Why I think Linus has had such a hard time moving to GNU+Linux, My story of moving to Linux, And how I think you should approach switching to Linux

[RedderThanMisty]

From the content that I've seen so far (Mainly just WAN show VOD's because Linux_challenge_pt1 isn't on youtube yet), I think that the main reason why Linus has had such a hard time using Linux, let alone using it as a daily driver, is because just like me a few years ago, he was woefully unprepared. My guess is that he came into this challenge expecting it to be a sort of drop-in replacement for windows (and probably forgot to take that pinch of salt from enthusiasts that keep saying that Linux is the greatest platform there is and will ever be), similar to switching from a diesel car to an electric one now that enough R&D has been put into the technology to make it a compelling product. Linux is not that. Much like MacOS, Android_x86, BSD, or even TempleOS, Linux is it's own platform that has it's own unique design and development philosophies to achieve different goals. And using or switching to it should be treated akin to switching to PC from a console for the first time or learning to fly a plane or sail a boat when you only know about cars. Sure, some limited knowledge is transferable, like 'engine is on so vehicle move forward' but beyond that, there are completely different variables to take into account when using the new platform. Generally, when moving to a more open platform, there often isn't a unified support structure where you can ask for support, like there is when your xbox gets a red ring of death. Instead, much like Linus said he experienced on the latest wan show, you have to sift through forum threads that are either contradictory, years old, or for different distros entirely, or god forbid if none of those are an option, have the know how to implement your own fix.

 

Now, for the story on how I made the very gradual switch. The first time that I tried moving to Linux was in 2015 when I got frustrated of the 'activate windows' watermark, that appeared over every app no matter what, and decided to give Linux a try to get rid of that. I'll admit, I made many of the same mistakes, if not worse mistakes, than Linus did which nearly put me off linux as a whole and probably would've done for many others. I too thought that Linux would be a drop-in solution to what I already knew and was comfortable with. Boy was I wrong. The first Distro that 13-Year-old me used was SteamOS (Yes, the same SteamOS that came with the Steam Machines). Even though this was long before proton was a thing and the game library for Linux was abysmal at best. At the time, I still figured it was a good option as it seemed at the time, that Linux, the platform that was dwarfed by anything else, was finally getting proper backing and would soon (naive child me figured only a few months) be an equal match to windows. After quickly realizing the reality of using, let alone gaming on Linux at the time, I promptly re-installed windows within a week. About a year later, when I built my first PC, I decided to give Linux another go, and after about an hour of research, decided to install Ubuntu 16.10 as it looked like the most common distro. I definitely lasted a little longer this time, but eventually gave up after about a month because I didn't understand or had time to learn how to use the command line or even the gnome ux properly (I had games to play dammit!). It was a few years later, towards the end of high school, when I finally gave Linux a proper chance and installed Ubuntu 19.04, It definitely took me a while to get the hang of using it, and I spent most of my time in the first few weeks just learning about the command line, various tools included, and general troubleshooting with specific hardware and peripherals (it took me 2 days just to find some drivers for my mx master). I even managed to solve my problem with windows only software and games by watching a few tutorials on setting up a kvm virtual machine, Something that LTT Covered themselves a few years ago with level1Techs. That was the point where I had no reason to go back to windows on my bare hardware. I just booted into Linux by default and if I needed anything done that either I didn't know how to do in Linux, or could only be done in windows, I could quickly spin up a vm, do the task and return to normal Linux use without much of a hassle. Using this method, I took my time to learn the intricacies of Linux at my own pace, without worrying about needing specific software working immediately for school or work or gaming. Now, a few years after that, I'm used to Linux in the same way I was used to windows and simple tasks that would've stumped me when I was starting out are now second nature.

 

So how would I suggest approaching Linux? By not making the same mistakes that I did. And understand that Linux is not windows, nor will it ever be. Take your time to learn it at your own pace, whether it takes weeks, months or years. Start by using Open source alternatives to software you use that won't run on Linux (e.g Instead of Photoshop, learn GIMP. Instead of premier, Learn kdenlive etc.) Once you're used to the software that CAN run on Linux, move onto loading a stable Linux distro such as Pop-OS or Ubuntu onto a virtual machine like Oracle or VMware where you can't break anything permanently, and spend time learning how to use them (General use will include; Command Line syntax, Updating your system, Using package managers like apt to install software, If you want to know more about a terminal app such as it's various commands then use (man [x]) where [x] is the name of the app). Once you feel confident that you can use Linux as a daily driver, Install it and don't be afraid to ask for help if you can't find a solution online from somebody that had the same problem and just ignore any toxicity that you may receive because it will be present, just as in any community.

