A KDE Developers Response Videos To LTT's Linux Challenge

[LAwLz]

Oh boy, yet another thread that could have been an interesting discussion, just turning into people saying Linux is bad because it's not like Windows, or that Linux is too hard to use even though things like the third Linux video clearly showing that it is super easy to use for most everyday things that the majority do (like print a document, or open a web browser).

 

Not sure why people insist on this false idea that in order to use GNU/Linux you have to use the CLI. 90% of users could most likely switch to Ubuntu and never have any issues at all, and not have to touch the CLI even once. Yet it seems like whenever the discussion of Linux comes up it's the last 10% that makes all the noise.

[tikker]

11 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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

Ah right, the year is almost over already. Even so, your computer will not drop dead if it's still running Win10 at the end of 2025.

11 hours 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. 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.

And for good reason. Windows XP is beyond end of life at this point. It has been superseded by Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and 10 at this point, it is not secure and modern games and drivers are probably also a hassle. There's no reason to run XP anymore for the average person, at least not on an internet-enabled device, or for anyone really. The same applies to Windows 7. It's end of life now, having no official support anymore, so it makes perfect sense for software to start dropping support. You can still keep using your older versions of software, just not new ones.

11 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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.

You people are severely exaggerating this "upgrade all the time to a new computer". Nobody is forcing you to do that. If you just want to browse the web you are fine as you are. No need to upgrade to Win11 yet, no need to buy a new computer, nothing.

 

11 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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.

Of course some hardware has issues on Windows too and printers are indeed notorious. I have a lot more trouble getting stuff to work properly on Linux compared to on Windows, however. This is simply because there isn't critical mass for Linux. For example, the fingerprint sensor in my XPS13. It simply doesn't work on Linux, because nobody has bothered to write a driver for it. A lot of those smaller, but not less relevant details, are what you tend to run into with Linux.

11 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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.

In return then people need to accept that people will not want to move to Linux unless mainstream software implements decent support. That is why I brought it up, because right now it's "come join Linux, it's awesome!"... but it's not really awesome, because of it's still many shortcomings regarding those things. Microsoft's Office is still unbeaten. Adobe's Photoshop and co. is still the best for me. Even other great alternatives (been a fan of Affinity lately) do not support Linux. OpenOffice, GIMP etc. all suck in comparison. They can do basic stuff, but fall short on the complicated things their mainstream version handle so well.

11 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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.

Bold of you to assume that bold faced text. My gaming computer runs Windows yes, but my laptops for work have all run a variety of Linux distros, I have worked with supercomputers and manage software installations and deployment on multiple clusters. I know my fair share of Linux and upgrades of any kind, especially system libraries, are a major pain.

11 hours ago, D-reaper 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).

Don't drag global warming into this. Windows 11 is not causing global warming, neither is dropping Windows XP support.

[Blademaster91]

12 hours ago, D-reaper said:

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.

I haven't really liked using Windows since Windows 7, I went from 7 to 10 on my desktop, 8 and 8.1 were just crap IMO and I think you shouldn't need to install extra things to bring back features MS tried to take away like a simple to use start menu.

But MS are really pushing it now with forced BIOS updates, this is fine for an average Dell or HP that have a set configuration, but can be a complete disaster for any DIY system where you might not always want the newest BIOS update which can be buggy or not work well with certain hardware.

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

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.

That is fine for an experienced gamer or an enthusiast but I don't see how that matters for most people that don't know how to clean install. MS is effectively pushing planned obsolescence for most people that don't upgrade unless they need to because some software doesn't work or doesn't get updated.

1 hour ago, tikker said:

Ah right, the year is almost over already. Even so, your computer will not drop dead if it's still running Win10 at the end of 2025.

1 hour ago, tikker said:

And for good reason. Windows XP is beyond end of life at this point. It has been superseded by Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and 10 at this point, it is not secure and modern games and drivers are probably also a hassle. There's no reason to run XP anymore for the average person, at least not on an internet-enabled device, or for anyone really. The same applies to Windows 7. It's end of life now, having no official support anymore, so it makes perfect sense for software to start dropping support. You can still keep using your older versions of software, just not new ones.

