A KDE Developers Response Videos To LTT's Linux Challenge

[D-reaper]

8 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

If this helped, everyone would be copying stuff from ChromeOS, but nobody gives a shit about anything coming from them. Not even A/B partitioning/system updates, which is probably the best thing to copy out of the entire thing.

Well, if not them. Then someone else. All it takes is a bit of inspiration from someone or somewhere.

[AudiTTFan]

To me, comparing Desktop Linux to a currently supported version of Windows is like comparing an unsupported Windows version to a modern one. They have some advantages over the modern stuff, but for the most part, they're really just hobbies for when we want a break from using Windows 8.1 and 10 at this point.

[D-reaper]

37 minutes ago, AudiTTFan said:

To me, comparing Desktop Linux to a currently supported version of Windows is like comparing an unsupported Windows version to a modern one. They have some advantages over the modern stuff, but for the most part, they're really just hobbies for when we want a break from using Windows 8.1 and 10 at this point.

That's what I've been saying when it comes to this: to a currently supported version of Windows is like comparing an unsupported Windows version to a modern one.

 

But no one in my household uses their computers for a some kind of tech hobby; which all run Linux. In our case, it's more to avoid having to buy a new computer just because MS says so. Also, because Windows has been crap after 7; to me at least. Hence the break from using Windows 8.1 and 10. But my household's break from Windows is more permanent given their use cases.

 

Finally, it's to make better use of the resources those older computers already provide. So we make use of our older computers just fine by using Linux. If people haven't noticed, this is one aspect where Linux is better than Windows. I just had to say it.

[tikker]

29 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

But no one in my household uses their computers for a some kind of tech hobby; which all run Linux. In our case, it's more to avoid having to buy a new computer just because MS says so. Also, because Windows has been crap after 7; to me at least. Hence the break from using Windows 8.1 and 10. But my household's break from Windows is more permanent given their use cases.

Are people still butthurt over Win11's hardware requirements that to an extent make sense while forgetting that that Windows 10 is still officialaly supported for 4 more years? Nobody is forcing you to buy a new computer. With Linux I also find it's the opposite. Although forums are active, there's hardly official support. Instead of updating to run the latest hardware, the latest and greatest hardware is probably a PITA to get to work if it even works at all. Then, when you upgrade your OS to the next release, half your system is broken again, because core stuff changed and developers of various software haven't had time to catch up with it yet. And then you realise your favourite software package for a certain task doesn't support Linux and all the FOSS alternatives simply don't cut it.

 

That might be painted a bit pessimistic, but distros simply aren't at the convenience level of Windows or mac yet.

[D-reaper]

1 hour ago, tikker said:

Are people still butthurt over Win11's hardware requirements that to an extent make sense while forgetting that that Windows 10 is still officialaly supported for 4 more years?

3 years actually. Time is a ticking. And over time, applications that people take for granted will not work on that version of Windows.

 

1 hour ago, tikker said:

Nobody is forcing you to buy a new computer.

Actually, in a way, you are being forced. Take Google Chrome for example; soon it will no longer work on Windows 7. But it will continue to work on Linux. Point I am getting at is that if things as simple as that are forcing you to upgrade, then yes, this is more enforced on the Windows spectrum of things. Look at Firefox too; that doesn't support XP anymore. So if something as simple as that is forcing people to upgrade, then yes, you are being forced to upgrade. Just more slowly.

 

But with just about any web browser, Linux is immune to this. And really, a lot of computers users just want to web browse/Stream and then get on with their damn day. And you shouldn't have to upgrade all the damn time to a new computer just to do something as simple as that.

 

1 hour ago, tikker said:

With Linux I also find it's the opposite. Although forums are active, there's hardly official support. Instead of updating to run the latest hardware, the latest and greatest hardware is probably a PITA to get to work if it even works at all. Then, when you upgrade your OS to the next release, half your system is broken again, because core stuff changed and developers of various software haven't had time to catch up with it yet. And then you realise your favourite software package for a certain task doesn't support Linux and all the FOSS alternatives simply don't cut it.