[Tamesh16]

1 minute ago, RedderThanMisty said:

Open source alternatives to software you use that won't run on Linux

But like Linus mentions, this process is to test for the average user. I know how to use photoshop, so moving to another OS then learning another program is tedious. The same applies for games, we play games based on preference and as such finding out a game is not compatible like Minecraft Dungeons as linus mentioned. I think though the main idea Linus is conveying is Linux is not as easy to use as everyone says, it takes some getting use to and also has problems just like windows. 

I am glad they are going through this process though, I have always wanted to see what the benefits and road to use Linux would be like so I am glad they are making this, especially from 2 perspectives.

[tikker]

10 minutes ago, RedderThanMisty said:

Start by using Open source alternatives to software you use that won't run on Linux (e.g Instead of Photoshop, learn GIMP. Instead of premier, Learn kdenlive etc.)

I haven't followed their challenge closely, so this may be not completely relevant. Sure there are many open source variants that work well, but one major reason I foresee this being a difficult point is that companies perhaps aren't just looking for your skill as an editor. They may specifically be looking for experience with industry standards such as Adobe's stuff.

 

Also, as great as alternatives can be, they never quite cut it for me. There are always some oddities, quirks or things that they can't do for some reason (even simple ones sometimes). The standards undoubtedly have their quirks as well, but things like that do remind me why the standards are the standards sometimes.

[RedderThanMisty]

4 minutes ago, tikker said:

one major reason I foresee this being a difficult point is that companies perhaps aren't just looking for your skill as an editor. They may specifically be looking for experience with industry standards such as Adobe's stuff.

Yeah, I agree, which is a shame, but the only solution I have had for those situations is to keep either a small windows partition or virtual machine specifically for using apps that you need and only run on windows such as adobe or MSoffice

[gudvinr]

I kinda agree with you. But at the same time I don't think your methods are viable for most. His frustration is understandable but he also making a good point. Realistically, users won't start using Linux from scratch (put is not intended) in the near future. People will try out of curiosity and they will be frustrated. Average Joe won't try to understand that Linux isn't Windows by himself and no one should expect that.

If system breaks or doesn't work like how you expect it to work, rather than expecting user to learn by himself through Arch wiki and reddit posts system should give advice in some form how to do things better.

 

Like, really good example is a little rant about inability to copy files through Dolphin using root. There's an open issue in KDE tracker about implementing polkit to do exactly that.

But the thing is that Windows has very vague separation of user privileges so it doesn't sound like a big deal to want copy stuff in "Program Files" or something like that.

 

On Linux, most of the time the need to touch something using root outside from /etc is a sign of doing something wrong. It has stricter view on what users should and shouldn't do.

Especially since package managers exist, you most definitely doing something wrong when you messing with installed software and libraries by placing plugins into system directories.

While it might be a goto way on Windows, but in Linux if user needs to extend app through plugins, there's a huge chance that either that plugin exist in packaged form or app provides a way to place it into $HOME/.local/ which is a way to go.

Same with installing software. If you feel like dropping something in /usr by hand instead of using package manager then it's time to stop and consider using, again, $HOME/.local/

 

But Windows user don't know that because it's not a rule and that's what they are used to. And then frustration comes that while Linux is "kinda open and allows you to do whatever you want" but doesn't allow you to copy files to root directory "just because".

If you are experienced users, you just won't do it but for people like Linus, file manager should say "Look, pal, while it is technically possible to copy your stuff into root directory it is generally considered an ill-practice. If you're trying to make modification to system, consider using doing so through files located in home directory and avoid installing software withoug packaging tools". Then show password prompt and checkbox to turn off this advice.

 

That won't help dumb users who don't read anything but definitely will make curious people think that they should step back and revise their strategy.