That contradicts your other comment, sure you can keep using an unsupported windows 10 computer but software won't receive updates and anyone that keeps using windows 10 will be at risk of getting malware or getting hacked, so MS is essentially forcing people to replace their computers sooner than needed.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Blademaster91

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Paul Thexton said:

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

Don't know, Microsoft's advice is quite often dubious or not strictly relevant. Depends who and where it's coming from. Good example would be minimum software requirements for some of their products and the base line is set at a corporate network with 10,000 workstations... ok cool but for new Zealand with a total population of 5 million how many companies are operating networks of that size? lol

 

Some of the best IT knowledge is when to know to listen to Microsoft, or any vendor, or not heh.

 

2 hours ago, Paul Thexton said:

far too many of the updates require a reboot compared to Linux

You mean every single update that isn't a Malicious Software Removal Tool or AV definitions 

 

2 hours ago, Paul Thexton said:

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 doubt a lot of things would have changed for you. There has been some really big improvements but unless you actually use those things then Windows is Windows and there isn't actually an overall huge different between Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2019. Not in terms of general running it to host an application/service anyway.

 

Core inbuilt stuff has changed the most and I actually really like some of it but the problem is there is often an existing better solution 

 

2 hours ago, Paul Thexton said:

and in the genuinely “old days” Solaris) where normally you’re only rebooting if the kernel itself is updated

Local hospital here ran two Sun Ultra Enterprise servers, those things were sweet. Everything, actually everything, dual redundant or better and fibre attached SCSI disks when those were much more rare and expensive. OS wise they would regularly have years of uptime, application was switched between them on a schedule but I forget how often that was. A garden gnome was put on top of the active server so anyone could easily tell, ah good old classic methods. CLI command vs look at the gnome, gnome wins (if you are actually there ofc).

 

Ahh.. I better say something more on topic now. Linux kicks ass without a GUI.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

That is fine for an experienced gamer or an enthusiast but I don't see how that matters for most people that don't know how to clean install. MS is effectively pushing planned obsolescence for most people that don't upgrade unless they need to because some software doesn't work or doesn't get updated.

I don't see how it matters all that much to those that are not this. It is still my firm believe to this day that the world wide upgrade to Windows 10 was not and never was a good idea. It was then and it isn't now.

 

Computers sold at end of lifespan just before Windows 11 now that's an awkward situation however if I had my way Windows 10 support would end minimum 5 years after that final date of Windows 10 general availability on OEM computers.

 

Fundamentally you don't have to upgrade operating systems but there is a point where I do actually support those that do not wish to upgrade to be operating under "your own risk".

 

This isn't even a Microsoft/Windows issue either, Linux distros have their own support periods and depending on if you went LTS or not you will find yourself out of support sooner than Windows on quite a few distros, or alternatively you'll never get round to do a distro upgrade and then you'll stop receiving package and security updates. Windows and Linux support lifecycles are by no means perfect and I don't even think there could be such a thing.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

90% of users could most likely switch to Ubuntu and never have any issues at all

I think I'm about to walk out in front of a firing squad through a mine field on the way but... if one hasn't picked Ubuntu then they have probably picked the wrong one. I know I know that's way to generalizing but still I do believe that to largely be true, at least if you are an entry level Linux user. The sheer amount of Ubuntu specific information and help out there simply puts it well ahead of others, Ubuntu derivatives included.

 

I personally really like Ubuntu

 

*oh god run, run away, the Linux user group is coming for me!*

[linkboy]

26 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I think I'm about to walk out in front of a firing squad through a mine field on the way but... if one hasn't picked Ubuntu then they have probably picked the wrong one. I know I know that's way to generalizing but still I do believe that to largely be true, at least if you are an entry level Linux user. The sheer amount of Ubuntu specific information and help out there simply puts it well ahead of others, Ubuntu derivatives included.

 

I personally really like Ubuntu

 

*oh god run, run away, the Linux user group is coming for me!*

I agree to a point. My biggest issue with Ubuntu (and why I don't run it) is their mashed together Unity/Gnome UI. That UI would definitely through off people coming from Windows.

 

Something like Cinnamon would be a better choice for those people (Plasma has way, way to many options), but there's no official Ubuntu Cinnamon release (Ubuntu Cinnamon Remix is unofficial), which just leaves Mint and as much as I love Mint (currently running it), it's not without it's issues.

 

You're 100% correct in regards to documentation and support.

[tikker]

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

That is fine for an experienced gamer or an enthusiasts but I don't see how that matters for most people that don't know how to clean install. MS is effectively pushing planned obsolescence for most people that don't upgrade unless they need to because some software doesn't work or doesn't get updated.