Some hardware has issues on Windows too. Look at the printer issues for one or issues with AMD GPUs on Windows (Which ironically, AMD GPUs work smoothly on Linux). Especially if the software used to run the hardware hasn't been tested thoroughly for problems. Also, half of my systems being broken after an upgrade? Well, that's not I have experienced. The upgrades actually went rather smoothly. That, and maintenance is so much easier than on Windows.

 

And like I said right here:

3 hours ago, D-reaper said:

It's called getting used to the new platform, people. We all learned how to use Windows as kids after all. We weren't born knowing Windows by default. Also, people need to realize that certain applications from Windows will not work on Linux. So if you're stuck on things like Adobe products, you'll have to go the extra mile if you want to use Linux full time; which generally involves a VM running Windows with GPU pass through on top of Linux.

 

For more advanced users, if they want to use Linux, they have to get away from the Windows way of doing things. And they have to accept that some applications will not work natively on Linux. It would be the same if they used a Mac. There is no way around it. I still don't know why people put all this pressure for Linux to be like Windows. They know that Mac can't be just like Windows, so why can't they see Linux in the same light? It's like expecting iOS to be like Android and vise versa.

It's like this; either you switch to open source software, you go the extra mile to get your current applications working, or you just stick with what you got presently. Nothing is perfect. You need to accept that. Windows, Mac or Linux, it matters not.

1 hour ago, tikker said:

That might be painted a bit pessimistic, but distros simply aren't at the convenience level of Windows or mac yet.

You are being a pessimist. Not your fault. You're just used to a certain platform and certain software. That, and you don't want to use anything different. However, for people (like in my household) who just want to do something as simple as web browsing, they don't have that obstacle. For my household, just about any computer will do for them as long as they can see that Firefox icon; therefore, Linux is convenient for them. So why waste money on a computer they'll never use to its fullest? Like I said. This is also the reason why that global warming is a thing today. Because people are so wasteful and companies want to keep overproducing for the sake of profit; which is exactly what Windows 11 as an upgrade represents; because it will render many computers in the world as obsolete (during a chip shortage no less).

 

To wrap up, not everyone is a hardcore gamer/hardware enthusiast. Clearly some people haven't gotten that memo yet.

[The Sloth]

11 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

Actually, in a way, you are being forced. Take Google Chrome for example; soon it will no longer work on Windows 7.

>Initial release date: October 22, 2009

 

It will stop in 2022

 https://www.makeuseof.com/google-chrome-windows-7-stop-2022/

 

 

for most poople 13 years support is good enough.  Also most people use windows 10 not 11. by the time October 14th, 2025 comes, most users will upgrade. Or microsoft might drop requirement. 

 

 

Linux is still a clusterfuck for most users like my parents. You can't expect everyone to learn how to use it. 

 

 

I love POP OS but they have a long way to go. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[D-reaper]

11 minutes ago, The Sloth said:

>Initial release date: October 22, 2009

 

It will stop in 2022

 https://www.makeuseof.com/google-chrome-windows-7-stop-2022/

 

 

for most poople 13 years support is good enough. 

So? You act like there needs to be time limit. There really doesn't need to be. For hardcore gamers and hardware enthusiasts, sure. But for the average Joe who just want to web browse? Why?

 

11 minutes ago, The Sloth said:

Also most people use windows 10 not 11. by the time October 14th, 2025 comes, most users will upgrade. Or microsoft might drop requirement. 

As far as MS dropping that requirement, you can't count on that.

 

11 minutes ago, The Sloth said:

Linux is still a clusterfuck for most users like my parents. You can't expect everyone to learn how to use it. 

And like I said; my entire household uses Linux daily. They don't have an issue. And since all they do is web browse, there isn't much to learn. Huge misconception there.

 

11 minutes ago, The Sloth said:

I love POP OS but they have a long way to go.

Nice! But I don't use Pop OS. Me and my family are all KDE Neon users. And a bit of Zorin OS Lite too.

[StDragon]

So far, my distro (both Server and Desktop) of choice always goes back to Ubuntu. If only we could get Ubuntu and Steam together and one room, it would probably be a really good alternative to the normal Windows OS experience.