[RedderThanMisty]

11 minutes ago, Tamesh16 said:

 I think though the main idea Linus is conveying is Linux is not as easy to use as everyone says, it takes some getting use to and also has problems just like windows.

Yeah, my main concern for ease of use is that due to the fractured nature of Linux, there is a huge lack of anywhere near the directed funding or telemetry that windows and Mac gets for research into usability and intuitiveness for the everyday Joe and any push by desktop environments for more intuitiveness gets counterattacked by hardcore Linux users that want more functionality.

[Arika]

I love how all of these posts posts follow the same formula 

1. Linux is great
2. All the problems are Linus' fault
3. Linux isn't windows
4. Open source is better
5. Linux is better even though I had all these stupid issues.

It just feels like a bunch of people running between Linus and Linux with shields raised.

 

I run Linux on my laptop and my nas (for a few months now) and I can say: Linux is frustrating, it's community is annoying and full of elitism, every complaint Linus has made I can related to.

 

I don't know if Linux users want more people to use Linux so it becomes more popular, or if they want want to forever be the gatekeepers of their promised land. 

[LAwLz]

Great write-up.

I want to add some things myself to the list of reasons why I don't think Linus is having a good time with GNU/Linux (haven't watched the videos about it, just heard him talk about it on the WAN show).

 

1) Linus is not a techie. People might think of him as one, but in reality he is a sales person. He was one at NCIX, and he is one on Youtube. He has very little understanding of software in general, much less about OSes and GNU/Linux. I think he often overestimate his knowledge and since he now realize how little he knows, it becomes frustrating. It's like when "the smartest kid in the class" moves to high school or university and all of a sudden they realize that everyone around them is as smart if not smarter than them, and suddenly they have to really try hard to keep up with the classes. I know a lot of those myself, and to a certain degree I was one of them, and it sucks. You go from "I am the king of the world, I am so great" to "holy crap I am struggling and all my classmates seem to have an easy time". Your natural instinct is to go "it's not me that's the problem, it's the school".

Except Linus was never the smart kid in the class, just smart compared to his audience which mostly consist of teenage boys that use their computers exclusively as gaming consoles.

 

2) Linus' setup is really exotic. I am pretty sure he made several videos about how he struggled to get it working in Windows even, and that's the OS the hardware makers primarily focused on when making the hardware. If the hardware is a pain to get working on the OS it was built for, it probably won't be easy to get running on GNU/Linux.

 

And number 3), which I think is the biggest reason and the reason you gave, Linus is suffering from baby duck syndrome. He is used to Windows and can not grasp that things might be different on other operating systems. He sees "different to what I am used to on Windows" as "wrong". 

 

 

Also, who the hell gave him the advice of running Manjaro? He specifically said he wanted a distro that would let him find documentation easily. 

Ubuntu has over 95% of the GNU/Linux desktop market share. He really should have gone with that if he wanted something beginner friendly. Hell, even if you try and pull the "yeah but guides for Arch will usually work for Manjaro"... Arch has 0,11% of the GNU/Linux desktop market share. He chose a terrible distro to start with.

It's like watching a person who has never ran in his entire life decide to try a marathon because "I know how to walk. I have walked my entire life. How hard can it be?". Then when he realize it might be a bit though running a marathon and ask for advice, someone tells him "you should run bare foot and with a backpack full of rocks. It'll be as easy as walking if you do that".

It's no wonder he is whining about how running sucks and how he really wants to go back to walking again. He should get himself some proper running shoes and stop carrying around a backpack full of rocks. Also, he should not expect the experience to be pain free if he has never done long distance running before.

 

 

 

 

I just posted this as a status update but I want to post it here as well, before people start jumping in and going "Linux sucks. It's so hard. You have to be a nerd to use it!". I strongly recommend you people watch it in full before commenting, or else the discussion will just be, as Mental Outlaw puts it, "tribal gorillas throwing poo at each other".

 

[Vishera]

16 minutes ago, Arika S said:

I love how all of these posts posts follow the same formula 

1. Linux is great
2. All the problems are Linus' fault
3. Linux isn't windows
4. Open source is better
5. Linux is better even though I had all these stupid issues.

It just feels like a bunch of people running between Linus and Linux with shields raised.