You can check if there's a service near you that does it in that case. I also think those people that don't upgrade don't really care if it's Windows 7, 8, 10 or 11 that their system runs. It is indeed a form of planned obsolescence, you can blame every brand and system out there, but in my eyes the 10 years or so is a reasonable one for OSes. If they wouldn't drop official support you'd get another problem that a lot of people won't upgrade, simply because they're content with what they have. People refusing to switch to Linux isn't that different from people not wanting to upgrade to 11 in that regard. Not to say that it is wrong to be happy with what you have, but I think that'll only exacerbate the issue of slow transitions. Then of course you can debate whether we need these new things, but a new OS every 10 years isn't that bad in my opinion.

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

That contradicts your comment above, sure you can keep using an unsupported windows 10 computer but software won't receive updates and anyone that keeps using windows 10 will be at risk of getting malware or getting hacked, so MS is essentially MS is forcing people to replace their computers sooner than needed.

Blame capitalism I guess? We've realised decades ago that making stuff that lasts doesn't make money, so we started selling style instead. I do believe you can't support it all forever. XP and after have all followed the same patter of ~5 years mainstream support, followed by ~5 years extended support. That is similar to e.g. Ubuntu's LTS version, as @leadeater mentions above, which are supported for 10 years give or take. Compare that a whopping 9 months of support for non-LTS releases that happen every 6 months. The downside of those LTS releases is that you are stuck with the same old stuff for 10 years, which can also be problematic if the software you use evolves quickly over those years.

19 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I think I'm about to walk out in front of a firing squad through a mine field on the way but... if one hasn't picked Ubuntu then they have probably picked the wrong one. I know I know that's way to generalizing but still I do believe that to largely be true, at least if you are an entry level Linux user. The sheer amount of Ubuntu specific information and help out there simply puts it well ahead of others, Ubuntu derivatives included.

 

I personally really like Ubuntu

Yep. I personally use Fedora, because it's closer to all the systems I typically interact with, but that knowledge base makes Ubuntu still the go-to distro I recommend if people are completely new or want a good shot at "it just works" or "can be made to work".

[leadeater]

14 minutes ago, linkboy said:

I agree to a point. My biggest issue with Ubuntu (and why I don't run it) is their mashed together Unity/Gnome UI. That UI would definitely through off people coming from Windows.

I don't know, a lot of people are horrible at using Windows and can barely drive it so I'd say it wouldn't be much worse than swapping from a right hand drive car to the left hand drive car etc. Well except people largely "know how to drive", guess that is also slightly controversial statement as well lol.

 

Certainly agree there would be a learning curve but I honestly don't think it would be that bad.

 

I guess it would more have to do with fighting against the "it's different so I hate it and wont try" mindsets.

 

Far as DE's goes I'm really not in a position to give much of opinion there, I'm nearly exclusively server only no GUI and my comment didn't actually come from knowing much about Ubuntu's DE at all and mainly from a support and resources standpoint.

 

That said I've had some things that were harder to get working on Ubuntu than on CentOS, and vice versa, but those were so far away from a desktop user situation but I don't doubt similarities will exist.

[Gimmick21]

2 minutes ago, linkboy said:

I agree to a point. My biggest issue with Ubuntu (and why I don't run it) is their mashed together Unity/Gnome UI. That UI would definitely through off people coming from Windows.

I think people are way more flexible in terms of GUIs than you think. Especially if it's reduced to the basic things, not configurable but shows a clear concept (more or less ).

 

I realy like the idea from page 1:

That the great thing about Linux is, that it gives anyone the opportunity to develop something unique according to their own taste, but everyone should be happy knowing that it's possible, but not doing it and instead work on the same thing - so it's freedom but everyone decides not to be free xD

And that there should be a big company, that finances the project without influencing it or earning money with it - because that would be basically MS I think

 

Looks like you always need a company with a large wallet that benefits from the spread of the OS, but not from selling the OS directly - like Valve I guess.

[linkboy]

28 minutes ago, Gimmick21 said:

I think people are way more flexible in terms of GUIs than you think. Especially if it's reduced to the basic things, not configurable but shows a clear concept (more or less ).

 

I realy like the idea from page 1:

That the great thing about Linux is, that it gives anyone the opportunity to develop something unique according to their own taste, but everyone should be happy knowing that it's possible, but not doing it and instead work on the same thing - so it's freedom but everyone decides not to be free xD

And that there should be a big company, that finances the project without influencing it or earning money with it - because that would be basically MS I think

 

Looks like you always need a company with a large wallet that benefits from the spread of the OS, but not from selling the OS directly - like Valve I guess.