 

OTOH,  Clear Linux is the faster (in terms of CPU performance) than others because of various Intel optimizations (yes, they benefit AMD too). So from a performance aspect, this should be the one for gaming. I've never attempted to try it however.

[D-reaper]

3 minutes ago, StDragon said:

So far, my distro (both Server and Desktop) of choice always goes back to Ubuntu. If only we could get Ubuntu and Steam together and one room, it would probably be a really good alternative to the normal Windows OS experience.

 

OTOH,  Clear Linux is the faster (in terms of CPU performance) than others because of various Intel optimizations (yes, they benefit AMD too). So from a performance aspect, this should be the one for gaming. I've never attempted to try it however.

That would be something to see regarding Ubuntu and Steam. And I agree that would be something different to the Windows experience. I'm looking forward to the results.

 

Also, I'm basically all AMD on my computers. So I can vouch that it works great. Especially the AMD GPUs. Just plug and play. For this reason, I'm not surprised that Valve has made the Steam Deck with an AMD APU.

[pipnina]

A lot of people complain about how many different ways to use Linux there are, but I just got a Pixel6 today and it's yet another of the many many different forms of UI to control an android phone.

I was used to the home button and touch return and task button, then I was used to the touchscreen versions of them, now I need to get used to them not being there at all.

There was an app tray, then there wasn't, then it became optional, now it's back again. And the UI is different and "fragmented" between android manufacturers and the apps they package with the phones can be different.

 

Might not be as severe as desktop Linux, but it goes to show that a lot of things people view as "too hard, should be more like what I already know" are just things people should take the time to learn if they actually want to move OS.

 

Linux' DEs are not complete or perfect and there are valid criticisms, but a lot of the things people complain about on the reg are just "Not carbon copy of windows, how can I be expected to function?" then trying to say anyone who points out macos -> windows transitions for newbies of either and vice-versa also has a learning curve is just "part of why Linux will never be successful"

 

If you're happy on windows, just stay on windows, if you want to try something else however, you have to first accept that it is not windows and work from there, which means spending time to learn it. My 2c. Ofc some Linux community members genuinely are exclusive and unhelpful, but I like to think there are a fair few good places for getting help like /r/linux4noobs, and even on /r/linux which has often been a bit extremist there have been compilations of specific complaints and issues linus & luke have had, and trying to work out what to suggest to developers of the software.

[D-reaper]

16 minutes ago, pipnina said:

A lot of people complain about how many different ways to use Linux there are, but I just got a Pixel6 today and it's yet another of the many many different forms of UI to control an android phone.

I was used to the home button and touch return and task button, then I was used to the touchscreen versions of them, now I need to get used to them not being there at all.

There was an app tray, then there wasn't, then it became optional, now it's back again. And the UI is different and "fragmented" between android manufacturers and the apps they package with the phones can be different.

 

Might not be as severe as desktop Linux, but it goes to show that a lot of things people view as "too hard, should be more like what I already know" are just things people should take the time to learn if they actually want to move OS.

 

Linux' DEs are not complete or perfect and there are valid criticisms, but a lot of the things people complain about on the reg are just "Not carbon copy of windows, how can I be expected to function?" then trying to say anyone who points out macos -> windows transitions for newbies of either and vice-versa also has a learning curve is just "part of why Linux will never be successful"

 

If you're happy on windows, just stay on windows, if you want to try something else however, you have to first accept that it is not windows and work from there, which means spending time to learn it. My 2c. Ofc some Linux community members genuinely are exclusive and unhelpful, but I like to think there are a fair few good places for getting help like /r/linux4noobs, and even on /r/linux which has often been a bit extremist there have been compilations of specific complaints and issues linus & luke have had, and trying to work out what to suggest to developers of the software.

Nothing ever remains the same. Especially in the world of software. But if people are happy on Windows (with all the BS MS pulls today), they can have at it. No one is forcing them to use Linux. If they want to use Linux, they can. Personally, I found, when 8 was current and 10 just came in, that KDE Plasma was easier than what Windows had become UI wise after 7; which ultimately made me switch to Linux full time.