I agree with you,but Linux is still great

16 minutes ago, Arika S said:

I run Linux on my laptop and my nas (for a few months now) and I can say: Linux is frustrating, it's community is annoying and full of elitism, every complaint Linus has made I can related to.

I have Linux in quadruple-boot ()  and it is indeed frustrating,kernel updates that break stuff,when things don't work you have to use the terminal to solve them.

And sometimes there is no solution at all.

For example on my Manjaro install proton doesn't work at all,and when i updated to the latest version to see if it solves it then steam didn't want to work (and these are all known issues).

No wonder why Linux isn't mainstream,i personally don't use it as a daily driver,but rather for experimentation.

[Alan G]

1 hour ago, RedderThanMisty said:

So how would I suggest approaching Linux? By not making the same mistakes that I did. And understand that Linux is not windows, nor will it ever be. Take your time to learn it at your own pace, whether it takes weeks, months or years. Start by using Open source alternatives to software you use that won't run on Linux (e.g Instead of Photoshop, learn GIMP. Instead of premier, Learn kdenlive etc.)

This is so simplistic a suggestion lacking in reality.  Those of us who have been using Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop have thousands of images with adjustments in them.  You cannot simply start over with a Linux compatible program and sacrifice all the work you have done on those images.  Now, you may complain that Adobe has locked you into their programs and yes that is true but I don't have issues with that at all.  I do most of my work in Lightroom with an occasional use of Photoshop.  I don't see any single good Linux solution that does everything that I use in Lightroom.  I paid Microsoft one time for a software license that has now been upgraded several times.  If you like Linux, that's great but don't ignore that a lot of us are pretty happy with Windows.

[Radium_Angel]

1 hour ago, Tamesh16 said:

I know how to use photoshop, so moving to another OS then learning another program is tedious.

Or, if part of your profession is using PhotoShop, then changing programs is a non-starter.

1 hour ago, RedderThanMisty said:

keep either a small windows partition or virtual machine specifically for using apps that you need and only run on windows such as adobe or MSoffice

If I have to keep using Windows, then what's the point of switching? Running in a VM? Pointless, I'll get better performance AND less hassle just staying under Windows.

 

Let's face the truth here shall we?

Linux will never be a proper substitute for Windows until major software is ported, things like Adobe, and whatnot.

Not workalikes, not alternatives, the real deal, running natively under Linux.

 

Then, and only then will Linux *possibly* gain a foothold anywhere.

And I say this as an Linux evangelist. But I am not blind to the *many* *deep* shortcomings of Linux, the main one being the users, then the usability and so forth. 

[Radium_Angel]

4 minutes ago, Alan G said:

I don't see any single good Linux solution that does everything that I use in Lightroom.

Fellow professional photographer here. This isn't anything that even comes close to LR, nevermind anything with a compatible plug-in set.

LR (and to a lesser extent PS) is what helps us sustain our career. You don't just dump your toolset (and by extension, our career) on a whim...

[igormp]

Heck, I don't get why some people are so adamant about making others switch. If an OS doesn't fit your use case, don't use it, plain simple, and don't try to force it upon others, you'll only look dumb.

 

You gotta edit videos and use adobe products? Use windows or mac

Gotta game a lot? Use windows

Going to manage servers and do tons of programming? Probably mac or linux

 

Don't care about what I said above and want to do things in an unconventional way? Go head, you're an adult and can decide for yourself anyway, it won't make a difference for me afterall.

 

2 minutes ago, Alan G said:

I don't see any single good Linux solution that does everything that I use in Lightroom.

There isn't, and there seems to be no actual reason for you to switch to linux either. I'd actually recommend against it.

 

3 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Linux will never be a proper substitute for Windows until major software is ported, things like Adobe, and whatnot.

It shouldn't even be a proper substitute, it doesn't try to. If anything, the only "proper substitute" should be ReactOS.

[LAwLz]

7 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Linux will never be a proper substitute for Windows until major software is ported, things like Adobe, and whatnot.

Not workalikes, not alternatives, the real deal, running natively under Linux.

What do you define as a proper substitute? I don't think running some niche software like the Adobe suite is required to be a "proper substitute". Adobe has approximately 12 million users. As of 2021, there were an estimated 4.66 billion active Internet users. Adobe software is used by 0.25% of users.

