previously called turf wars. Why do I always get the feeling that if I invest in Linux I have to live and breathe this free software ideology or be branded an outcast?

See also: the origin of KDE.

 

Back when I was actually involved in the whole GNU/Linux stuff (early 2000s, KDE 2 was brand new and KDevelop had just appeared), people hated KDE because it was "tainted" by the non-free QPL, but also because its goal back then of being an easy-to-use, consistent desktop environment displeased the POSIX terminal crowd. "Why make bloated desktop applications with redundant features when you can just pipe two dozen terminal applications into each others?"

[ketmar]

31 minutes ago, Gez said:

because its goal back then of being an easy-to-use, consistent desktop environment

sadly, KDE team didn't stopped at that point. i mean, KDE3 was last usable KDE version...

[Graf Zahl]

1 hour ago, ketmar said:

absolutely not a problem: GNU/Linux does exactly what we (devs and its users) wanted it to do. problems suddenly appears when people from other camps came to GNU/Linux and start telling us how we should shape our OS so they could like it. like if we care at all. we want free and open source OS, and free and open source apps, so we can build what we like. and we have it. the last thing i want is "free windows", because windows is absolutely unusable for me.

 

And thus you basically confirm that the current crop of Linux users is the biggest obstacle for building a mass-market compatible desktop OS on top of it.

 

 

 

 

 

[ketmar]

11 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

And thus you basically confirm that the current crop of Linux users is the biggest obstacle for building a mass-market compatible desktop OS on top of it.

i even wrote this in clear text! somebody want *nix-compatible desktop OS? go on. but don't expect us to help there, we created GNU/Linux for our own purposes, not for making some money bags happy. we're not going to take away other people's toys, and we won't throw away our own. tl;dr: "a mass-market compatible desktop OS" is something we can't care less.

Edited February 18, 2020 by ketmar : typo

[seed]

17 hours ago, Gez said:

See also: the origin of KDE.

 

Back when I was actually involved in the whole GNU/Linux stuff (early 2000s, KDE 2 was brand new and KDevelop had just appeared), people hated KDE because it was "tainted" by the non-free QPL, but also because its goal back then of being an easy-to-use, consistent desktop environment displeased the POSIX terminal crowd. "Why make bloated desktop applications with redundant features when you can just pipe two dozen terminal applications into each others?"

 

... aaaaand that's exactly what I find off-putting in Linux... I mean yeah sure, I don't mind doing it every now and then when needed (Windows also has Command Prompt and PowerShell after all, and they both have their use), but if I need to conjure the thing every time I want to configure, install, or uninstall something... I would rather not.

 

I find GUIs indispensable in this age. No wonder Linux has such a baffling market share, even compared to macOS, and is only really used by geeks. And with the apparent outright refusal of some of its users to make the platform more accessible/noob friendly/inviting, this should be of absolutely no surprise to anyone - but some of its users actually do seem to like things staying that way.

 

Graf described it pretty well - an OS made by, and for, hobbyists, and it serves that purpose just fine. It will never be mainstream or see wide adoption, not with this philosophy and mindset in place. If it ever dreams to get there, it will either have to be a commercial product/distro, or its maintainers get their heads out from their asses so that what it absolutely needs for such adoption gets added, but none of them are likely.

 

And for whoever wants to say this, no, I don't hate Linux - if I did, I would've never, ever considered dual-booting in the first place, it's the gate-keeping that bothers me.

Edited February 18, 2020 by seed

[Cacodemon345]

http://web.mit.edu/simsong/www/ugh.pdf

Quite a bit of problems highlighted in this book continues to apply to modern-day Linux. The book is outdated, however.

[Matthias]

I use Linux Mint on my notebooks mostly and recently I decided to move from Win 10 to Linux Mint also on my main desktop. And my feelings are mixed.

 

Some things are much better than Windows and I love them - especially how Terminal works.

But in some way I felt disappointed.

 

I had many technical problems with Linux. For example after isntalling updates, it won't let me to sign in and sign in dialogue was stuck in endless loop. I googled for solution and tried some and one worked! Yeey! But it happen later again and suddenly it didn't work anymore and I need to try many different things.

Also I made 50 GB partition for /root and people from Linux community said to me it's enough, but system told me repeatedly "Not enough space!" and I deleted many things and it happeed again soon:(

 

Many things didn't work, or work partially or work only sometimes. For example - OBS studio (sometimes), Sony Vegas (not at all), DaVinci Resolve (didn't work first, then after installing OpenCL, it was possible to launch, but it won't show videos anyway).