 

BTW, I find Reddit to be full of idiots. Not the best place if looking for solid advice.

[jagdtigger]

3 hours ago, The Sloth said:

You can't expect everyone to learn how to use it. 

Yeah because they never had to relearn how to use windows because ms never changed the whole ui pointlessly.... /s Yeah, get real.....

[WolframaticAlpha]

7 hours ago, FakeKGB said:

This, and Chrome OS/Chromebooks had Google backing them. Linux doesn't have a giant megacorp backing and promoting it like Chrome OS/Chromebooks do.

If you have a megacorp backing it, then you get shit for using it. Look at fedora and ubuntu. Backed by megacorps, yet are dealt with scorn.

 

Also fedora is backed by redhat, which is owned by IBM. So that's one.

[WolframaticAlpha]

4 hours ago, StDragon said:

So far, my distro (both Server and Desktop) of choice always goes back to Ubuntu. If only we could get Ubuntu and Steam together and one room, it would probably be a really good alternative to the normal Windows OS experience.

 

OTOH,  Clear Linux is the faster (in terms of CPU performance) than others because of various Intel optimizations (yes, they benefit AMD too). So from a performance aspect, this should be the one for gaming. I've never attempted to try it however.

I used clear for a few months. Its perf gains translate to just compilation in the real world. Swupd was the main feature that I liked but as a whole, you don't really notice the diff between clear and ubuntu.

[D-reaper]

1 hour ago, jagdtigger said:

Yeah because they never had to relearn how to use windows because ms never changed the whole ui pointlessly.... /s Yeah, get real.....

I remember customers that I worked with in computer tech screaming about 8 having no freaking start menu. Which case, I had to install Classic Shell at the time to make them happy. 8 was crap. 10 has been crap (ads, bloat, spying, dictatorship; Edge being forced on people and forced updates). And 11 is just horrible with the strict hardware requirements.

 

Ironically, KDE was my salvation after 7; which ultimately got me more into Linux. Because it felt similar to the traditional desktop experience that I was used to. Unlike with 8 and 10.

[AudiTTFan]

8 hours ago, D-reaper said:

 Windows has been crap after 7; to me at least.

I agree for the most part, although I must say the fullscreen start menu in Win8.1 makes for some truly excellent TV remote-based navigation on my media center. Windows 10 on the other hand is a slow, buggy mess, and the near 1 second long delay to open things like the redesigned jumplists or the action pane seems to have no point other than to just waste my time.

[D-reaper]

20 minutes ago, AudiTTFan said:

I agree for the most part, although I must say the fullscreen start menu in Win8.1 makes for some truly excellent TV remote-based navigation on my media center. Windows 10 on the other hand is a slow, buggy mess, and the near 1 second long delay to open things like the redesigned jumplists or the action pane seems to have no point other than to just waste my time.

That's great for a TV. But for general computer use, it can be a pain. I can't say much for 10. I've used lite mods of it from Team OS to make it bearable.

[AudiTTFan]

2 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

That's great for a TV. But for general computer use, it can be a pain. I can't say much for 10. I've used lite mods of it from Team OS to make it bearable.

Windows 8 would've been nice if it was called something along the lines of "Windows 7 Media Center Edition 2012" but instead it was an OS with a purpose that MS grossly misunderstood. If it had an option to use a smaller start menu similar to how Winblows 11 at least lets you move the start button back to the corner despite being the biggest joke of an OS I've ever seen, I think it could've worked out a lot better.

 

I plan on using Windows 10 until the day Firefox updates no longer support it, and boy do I sure hope that the Linux Mint team has an actual good search function that lets you find individual settings by then.

[Laborant]

Linux is great for environments that serve a distinct purpose - namely embedded systems and servers. To take off in a "general purpose" way, you need a company offering support not only for the end user but also for the software developer (and possibly hardware developer).