There are probably more BIND users than Adobe users, so saying that "Linux won't be a proper replacement for Windows until it runs Adobe software natively" is about as silly as saying "Windows will never be a proper GNU/Linux substitute until it runs BIND natively".

I think you are blinded by your use case to the point where you are missing what is important for the majority of people. It might not be a proper substitute for you, but that does not mean it won't be a proper substitute for ~99% of the world.

 

 

 

Before we make generalizations like whether or not an OS is appropriate to use, we need to define what use case we're talking about.

Do you absolutely need to run Photoshop or Lightroom for example? Yeah, then GNU/Linux is probably not for you. Likewise, when I need to run netsniff-ng, Docker, Metasploit ,grep, etc, then Windows is not exactly my platform of choice. Does that mean "Windows will never be a proper substitute for GNU/Linux"? Maybe for that particular use case, but certainly not for all use cases.

[gudvinr]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Arch has 0,11% of the GNU/Linux desktop market share.

To be fair, Arch has excellent Wiki which is considered the default Linux documentation by many. Many times google will lead you there and people will suggest you reading extensive articles on Arch Wiki despite using Ubuntu or Fedora or whatever else.

 

Although Manjaro is indeed rather a bad choice. Manjaro itself probably is the source for maybe not most but not a little amount of issues people having when they use Manjaro.

[LAwLz]

Just now, gudvinr said:

To be fair, Arch has excellent Wiki which is considered the default Linux documentation by many. Many times google will lead you there and people will suggest you reading extensive articles on Arch Wiki despite using Ubuntu or Fedora or whatever else.

 

Although Manjaro is indeed rather a bad choice. Which probably is the source for maybe not most but not a little amount of issues people having when they use Linux.

I am pretty sure Linus said that he does not read the documentation because "he shouldn't have to", so all that great documentation is wasted on him.

 

He does not want to understand how things work, or get it to work by himself. He wants a guide that holds his hand and tells him "click here, then click here, and then write this exact thing and press enter and it will work". 

[Radium_Angel]

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

define what use case we're talking about.

Fair point, but I can think of a million "must-have" software packages that don't exist under *nix, that really need to if you are going to expand Linux beyond what it is today on the desktop (server-side is another case.)

 

QuickBooks

AutoCAD

 

are two of the big ones just off the top of my head.

Heck, even as much as Steam has done to advance gaming under *nix, it's still a PITA when things like whatever DRM/anti-cheat software gets in the way

 

*nix has its use, servers are great. Desktop? Not so much

 

[gudvinr]

18 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I am pretty sure Linus said that he does not read the documentation because "he shouldn't have to", so all that great documentation is wasted on him.

There's a difference between "reading documentation before diving in" and "reading documentation when you have issues you need to solve".

Having access to most up to date documentation that is directly applicable to your system in case you will have issues isn't a bad idea.

 

I didn't refer to Linus' experience in particular but rather on why one could choose (or suggest) unpopular distro.

Also mainline-ish kernel and mostly fresh software usually helps with modern hardware. Although I'd personally suggest openSUSE for newcomers who feel a need for rolling release.

[gudvinr]

15 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

servers are great

There's a reason for that. Big corporations spend tons of them moneys to make it great so they could get more moneys out of it.

 

Desktop Linux mostly relies on RedHat (while GNOME Foundation backed by other companies many developers are RedHat employees/contractors) and KDE (which is mostly independent). These companies do not earn money out of desktop Linux directly. RedHat mostly cloud software provider and KDE is non-profit.

 

Unless there's serious reason to make money out of desktop Linux it will continue to be mostly community effort. Valve seems to be having interest in KDE so it might lead to something interesting. They significantly boosted wine development and helping to refine graphical stack so it's not unreasonable assumption that SteamDeck running under Plasma can help its development with either direct or indirect help from Valve.

 

Maybe it won't help but it doesn't really matter because it was just an example to prove a point that to make Linux desktop experience you need companies who will hire developers and other people who know thing or two about UX and not just nerdy guys.

[Roswell]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

What do you define as a proper substitute? I don't think running some niche software like the Adobe suite is required to be a "proper substitute". Adobe has approximately 12 million users. As of 2021, there were an estimated 4.66 billion active Internet users. Adobe software is used by 0.25% of users.

