Linux Steam bug has the potential to wipe out all files

[AxelRantila]

Unfortunately a big part of the problem is education and breaking down the myths/stereotypes about Linux. Most people are stubborn and don't want to change, even if the change is for the better. Their mentality is anything that's different is not as good as what they're used to. My mother-in-law was hesitant at first, but I just said try it for a couple weeks and if you really truly don't like it, then I'll put windows on it. It's been 3 weeks now and she loves it. People need to be willing to try something else instead of always running back to what they know. They may find greener grass on the other side, but they're too afraid to even look.

I'm not against change at all (I really like Metro with m/k). The thing is that I wholly believe that Microsoft has been making some really good decisions that has improved existing products a lot. For example (don't have links available ATM) open-sourcing .NET, adding a native Android emulator to Visual Studio and 10TB of cloud storage for office 365 subscribers. So it's not that I'm against trying out Linux at all (as I said, I like Synology's DSM); the thing is that Microsoft has set the bar high for me with their recent decisions.

[MEC-777]

I'm not against change at all (I really like Metro with m/k). The thing is that I wholly believe that Microsoft has been making some really good decisions that has improved existing products a lot. For example (don't have links available ATM) open-sourcing .NET, adding a native Android emulator to Visual Studio and 10TB of cloud storage for office 365 subscribers. So it's not that I'm against trying out Linux at all (as I said, I like Synology's DSM); the thing is that Microsoft has set the bar high for me with their recent decisions.

 

I've been using the windows 10 tech preview on our HTPC over the last couple months and I will give them this; that it's definitely lighter on system resources than 8.1. But that's about it. 

 

People say Linux has problems, and it does, but I would be so bold as to say windows has problems too and the problems with windows can be more devastating/annoying to the user. Problems like viruses and malware which are FAR too easy to contract/pick up, even from just clicking on one wrong link. Programs can install on windows and you don't even know it. On Linux nothing gets installed unless YOU, the user, authorize it. When I told my mother-in-law she didn't have to worry about malware and viruses (which had bogged down and partially taken over her old windows desktop) she was over-joyed. 

 

Different people will find different things they like/dislike about any OS and reach different conclusions about said OSs. But I will also say this; If all my favorite games ran natively on Linux, I wouldn't give windows the light of day. Over the last year, that list of games has been growing and even still, there are other ways to run Linux as your main OS and run your windows-only games. So for me, windows is loosing it's grip and Linux is gaining much-needed traction. 

 

I say to each, his/her own, but a little education goes a long way.

[Albatross]

@dalekphalm

 

Good post!

 

I realize Linux still has issues and will need time/changes to fix them. I won't argue the rest of your points but these three as I agree with the others (previously stated in posts);

 

1. Complexity; as I said before, it really isn't that complex. The terminal is not something you have to be in all the time. The average joe can install Ubuntu and really never have to go into the terminal, unless they have severe problems. I started using it when I was just a child, and I have seen other children do the same. I have recommended Ubuntu LTS to people who have never tried any other OS but Windows and have seen them catch on within the week. I simply do not agree that Ubuntu is a complex OS. I have never seen it in such a fashion to describe it as "complex" unless you want it to be.
2. Unified Experience; I don't really see how this is a problem. It is like Windows with multiple different versions of its OS, just with a slight change. That's all Ubuntu and its distros are. Unless you find the rare complex Linux distro, like Manjaro/ArchLinux, the rest of the distros are pretty much the same. Desktop environments may be different at first across several Linux OSes, but there are ways you can install Uninty, Cinnamon (Windows like) etc in a very easy manner. Nowadays most of these distros have the ability to be downloaded/bought in a certain format as well so you don't have to tinker with it. Lastly, believe it or not, the distros aren't that very different. The differences they have are incredibly superficial. That's why you get "advanced" Linux users saying to people who ask for recommendations, "Just pick which you like the desktop more of" because when it comes down to it, there aren't big differences between them. *there are certain exceptions of course
3. Support; Microsoft has support that doesn't work. It might as well not even exist at that point. Look at all those support pages of "officials" recommending people to do things they either already tried and stated to have tried, or to try things impossible of them because of their issues. Ubuntu may not have official support offered as free, but their free community help is still far more effective than any help you can get from Microsoft. Though I definitely agree with you. This is a serious issue holding the OS back.