The key of the operating systems that are successful in the desktop world is reliability in the sense of API and a GUI. Any software that needs to "look appealing" to any end user should offer some "works out of the box" experience, take use of any hardware acceleration (AMD or Nvidia GPUs) and run stable over many releases. In Linux, you have firstly a big mess with GPU drivers (nouveau vs. nvidia official), you have a big mess with kernel versions, you have a big mess with windowing systems (Wayland anyone?), you have a big mess with GUIs and you have a big mess with software distribution. 

I remember when Canonical decided to add some "data collection" and decided to develop their own Windowing System "Mir". Parts of the Linux community went apeshit, stating that this is not the Linux way and Weyland is the windowing manager of choice! (And yet we still use X server today).
If you want Linux to take off in the consumer field, some standards need to be met.

"Gaming" is often seen as the thing that will bring Desktop Linux to the top. People thinking that "Gaming" is enough, see the PC as a glorified gaming console. That will not happen, if professional software is still limited to Windows and macOS. Many many people do other stuff too on their gaming rig. Be it photo editing with Photoshop (Stay away with Gimp, if you mention Gimp now, you have never used Photoshop), electronics design with Altium or simple office work with MS Office (and no, the online variant is equally bad as LibreOffice and OpenOffice). 
Even Logitech mice are limited to heir base functionalities under Linux, as Logitech does not provide official Linux software. Yes many things can be installed, but that most often involves some digging, finding the right way (WINE) or alternative software. 

Sincerely, 
A Linux Embedded Developer.

[leadeater]

9 hours ago, D-reaper said:

Actually, in a way, you are being forced.

You can do a clean/fresh install of Windows 11 on "unsupported" hardware. The restriction is actually only on upgrades. And this is actually quite logical, if you are prepared and knowledgeable enough to do a clean Windows install then you are also probably able to deal with any hardware/driver/applications issues and get them sorted out.

 

The most likely way to totally break a Windows install is by trying to upgrade it from one version to the next and having a smaller more vetted list of hardware actually does increase the success rate. At work we never, ever, unless in extreme circumstances upgrade any of our Windows servers and deploy new replacements instead.

 

So if I were to switch to Windows 11 the only way I would do it is via a clean install so the hardware requirements are almost entirely moot. And no you do not need TPM/fTPM or Secure Boot enabled to do a clean install.

 

People need to be careful when trying to knock Windows 11 for it's hardware support, because it's not cut and dry straight forward.

[Master Disaster]

16 hours ago, SlidewaysZ said:

I'm going to throw out something highly controversial. Linux isn't meant for every day users and it's not supposed to be mainstream in that sense. There I said it. Linux was literally built around the idea of making it your own not having a cookie cutter OS made for your Grandma who can barely log into your email. Honestly Linus is disgracing the Linux OS when he can't even see the dang zip compression loading bar in the bottom right of the screen and then rants about zipping a file. 

Not sure where you got this nonsense from but its wrong on pretty much every point. Linux was built to be a free replacement to the commercial Minix OS that was used in academia throughout the 80s. Yes one of torvolds goals was to create something free and open (Minix was open source but non modifiable) to everyone but at the time computers were something used in schools & businesses, very few homes would have had IBM PCs in them and nobody was even considering them becoming as popular as they are today.

 

The goal of Torvalds was to create a 32 bit compatible, free and open source kernel that could be used by students as a tool to learn comp sci without having to rely on Minix.

[AnonymousGuy]

39 minutes ago, Laborant said:

Linux is great for environments that serve a distinct purpose - namely embedded systems and servers. To take off in a "general purpose" way, you need a company offering support not only for the end user but also for the software developer (and possibly hardware developer).

This.  The only time *nix is "okay" is when it's basically packaged in the same way Microsoft is packaging Windows (Android, ChromeOS, RedHat) where it's a standardized installation and you don't really need to mess with it and someone is getting paid to maintain it.   Linux as a kernel would be complete dogshit if paid engineers working for the Intel-IBM-Google-Nvidia's of the world weren't developing shit for it so server hardware will be compatible but everyone wantns to pretend it's some neckbeard swigging beer in his free time making meaningful contributions for free.