There are probably more BIND users than Adobe users, so saying that "Linux won't be a proper replacement for Windows until it runs Adobe software natively" is about as silly as saying "Windows will never be a proper GNU/Linux substitute until it runs BIND natively".

I think you are blinded by your use case to the point where you are missing what is important for the majority of people. It might not be a proper substitute for you, but that does not mean it won't be a proper substitute for ~99% of the world.

 

 

 

Before we make generalizations like whether or not an OS is appropriate to use, we need to define what use case we're talking about.

Do you absolutely need to run Photoshop or Lightroom for example? Yeah, then GNU/Linux is probably not for you. Likewise, when I need to run netsniff-ng, Docker, Metasploit ,grep, etc, then Windows is not exactly my platform of choice. Does that mean "Windows will never be a proper substitute for GNU/Linux"? Maybe for that particular use case, but certainly not for all use cases.

CC numbers were around 22 million a year ago: https://prodesigntools.com/number-of-creative-cloud-subscribers.html

 

Who knows what it is now.

 

Beyond that though, it's not just an Adobe problem. It's the fact that like 95% of applications used by professionals and businesses don't have Linux support. Hundreds of millions of users can't switch. Until there's native support for professional applications, Linux will never be more than a toy for hobbyists on the desktop. Obviously infrastructure wise it's an entirely different story.

 

I don't know if there's an easy way to fix it... it's a lack of software support due to a lack of users. There's a lack of users partly because of a lack of software support, etc. It's a feedback loop that goes nowhere, unfortunately.

 

1 hour ago, Alan G said:

This is so simplistic a suggestion lacking in reality.  Those of us who have been using Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop have thousands of images with adjustments in them.  You cannot simply start over with a Linux compatible program and sacrifice all the work you have done on those images.  Now, you may complain that Adobe has locked you into their programs and yes that is true but I don't have issues with that at all.  I do most of my work in Lightroom with an occasional use of Photoshop.  I don't see any single good Linux solution that does everything that I use in Lightroom.  I paid Microsoft one time for a software license that has now been upgraded several times.  If you like Linux, that's great but don't ignore that a lot of us are pretty happy with Windows.

 

A lot of people that suggest GIMP don't understand how awful it is and how there's no way a professional/advanced user could use it in any meaningful capacity. GIMP doesn't have non-destructive editing (lol), no RAW support and no CMYK (so forget about print). There's another 100 things missing but those are some of the most glaring problems.

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

Fair point, but I can think of a million "must-have" software packages that don't exist under *nix, that really need to if you are going to expand Linux beyond what it is today on the desktop (server-side is another case.)

 

QuickBooks

AutoCAD

 

are two of the big ones just off the top of my head.

Heck, even as much as Steam has done to advance gaming under *nix, it's still a PITA when things like whatever DRM/anti-cheat software gets in the way

 

*nix has its use, servers are great. Desktop? Not so much

Again, it depends on what use case we're talking about.

I'd say that 90% of Windows users could probably make the switch to GNU/Linux and have zero issues, because most of what they do is just run their browser. We concluded that Adobe users are 0.25% of the market. Even if we make the big assumption that there are as many AutoCAD users as there are Adobe users, that's still only a total of 0.5% of users that relies on Adobe or AutoCAD software. Add QuickBooks and we are most likely still not talking about even 1% of users.

You can come up with hundreds of software like this, and still only be talking about single percentages of users that have specific, Windows-only software needs.

 

Most people do not run specialized, Windows-only software. Most people only care about the browser, and that works exactly the same across all platforms.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Roswell said:

It's the fact that like 95% of applications used by professionals and businesses don't have Linux support.

[Citation Needed]

From what I can tell, as a consultant for several different companies, most users at most companies only need their browsers. There are other reasons why they might choose Windows (familiarity and management being the two primary ones) but software is not one of them.

It is easy to point to one or even a handful of different niche software solutions that only works on Windows, but we need to stop generalizing those users as anything but a tiny fraction of a percentage of edge cases. 

Pointing to Adobe with their ~22 million users as a reason for why Windows must continue being the de facto OS for desktops is missing the forest for the trees.

Estimated number of Internet users as of 2021: 4 660 000 000
Estimated number of Adobe users as of 2021:       22 000 000

When talking about users who need any of the Adobe CC software suite, you're talking about ~0.5% of users. 