 

The issue, as leadeater put it, is getting over the "it's different so I hate it and wont try" mindset. I work in mobile sales and that mindset is something I run into pretty much every day with customers looking at phones (especially on Android, where each manufacture has a different launcher that looks different, but is pretty much functionally the same).

 

One of the biggest things I've learned since I got into the mobile industry and working with the general public is that for the vast majority of people, you have to turn the technical brain off (especially in regards to technology). You have to change your way of thinking to connect with them. If you come at them with a bunch of tech stuff, jargon they won't understand, things like RTFM, you're going to lose them.

 

I'm pretty sure that with enough time, a person could adjust to Ubuntu's UI, it's just that the hardest part for them is going to be getting over that initial shock of how it looks, since it's so different from what they're used to (and vice-versa if someone was coming from Ubuntu's UI to Windows for the first time, but I'm willing to bet there's a lot less people like that in the world).

[Forbidden Wafer]

1 hour ago, linkboy said:

I agree to a point. My biggest issue with Ubuntu (and why I don't run it) is their mashed together Unity/Gnome UI. That UI would definitely through off people coming from Windows.

As someone that loved Gnome 2, really liked Unity and absolute hates Gnome 3, I appreciate their customizations. I have always placed the dock with apps on the left when using my Mac, so they're quite similar overall. 

[RejZoR]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Oh boy, yet another thread that could have been an interesting discussion, just turning into people saying Linux is bad because it's not like Windows, or that Linux is too hard to use even though things like the third Linux video clearly showing that it is super easy to use for most everyday things that the majority do (like print a document, or open a web browser).

 

Not sure why people insist on this false idea that in order to use GNU/Linux you have to use the CLI. 90% of users could most likely switch to Ubuntu and never have any issues at all, and not have to touch the CLI even once. Yet it seems like whenever the discussion of Linux comes up it's the last 10% that makes all the noise.

Linux is great, until something doesn't work. Then it sucks ass hard. And experience varies between distros so hugely it's not even funny. Not only that, it can vary even within same distro just because of different desktop environment used. For example Manjaro KDE is sublime experience. XFCE or Gnome just lack things like AppImage being available by default which makes installing of apps a chore. And while it's in the repository, you have to purposely look for it.

 

And no, it's not false idea that you almost absolutely have to use CLI. Even Manjaro KDE where I could do all of it via GUI, as soon as I had any kind of problem, every solution was fuck tons of cryptic CLI noodles. Fuck that. I don't care if it's easier, faster or more efficient way of troubleshooting. It's like giving someone who's learning to code a complete code instead of a snippet and explanation how it works. That's CLI's issue. You solve the problem, but you have zero clue what the F you just did. Which means your learning curve is endlessly stagnating because you always rely on completed CLI noodles that solve your problems.

 

Same was in these challenges videos. First thing they did even for most trivial things was to go online and search for pre-cooked solution. Where if setting is in expected location in a Control Panel, your first thing is to look for it there. And Microsoft has same problem with their dumb fuckery where they remove settings and features we had for 30 years for no god damn reason. Like for example not using stupid lock screen in Windows 11. Every solution i looked for was some early build or for Windows 10 and earlier. Why is there this need for stupid arbitrary changes and downgrades that make no sense and complicate things that were solved or perfected 20 years ago.

[Gimmick21]

1 hour ago, linkboy said:

 

The issue, as leadeater put it, is getting over the "it's different so I hate it and wont try" mindset.

yeah, maybe it is. I never had that mindset, I know a lot of very much non-technical people without such mindset and tbh. I have always thought of this behavior as some kind of laziness. It's not like that it's not ok to be lazy about some things - who isn't...? - but I don't like that it's often used as a reason to critisize things and call them "bad".

 

Some new things work against old habits and you need time to appreciate them. Therefore, feedback can be interesting after a very short time, but ultimately not useful.

[LAwLz]

17 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Linux is great, until something doesn't work. Then it sucks ass hard.

Maybe if you are inexperienced then it sucks, but so does all troubleshooting. Also, the same can be said about Windows so I don't really get your point. How often do you see people recommend "reinstall Windows" as a solution to a problem? I see it all the time. 

 

 

19 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Not only that, it can vary even within same distro just because of different desktop environment used.

So...

Choice = bad?

Also, how often do people actually run a distro and use something other than the default DE? Those users are the advanced users, not something a novice Linux user should use. This is a non-issue. Might as well say troubleshooting Windows is hard because people can install skins on it, making it look different.