It is true Linux has some things to wrestle out and improve, but what OS doesn't? Linux has only recently started looking towards mainstream use and since then they have made major improvements to help transition users if they so wish to try or switch over. I never once stated it was, at this moment, the perfect OS to switch to. I said clearly that it was the future, and it will be. It is innovative, free, driven, smart, stable, useful, beautiful, fast and best of all, as easy or as complex as you need or want it to be. Windows will probably remain the main OS for a while now, but it doesn't mean Linux won't become a competitor or close to it within that time or that in the future it cannot take Microsoft's place in the purposes it sets out for people.

 

I see your point though.

 

 

@Albatross

This is NOT IN ANY WAY an argument that Linux should be used as a Desktop OS for the average Joe. Most web servers run off LAMP, this is known. But that's been true since what... the 1990's? That hasn't helped Linux Desktop adoption rates at all. Servers are very very different from Desktop computers, in what they need, what features are important - and most importantly - who is using them.

 

Average Joe isn't going to install a LAMP server on his old PC. Average Joe thinks servers are these magical things in the cloud and has no idea how they actually work - nor does he need to.

 

And until Linux has an "Out of the box" ready to use alternative for Active Directory Domain Servers, then Windows based Servers will still be incredibly popular among business for the foreseeable future. Most businesses actually run a MIX of Windows AND Linux Servers. Why? Because they understand that each has its own advantage. Besides, it's not like Linux Servers end up being any cheaper in the long run, since you pay for support contracts from RedHat or whoever else you use for your Distro. Most Businesses want support contracts because it saves them a lot of time, because their techs don't have to waste time nailing down some random stupid issue where they can contact support and get it fixed in an hour.

 

Linux is great for Web servers, and certain other applications. Windows, however, is great for AD Domains, and user/group control. Both have advantages. One is not simply superior to the other.

 

I think you misunderstood me...

 

LePawel said that it has no uses in this day and age, and I retorted that he was wrong by giving him examples of how Linux is used in this day and age. E.i servers, businesses etc etc. It wasn't said to be connected with the "average joe" and why they should use it for such purposes.

 

LAMP? It is way beyond that, you know. There is Red Hat, SUSE, Debian, CentOS and Mandriva and Ubuntu Server. I believe SUSE and Ubuntu Server are now the most popular server OS. Though Red Hat may be in there, too.

[dalekphalm]

@dalekphalm

 

Good post!

 

I realize Linux still has issues and will need time/changes to fix them. I won't argue the rest of your points but these three as I agree with the others (previously stated in posts);

 

1. Complexity; as I said before, it really isn't that complex. The terminal is not something you have to be in all the time. The average joe can install Ubuntu and really never have to go into the terminal, unless they have severe problems. I started using it when I was just a child, and I have seen other children do the same. I have recommended Ubuntu LTS to people who have never tried any other OS but Windows and have seen them catch on within the week. I simply do not agree that Ubuntu is a complex OS. I have never seen it in such a fashion to describe it as "complex" unless you want it to be.
2. Unified Experience; I don't really see how this is a problem. It is like Windows with multiple different versions of its OS, just with a slight change. That's all Ubuntu and its distros are. Unless you find the rare complex Linux distro, like Manjaro/ArchLinux, the rest of the distros are pretty much the same. Desktop environments may be different at first across several Linux OSes, but there are ways you can install Uninty, Cinnamon (Windows like) etc in a very easy manner. Nowadays most of these distros have the ability to be downloaded/bought in a certain format as well so you don't have to tinker with it. Lastly, believe it or not, the distros aren't that very different. The differences they have are incredibly superficial. That's why you get "advanced" Linux users saying to people who ask for recommendations, "Just pick which you like the desktop more of" because when it comes down to it, there aren't big differences between them. *there are certain exceptions of course
3. Support; Microsoft has support that doesn't work. It might as well not even exist at that point. Look at all those support pages of "officials" recommending people to do things they either already tried and stated to have tried, or to try things impossible of them because of their issues. Ubuntu may not have official support offered as free, but their free community help is still far more effective than any help you can get from Microsoft. Though I definitely agree with you. This is a serious issue holding the OS back.

It is true Linux has some things to wrestle out and improve, but what OS doesn't? Linux has only recently started looking towards mainstream use and since then they have made major improvements to help transition users if they so wish to try or switch over. I never once stated it was, at this moment, the perfect OS to switch to. I said clearly that it was the future, and it will be. It is innovative, free, driven, smart, stable, useful, beautiful, fast and best of all, as easy or as complex as you need or want it to be. Windows will probably remain the main OS for a while now, but it doesn't mean Linux won't become a competitor or close to it within that time or that in the future it cannot take Microsoft's place in the purposes it sets out for people.

 

I see your point though.

