There are rather userfriendly distros like Fedora, Mint which out of the box are just as usable as any windows installation. The only reason i can think of why you might think linux is more complicated is because you have prior experience with windows and would need to re-learn how todo things. But i dont see any user without such notions to describe the linux experience as more complicated.
What issues are you talking about. Could you provide one or two examples?
doesn’t have NEARLY the amount of software supported
because linux is currently undergoing a unification of software with flatpaks … so the amount directly supported software is very quickly increasing like nothing before
It’s still a nightmare to install new software.
Almost all distros have graphical software installers now … so i can’t really agree with you, sorry.
Linux itself is incompatible with the basic user function … People want it to be extremely easy, extremely simple, and easy to find.
Every desktop main menu has a search function … so finding stuff is as easy as never before.
What an utterly meaningless statement.
I’d say meaningless is the wrong word … i think you wanted to say “obvious” … which i agree. It’s just that some people seem to forget and i got into the habit of reminding them.
Why? Because it’s unnecessarily complicated for basic daily use.
Still sounds to me like you might be mixing your preconceptions and maybe old experiences
There’s a reason that Microsoft and Apple dominate the home computer market and it’s simply due to ease of use.
I’d say its mostly because of clever marketing and having their stuff pre-installed and the average user not knowing about alternatives … but i wont say that they didn’t learn maintain a reasonable easy to use UI for their systems, especially since the insentive for profit is pretty high.
simply to move a folder from one location to another. The fact that Distros have had to build in this feature much later and a decade after the fact is utterly insane.
Now this sounds like you havent used any linux distro in a very long time … but maybe i am just misunderstanding you and you are meaning something more specific, which i can’t really make out, sorry.
Y’all can have fun using an abacus but I’ll stick with a calculator thats simple, easy, clean, and user friendly.
Obviously you can do as you like, i just wanted to better understand your perspectiv on this matter. And i think i already have a better understanding but … i think i am still missing some parts.
Here’s me then conceding to the fact that Linux is much harder to use than Windows - when anything goes wrong. Most people can barely even use windows properly, so no, Linux is out of the question for the majority unless they only ever use a web browser.
For people like me however, Linux IS easier to use, which is why the same type of people easily fall into the trap of assuming everyone can be like them.
Chrome OS is literally built on the Linux kernel and you’re saying it’s simpler lmao. It overtook because Google created their own entire class of laptop devices undercutting the price of most entry level options, preinstalled with ChromeOS.
More steps to get anything done is not correct, the entire reason I use Linux at work is because it takes less steps to get things done than Windows.
Installing Firefox on windows:
Open browser
Search for Firefox
Click result
Find and click download button
Click .exe
Click yes on security dialog
Click next a bunch of times (I’ll be fair and make this a single step)
Launch
On Linux (assuming it isn’t installed by default on your distro):
Open terminal
sudo apt install Firefox
type ‘y’
Launch
At least double the amount of steps if you don’t include launching the browser. You’re talking absolute shit saying it’s ‘simple fact’ when I could give many other examples that objectively prove your statement false.
Is it more difficult to use for the average user? Sure. Is it more difficult for everyone? No.
That’s not the point (which is also subjective; if you are a Linux developer or uses Linux software at work it’s much harder to use Window). They implied that Linux doesn’t let you install proprietary software, which is not true and shows they don’t understand how software works. Windows software requires proprietary software from Microsoft to run. You can’t run Windows software on Linux because those components are proprietary to Microsoft and are not available for Linux, although Wine tries to reverse engineer them.
Which is all irrelevant to original point and doesn’t change how factual my comment is. Should we start replying to comments making any factual point now?
deleted by creator
There are rather userfriendly distros like Fedora, Mint which out of the box are just as usable as any windows installation. The only reason i can think of why you might think linux is more complicated is because you have prior experience with windows and would need to re-learn how todo things. But i dont see any user without such notions to describe the linux experience as more complicated.
deleted by creator
What issues are you talking about. Could you provide one or two examples?
because linux is currently undergoing a unification of software with flatpaks … so the amount directly supported software is very quickly increasing like nothing before
Almost all distros have graphical software installers now … so i can’t really agree with you, sorry.
Every desktop main menu has a search function … so finding stuff is as easy as never before.
I’d say meaningless is the wrong word … i think you wanted to say “obvious” … which i agree. It’s just that some people seem to forget and i got into the habit of reminding them.
Still sounds to me like you might be mixing your preconceptions and maybe old experiences
I’d say its mostly because of clever marketing and having their stuff pre-installed and the average user not knowing about alternatives … but i wont say that they didn’t learn maintain a reasonable easy to use UI for their systems, especially since the insentive for profit is pretty high.
Now this sounds like you havent used any linux distro in a very long time … but maybe i am just misunderstanding you and you are meaning something more specific, which i can’t really make out, sorry.
Obviously you can do as you like, i just wanted to better understand your perspectiv on this matter. And i think i already have a better understanding but … i think i am still missing some parts.
Thanks for the nice discussion so far.
deleted by creator
Here’s me then conceding to the fact that Linux is much harder to use than Windows - when anything goes wrong. Most people can barely even use windows properly, so no, Linux is out of the question for the majority unless they only ever use a web browser.
For people like me however, Linux IS easier to use, which is why the same type of people easily fall into the trap of assuming everyone can be like them.
deleted by creator
Chrome OS is literally built on the Linux kernel and you’re saying it’s simpler lmao. It overtook because Google created their own entire class of laptop devices undercutting the price of most entry level options, preinstalled with ChromeOS.
More steps to get anything done is not correct, the entire reason I use Linux at work is because it takes less steps to get things done than Windows.
Installing Firefox on windows:
Open browser
Search for Firefox
Click result
Find and click download button
Click .exe
Click yes on security dialog
Click next a bunch of times (I’ll be fair and make this a single step)
Launch
On Linux (assuming it isn’t installed by default on your distro):
Open terminal
sudo apt install Firefox
type ‘y’
Launch
At least double the amount of steps if you don’t include launching the browser. You’re talking absolute shit saying it’s ‘simple fact’ when I could give many other examples that objectively prove your statement false.
Is it more difficult to use for the average user? Sure. Is it more difficult for everyone? No.
deleted by creator
That’s not the point (which is also subjective; if you are a Linux developer or uses Linux software at work it’s much harder to use Window). They implied that Linux doesn’t let you install proprietary software, which is not true and shows they don’t understand how software works. Windows software requires proprietary software from Microsoft to run. You can’t run Windows software on Linux because those components are proprietary to Microsoft and are not available for Linux, although Wine tries to reverse engineer them.
deleted by creator
Which is all irrelevant to original point and doesn’t change how factual my comment is. Should we start replying to comments making any factual point now?