 

 

21 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

XFCE or Gnome just lack things like AppImage being available by default which makes installing of apps a chore.

So? Most people will be more than fine with the software that's in the Ubuntu Software Centre by default. No need to use things like AppImages or add support for it.

 

 

26 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

And no, it's not false idea that you almost absolutely have to use CLI.

If you are an average user and choose a beginner friendly distro then it is a myth.

 

 

 

28 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Even Manjaro KDE where I could do all of it via GUI, as soon as I had any kind of problem, every solution was fuck tons of cryptic CLI noodles. Fuck that. I don't care if it's easier, faster or more efficient way of troubleshooting. It's like giving someone who's learning to code a complete code instead of a snippet and explanation how it works. That's CLI's issue. You solve the problem, but you have zero clue what the F you just did. Which means your learning curve is endlessly stagnating because you always rely on completed CLI noodles that solve your problems.

What kind of problems do you think the average user would run into?

Also, it's not CLI's fault you don't understand what it does. Most people don't understand how GUIs work either. I have lost count of how many times I have had to teach my grandpa to transfer pictures from their camera to their computer. Would you say it's Windows' fault that my grandpa can't remember how to transfer pictures from his camera, and would you say it's "GUIs fault" that he thinks it is complicated? Let's not just Windows' GUI. Let's blame the concept of GUIs for my grandpa's lack of understanding how to drag and drop pictures between two folders!

See how ridiculous you sound when you blame "CLI" for your lack of understanding what is happening when someone helps you fix an issue?

 

 

31 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Same was in these challenges videos. First thing they did even for most trivial things was to go online and search for pre-cooked solution. Where if setting is in expected location in a Control Panel, your first thing is to look for it there. And Microsoft has same problem with their dumb fuckery where they remove settings and features we had for 30 years for no god damn reason. Like for example not using stupid lock screen in Windows 11. Every solution i looked for was some early build or for Windows 10 and earlier. Why is there this need for stupid arbitrary changes and downgrades that make no sense and complicate things that were solved or perfected 20 years ago.

What's wrong with googling something when you are unsure about how to do it? I do that all the time for all OSes. I think it's pretty natural to search for "how to do X" in Google before you start opening random menus in the OS hoping that the developer (be it a developer at Microsoft, Apple or let's say Canonical) happened to think that the "logical place to put this setting" is the same as the place you would have put it.

I find that you very often go "my way of thinking is the only correct way and everyone who disagrees is stupid and bad", and your way of thinking is often "what I am used to".

[Spindel]

6 hours 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.

 

And that product exists. Given it’s not Linux kernel it is Darwin (so BSD related) and the OS is MacOS. 
 

I’ve said it before and I say it again, for Linux desktop to be a thing it needs the backing of a dedicated company and to some degree being locked down so the environment becomes a bit ”controlled”. Preferably a company that also ships the hardware so compability is guaranteed. But then we basically have a Mac. 
 

For the time being Linux is great for embeded systems like routers, NAS, fridges etc but not on the desktop. 

[LAwLz]

8 minutes ago, Gimmick21 said:

yeah, maybe it is. I never had that mindset, I know a lot of very much non-technical people without such mindset and tbh. I have always thought of this behavior as some kind of laziness. It's not like that it's not ok to be lazy about some things - who isn't...? - but I don't like that it's often used as a reason to critisize things and call them "bad".

 

Some new things work against old habits and you need time to appreciate them. Therefore, feedback can be interesting after a very short time, but ultimately not useful.

It's called "baby duck syndrome", and I don't think anyone is immune to it. Neither you nor those non-technical people. Some may be more influenced by it than others though, but I am sure you have encountered a few things where you have gone "damn, it's so annoying that I can't do X anymore and have to do Y instead". I know I have thought that a lot with Windows 10 and their ever changing Settings/control panel stuff. It's not even that I think some changes are bad, just that the chances disrupts my workflow and that's annoying.

You can most certainly fight it though and try to keep an open mind. Chances are you will find things annoying if you are used to doing certain things and then you have to change though.

 

Also, the people who are the opposite annoy me a lot too. Those who always "welcome change" even when the chance is bad, and dismisses criticism as "you just don't like chance".

[D-reaper]

10 hours ago, AudiTTFan said:

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.

Maybe instead of using Mint, you could try out KDE? KDE is what got me off Windows.

[D-reaper]

9 hours ago, leadeater said:

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.