 

 

We can't be making generalizations about the population by focusing on less than half a percent of users.

It is, as I said earlier, it's like saying Windows will never be a serious contender to GNU/Linux because it doesn't natively support BIND. Even though there are millions upon millions of BIND installations, it is still a tiny fraction of the number of users, and therefore, the lack of a native Windows program is not an issue. Wanna run BIND? Get GNU/Linux. Millions of people do. Wanna run Adobe? Get Windows. Millions of people do. 

[Roswell]

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Again, it depends on what use case we're talking about.

I'd say that 90% of Windows users could probably make the switch to GNU/Linux and have zero issues, because most of what they do is just run their browser. We concluded that Adobe users are 0.25% of the market. Even if we make the big assumption that there are as many AutoCAD users as there are Adobe users, that's still only a total of 0.5% of users that relies on Adobe or AutoCAD software. Add QuickBooks and we are most likely still not talking about even 1% of users.

You can come up with hundreds of software like this, and still only be talking about single percentages of users that have specific, Windows-only software needs.

 

Most people do not run specialized, Windows-only software. Most people only care about the browser, and that works exactly the same across all platforms.

 

 

 

[Citation Needed]

From what I can tell, as a consultant for several different companies, most users at most companies only need their browsers. There are other reasons why they might choose Windows (familiarity and management being the two primary ones) but software is not one of them.

It is easy to point to one or even a handful of different niche software solutions that only works on Windows, but we need to stop generalizing those users as anything but a tiny fraction of a percentage of edge cases. 

Pointing to Adobe with their ~22 million users as a reason for why Windows must continue being the de facto OS for desktops is missing the forest for the trees.

Estimated number of Internet users as of 2021: 4 660 000 000
Estimated number of Adobe users as of 2021:       22 000 000

When talking about users who need any of the Adobe CC software suite, you're talking about ~0.5% of users. 

 

 

We can't be making generalizations about the population by focusing on less than half a percent of users.

It is, as I said earlier, it's like saying Windows will never be a serious contender to GNU/Linux because it doesn't natively support BIND. Even though there are millions upon millions of BIND installations, it is still a tiny fraction of the number of users, and therefore, the lack of a native Windows program is not an issue. Wanna run BIND? Get GNU/Linux. Millions of people do. Wanna run Adobe? Get Windows. Millions of people do. 

1.2 billion Office users kind of negates the argument of "single percentages of people": https://www.windowscentral.com/there-are-now-12-billion-office-users-60-million-office-365-commercial-customers#:~:text=Microsoft says there are now 1.2 billion users,business customers added to Office 365 each month.

 

That's just Office and Adobe. 1.5 billion people... Take a wild guess what happens when you start to add up all of the other Windows/Mac exclusive software.

 

I’m also not sure what BIND has to do with desktop/laptop computers? It’s server software…

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Roswell said:

1.2 billion Office users kind of negates the argument of "single percentages of people": https://www.windowscentral.com/there-are-now-12-billion-office-users-60-million-office-365-commercial-customers#:~:text=Microsoft says there are now 1.2 billion users,business customers added to Office 365 each month.

 

That's just Office and Adobe. 1.5 billion people... Take a wild guess what happens when you start to add up all of the other Windows/Mac exclusive software.

 

I’m also not sure what BIND has to do with desktop/laptop computers? It’s server software…

I am not sure what your point is.

Office 365 can be used in a browser (so GNU/Linux), and a lot of those users are not using Office 365 because they have to. They are using it because it's what they are used to. They could switch to LibreOffice if they wanted, without any issues. That obviously does not apply to all users, but probably a large portion of them.

Hell, a large portion of those 1.2 billion users are probably Android and iOS users, not Windows desktop users.

 

The important section of those 1.2 billion users are the 60 million commercial customers. So roughly 1.2% of users are commercial Office users that would have a hard time switching.

The other portion of Office users are either not using desktops (and instead uses for example iOS or Android) or most likely do not need Office 365 but have it because it came for free with their computer, or they have some perpetual license they bought a long time ago, or so on. In any case, they are most likely not using Office because they have, but rather because they already have it.