 

And that rolls right into why linux sucks as a desktop experience.  Because all the paid work is done for headless virtualized server shit.

[Paul Thexton]

31 minutes ago, leadeater said:

At work we never, ever, unless in extreme circumstances upgrade any of our Windows servers and deploy new replacements instead.

Once upon a time this approach was the official recommendation of Microsoft. Is this still the case?

 

Personally I’ve had a long standing hatred of Windows as a server OS, far too many of the updates require a reboot compared to Linux (and in the genuinely “old days” Solaris) where normally you’re only rebooting if the kernel itself is updated. That’s not my only issue of course but then it’s been so long since I’ve had to deal with it that I will accept my personal experiences are probably no longer relevant/ up to date. 
 

I’ve always defaulted to running a Linux based distro as servers and I don’t see that changing at any point in the future. I don’t even use x86 hardware (at home) for that use case now either, I just use Raspberry Pi and similar devices instead. 
 

Apple also changed their approach to software updates a few years ago where pretty much every system update demands a reboot to install, I really hate that and although the updates do seem (right now at least) to be much quicker to install on M1 devices it still feels like the wrong approach to me.

[Master Disaster]

45 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

This.  The only time *nix is "okay" is when it's basically packaged in the same way Microsoft is packaging Windows (Android, ChromeOS, RedHat) where it's a standardized installation and you don't really need to mess with it and someone is getting paid to maintain it.   Linux as a kernel would be complete dogshit if paid engineers working for the Intel-IBM-Google-Nvidia's of the world weren't developing shit for it so server hardware will be compatible but everyone wantns to pretend it's some neckbeard swigging beer in his free time making meaningful contributions for free.

 

And that rolls right into why linux sucks as a desktop experience.  Because all the paid work is done for headless virtualized server shit.

Yes and no.

 

I've often said that paid developers are an essential part of Linux and without them it wouldn't be where it is today. It 100% does take a focused team of engineers to get things done in a timely and coherent manner (a perfect example is SELinux which took the combined power of the NSA to develop).

 

However, its important to recognise that a lot of work on the GNU base, the kernel itself and many of the most popular apps of today is done by hobbyist devs who don't get paid and without them, it wouldn't be where it is today either.

 

Fun fact: Red Hat, Cannonical and I'm sure others too offer their employees a salary while having a strong focus on the desktop experience. RHEL is an industry go to for servers yet it ships with a desktop by default and has done since the beginning.

 

Linus has a very valid point about Linux as a desktop, sure the CLI is always there and ready but its not always the best option and it shouldn't be forced onto users as the only (or even preferred) option. Its a bit hypocritical for a bunch of free choice advocates to tell users they shouldn't be using a GUI to move files around.

 

Edit - should add that there is currently a push to move the kernel away from C/C++ and onto Rust, it was started by non professionals, is being done by mostly non professionals and Linus himself has stated that he doesn't hate the idea (which coming from him is big praise).

https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux

[Whiskers]

24 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Linus has a very valid point about Linux as a desktop, sure the CLI is always there and ready but its not always the best option and it shouldn't be forced onto users as the only (or even preferred) option. Its a bit hypocritical for a bunch of free choice advocates to tell users they shouldn't be using a GUI to move files around.

 

Totally agree. I like using CLI personally, and it can be incredibly powerful; it has many advantages over a GUI for various tasks, and when you've learned how to use it effectively it can be much more efficient and powerful than a GUI can be without becoming a monstrous nightmare of buttons, dropdowns, and submenus on submenus.

 

But it's also extremely unintuitive, very offputting to those who are less technically inclined, and for some tasks it can be less efficient or capable than a well designed GUI can be. And ultimately, regardless of how efficient or powerful either CLI or GUI is on paper, it's entirely meaningless if it doesn't work for the user. Some users fly with CLI, some with GUI. Important and common functionality should, optimally, never be exclusively tied to one or the other.

 

It is indeed ironic given the nature of Linux itself that there's a bit of a prevalent determination in the community that things must only be done one way, and that users who wish to do it a different way are wrong. Choices are good; catering to varied user tastes and preferences is entirely a positive move.