Not worth the hassle. And on an older computer, it will run much worse because Windows is so bloated today. The reason why MS is forces this strict hardware requirement it to compensate for the lack of quality and extra bloat they pushed into the OS. To me, nothing MS comes up with now will be as good as XP or 7 were. This is why I switched to Linux; because I could.

[Lightwreather]

28 minutes ago, D-reaper said:

And I will bring up global warming. Because it is damn well true! You just don't want to acknowledge that the over-production of chips (general over consuming) is part of the reason we are all flooding or burning. You're in denial. Face it. Linux will make people's computers last much longer than on Windows. Which is exactly what I have done with my household's computers and that of my friends computers; who don't need Windows for what they do.

While somewhat true, it however does not take into account the strides in efficiency gains that can be afforded by newer generations (barring of course the whole 14nm kerfufle Intel had going on).

On and off Linux user btw.

[jagdtigger]

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Oh boy, yet another thread that could have been an interesting discussion, just turning into people saying Linux is bad because it's not like Windows, or that Linux is too hard to use even though things like the third Linux video clearly showing that it is super easy to use for most everyday things that the majority do (like print a document, or open a web browser).

 

Not sure why people insist on this false idea that in order to use GNU/Linux you have to use the CLI. 90% of users could most likely switch to Ubuntu and never have any issues at all, and not have to touch the CLI even once. Yet it seems like whenever the discussion of Linux comes up it's the last 10% that makes all the noise.

Couldnt agree more, id even argue that it is easier to install a noob friendly linux distro than to install windows.....

  

5 minutes ago, Caroline said:

like Ubuntu the moment I overclock any component by 1MHz.

Thats funny, it never had issues with my cpu OC'd to 4.5 GHz and RAM running an XMP profile.....

[D-reaper]

6 minutes ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

While somewhat true, it however does not take into account the strides in efficiency gains that can be afforded by newer generations (barring of course the whole 14nm kerfufle Intel had going on).

On and off Linux user btw.

I'm just saying for what a lot of people do, they don't need the latest and greatest. For them, it's not worth shelling out the cash. For my household, a simple dual core system with 4/8 GB of ram (that's 15 years old even) is enough for now when it comes to their needs; web browsing/streaming and not much else. They don't need a frigging core i7, with 32 GB of ram and a 3070 Ti to get the job done. And Linux makes great use of that older hardware.

[D-reaper]

6 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

I haven't really liked using Windows since Windows 7, I went from 7 to 10 on my desktop, 8 and 8.1 were just crap IMO and I think you shouldn't need to install extra things to bring back features MS tried to take away like a simple to use start menu.

But MS are really pushing it now with forced BIOS updates, this is fine for an average Dell or HP that have a set configuration, but can be a complete disaster for any DIY system where you might not always want the newest BIOS update which can be buggy or not work well with certain hardware.

Yeah. I was not a keen on MS and Windows when it became more like a dictatorship. Which is why I use Linux now. As far as I am concerned, nothing new at MS will beat what XP and 7 were.

[Gimmick21]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

It's called "baby duck syndrome", and I don't think anyone is immune to it. Neither you nor those non-technical people. Some may be more influenced by it than others though, but I am sure you have encountered a few things where you have gone "damn, it's so annoying that I can't do X anymore and have to do Y instead". I know I have thought that a lot with Windows 10 and their ever changing Settings/control panel stuff. It's not even that I think some changes are bad, just that the chances disrupts my workflow and that's annoying.

You can most certainly fight it though and try to keep an open mind. Chances are you will find things annoying if you are used to doing certain things and then you have to change though.

 

Also, the people who are the opposite annoy me a lot too. Those who always "welcome change" even when the chance is bad, and dismisses criticism as "you just don't like chance".

Yes it's not like that it can't be annoying or 'work' - because it is work - but as you said "It's not even that I think some changes are bad". So you are not criticizing the GUI itself, but basically the situation of endless change. And that's what i meant: The situation maybe exhausting, but there is no one to blame. X can be more Y, and Y more like X...

The people I meant are not happy about changes either. But they usually understand that it takes time and so long they say "It's not bad, I just have to get used to it." - only in very strong Swabian

 

And my work and studies basically consisted of "get used to it", I guess I just don't care anymore xD 

[goodtofufriday]

I'm an IT Sysadmin that working on junky old cars and I still dont like getting into linux. More than half the stuff online isnt relevant to newest version stuff at all. 

At least with a junky old car the old knowledge on the net still applies to even newer cars.