 

Eventually it was very frustrating and I hate to ask on forums every day about everything.

 

I returned to Win 10 which I also totally hate.

 

Geez I hate technology. I should go to the monstarey and live without it :D Why am I IT guy anyway? What was I thinking?!

[seed]

Nah, if you spent your life on a different platform, switching now to another is going to be very difficult. I think it's only natural to have so many issues at first.

 

I'd have a similar experience, but now I definitely can't afford that level of hardcore frustration and non-stop trial-and-error in addition to constantly trying to troubleshoot and ask unreasonable amounts of questions online for help... it will not be fun at all :(. Amplify your experience tenfold and that would be the BEST CASE SCENARIO for me.

 

Meh, at least I actually like Windoze *shrugs*, but I wanted to try out something else, even if only to break the monotony. I'm getting bored of Android too for reference, but if time was of the essence in the case of Linux, money is another blocker here, and one I have no way around.

Edited February 18, 2020 by seed

[Graf Zahl]

The difficulty of switching operating systems is often exaggerated.

What really hurts is if the platform you switch to is missing the software you need.

 

What annoys me most about my work Mac is that for several of the tools I use on Windows there is no good equivalent - and in many cases, if there is one, it costs more money than it is worth.

With Linux the problems are different but they are there - and they get compounded by Linux being full of people who have zero interest in making it a nice place to hang out.

So I stick with Windows - because the alternatives are even worse.

[seed]

1 minute ago, Graf Zahl said:

The difficulty of switching operating systems is often exaggerated.

 

*laughs in endless Terminal commands*

[ketmar]

46 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

Linux being full of people who have zero interest in making it a nice place to hang out

we do have such interest. but this is you who came to us, not vice versa. so we have some habits here, and we like them. why should we change our habits to be more "welcoming"? what if i'll come to your house and will start telling you how you should do the things from now on, so i could stay? i am pretty sure that you'll kick me out of the door really fast. ;-)

[Hypnotik]

I beg to differ. I've met a bunch of Doomers that frag on Linux.

Alot of people in the Quake community like Linux too.

Open-source is practical.

[Graf Zahl]

 

10 hours ago, ketmar said:

what if i'll come to your house and will start telling you how you should do the things from now on, so i could stay? i am pretty sure that you'll kick me out of the door really fast. ;-)

 

I don't know how deeply you are personally involved with Linux development, but let me tell you one thing:

With this kind of boneheaded make-no-compromise attitude - my way or the highway - you are playing directly into the hands of big corporations like Microsoft and Apple. Any product that's merely supposed to fulfill the petty needs of its creators and maintainers is a failure by default, and such is Linux on the desktop right now.

 

What we really need these days is a desktop OS that isn't owned by a big corporation, but at the same time mass market compatible. We need to take this power away from Microsoft, Google and Apple - especially the latter who are intent on controlling everything their users do. Thanks to your kind's narrow-minded attitude this isn't going to happen, because the fight for technicalities occupies the entire FOSS development sphere. What a pity.

 

Isn't it ironic that the most rabid and most fundamental open-sourcers are the biggest enemy of progress here?

 

[ketmar]

13 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

Any product that's merely supposed to fulfill the petty needs of its creators and maintainers is a failure by default

that's why i never though about GNU/Linux as a "product".

 

13 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

What we really need these days is a desktop OS that isn't owned by a big corporation

i already have this...

 

13 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

but at the same time mass market compatible

...and i can't care less about this.

 

13 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

Thanks to your kind's narrow-minded attitude this isn't going to happen

where's my money? oh, i see, i should do for free something that i don't even need... nope. no wai. it doesn't work.

 

if people want something, they should either DIY, or crowdfund it. if not, i can't see why anybody should do things they aren't interested into. especially considering enormous efforts required to build "mass-marked compatible desktop OS". GNU/Linux is not free windows, and will never be. and we aren't interested in creating "free windows".

[Graf Zahl]

You still don't understand. Nobody expects *YOU* to do such a project - just not stand in the way. Because that's the real issue: All these cock fights about what is right and what is wrong, standing in the way of other parties' interests (like the entire NVidia driver dilemma) and generally creating an atmosphere where interested parties just dismiss the entire thing as a hopeless cause that's better left alone to rot.

 

Ultimately this would require some serious investment, and I'm sure that there's sufficient interest worldwide to make it happen - if there wasn't that problem that it'd mean working with people that are even less pleasant to deal with than Microsoft. If that's your cause: Mission accomplished! I still call it utterly egotistical.