 

 

1 hour ago, Roswell said:

I’m also not sure what BIND has to do with desktop/laptop computers? It’s server software…

It was just a comparison.

Saying that GNU/Linux can not replace Windows because less than half a percent of users needs Adobe CC makes, to me, about as much sense as saying Windows can not compete with GNU/Linux because it doesn't have a native BIND client.

Not sure what Photoshop has to do with the average Joe's being able to use GNU/Linux or not. The average Joe doesn't run Adobe CC. Likewise, the average Joe doesn't need BIND, so support for that is irrelevant, just like Photoshop support is irrelevant for >99.5% of users.

 

We need to define what group of people we are talking about before we make generalizations about whether GNU/Linux is or isn't a proper replacement for Windows.

If you use rely on Adobe CC and don't want to change then no, GNU/Linux is not a good replacement for Windows.

 

My problem is with people saying "0.5% of users would have a bad time switching to GNU/Linux, so therefore I am going to make a broad and generalized statement about how GNU/Linux can never compete with Windows and Windows is the best!".

 

Unless we start making proper definitions of what we are talking about, which group of people, what are their use cases, etc, then this discussion is just "tribal gorillas throwing poo at each other", and we should try to avoid that.

 

Are we talking about desktop users exclusively or do we include laptops users, maybe even smartphone users that don't even have laptops? 

Are we talking about enterprise users or home users?

Are we talking about some specific group of people like content creators or just broadly the "average user"?

How "computer-savvy" are the users we are talking about?

Are we talking about people who want to keep using the same software they already have or are they willing to change to something else? 

 

These are all important factors that a lot of people have just glossed over so far in this thread. You can't just make a statement like "GNU/Linux can't replace Windows" without definition the group you are talking about, just like I can't say "Windows can't replace Windows" without defining the things mentioned above. 

[Radium_Angel]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

as a consultant for several different companies

AH! A consultant! You turn gibberish into cashflow. I can get behind that

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

most users at most companies only need their browsers.

Do you recall when every OS maker was scrambling to find the "killer application" that could secure their place in market dominance? The Internet (I believe) became that killer app. It killed off a lot of interesting OSes in the process as well.

 

I work in the scientific field, nothing we use has a linux client, and I wish it were otherwise. Many of the companies whose software we run, just laugh when I broach the subject of alt-OSes (and this includes MacOS)

It's a shame too, but as someone upsteam mentioned, it's a perpetual Catch-22.

The Linux world needs some big company, Quicken, AutoDesk, Adobe, etc to take that critical first step and show it to be a viable platform to code for, won't ever happen of course, but it's a nice dream. 

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Do you recall when every OS maker was scrambling to find the "killer application" that could secure their place in market dominance? The Internet (I believe) became that killer app. It killed off a lot of interesting OSes in the process as well.

 

I work in the scientific field, nothing we use has a linux client, and I wish it were otherwise. Many of the companies whose software we run, just laugh when I broach the subject of alt-OSes (and this includes MacOS)

It's a shame too, but as someone upsteam mentioned, it's a perpetual Catch-22.

The Linux world needs some big company, Quicken, AutoDesk, Adobe, etc to take that critical first step and show it to be a viable platform to code for, won't ever happen of course, but it's a nice dream. 

Well like I said earlier, it sounds like you belong to the group of niche users that GNU/Linux would not be suitable for because of vendor lock-in. It sucks for you but such is life. However, all the ones you mentioned, Quicken, AutoDesk, Adobe, etc. Those are also niche things when we look at the grand scheme of things. It's maybe a couple of percentage points of users. Basically rounding errors when looking at the total number of users.

 

I really don't think it is a catch-22 because most people don't need Windows-exclusive software. For the people who do rely on Windows-exclusive software (which again, is a very small group of people) it sucks and they will be stuck with Windows. However, most of the average users only use their browser or other web-services.

Again, we need to define the audience we are talking about. Are we talking about users like my grandma or are we talking about architects designing bridges and skyscrapers? 

 

Snapchat is bigger than all those companies you mentioned combine, and Snapchat does not work on Windows. Does that mean I should say Windows is not a suitable OS for the average Joe? I think that statement is even more true than saying Adobe CC/AutoCAD/Quicken/etc doesn't run on GNU/Linux so therefore it is not something for the average Joe.