 

 

 

I think you misunderstood me...

 

LePawel said that it has no uses in this day and age, and I retorted that he was wrong by giving him examples of how Linux is used in this day and age. E.i servers, businesses etc etc. It wasn't said to be connected with the "average joe" and why they should use it for such purposes.

 

LAMP? It is way beyond that, you know. There is Red Hat, SUSE, Debian, CentOS and Mandriva and Ubuntu Server. I believe SUSE and Ubuntu Server are now the most popular server OS. Though Red Hat may be in there, too.

Great post too @Albatross. I won't deny that you bring up some excellent points and advantages of Linux. It IS getting better. I think Ubuntu has single-handedly given Linux a chance to grow into a mainstream OS.

 

As for the second part of your post (Linus, businesses, servers, etc), then I apologize for misunderstanding you. (Tho LAMP stands for Linux Apache MySQL PHP Server - so it can be run on literally any of the Distro's that you mentioned - which is one of the fucking kickass benefits of running a Linux server). But I fully agree, saying Linux has no uses is just straight up wrong.

[MEC-777]

I'm just right now watching Cary Holzman's latest presentation (about an hour long) and the majority of the time, he's talking about viruses, malware, junkware etc. - how to avoid it and get rid of it by using antivirus software that won't completely keep you safe. I can't help but think how much time could be saved if all those users didn't have to worry about accidentally downloading the wrong file/program or clicking on a wrong link, and instead took that time to learn just how easy Linux can be to use and be learning how much more they could to do with it. It just makes me shake my head, all the frustration and aggravation that could be avoided by going with Linux instead of windows. 

 

When your computer gets old and the hardware no longer compares to what's currently available, you can't install the latest version of windows on it. You can try, but I don't think windows 8.1 will run very well on an old Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz with only 1GB ram. That's one of the major problems with windows. It just keeps getting bigger and bloatier (is that even a word? lol) and the only reason it runs fairly well on modern hardware is because modern hardware is that much faster and most PCs use more than 4GB ram to handle all the extra processes it runs in the background. With Linux, there are certain distros made for older, slower hardware that can significantly extend the life of an old PC (like the Core 2 Duo with 1GB ram) allowing the person to continue using that PC for basic use. There's no fear of not having the latest version of windows to make sure it's compatible with the latest browsers, file types, programs etc. and again, there's no virus or malware risk either. 

 

I could go on, but the point is; there really is a place for Linux among the "average Joe" user, and the key to that is just a little education. Most people don't know how to use windows much beyond the basic GUI interface and with Linux, that's all they need to know - if they're a basic user. Beyond that, once you learn a few simple terminal commands, it may surprise you what you can actually do with it. I'd much rather spend time learning more about my OS instead of wasting that time trying to keep it free of malware and junk. The time you spend using your PC should be enjoyable and productive, not be inundated with maintenance chores in order to keep it safe and running smoothly.

[AxelRantila]

I've been using the windows 10 tech preview on our HTPC over the last couple months and I will give them this; that it's definitely lighter on system resources than 8.1. But that's about it. 

 

People say Linux has problems, and it does, but I would be so bold as to say windows has problems too and the problems with windows can be more devastating/annoying to the user. Problems like viruses and malware which are FAR too easy to contract/pick up, even from just clicking on one wrong link. Programs can install on windows and you don't even know it. On Linux nothing gets installed unless YOU, the user, authorize it. When I told my mother-in-law she didn't have to worry about malware and viruses (which had bogged down and partially taken over her old windows desktop) she was over-joyed. 

 

Different people will find different things they like/dislike about any OS and reach different conclusions about said OSs. But I will also say this; If all my favorite games ran natively on Linux, I wouldn't give windows the light of day. Over the last year, that list of games has been growing and even still, there are other ways to run Linux as your main OS and run your windows-only games. So for me, windows is loosing it's grip and Linux is gaining much-needed traction. 

 

I say to each, his/her own, but a little education goes a long way.

The best tool in protecting yourself from viruses in called common sense... Completely free and cross-platform  

[dalekphalm]

I'm just right now watching Cary Holzman's latest presentation (about an hour long) and the majority of the time, he's talking about viruses, malware, junkware etc. - how to avoid it and get rid of it by using antivirus software that won't completely keep you safe. I can't help but think how much time could be saved if all those users didn't have to worry about accidentally downloading the wrong file/program or clicking on a wrong link, and instead took that time to learn just how easy Linux can be to use and be learning how much more they could to do with it. It just makes me shake my head, all the frustration and aggravation that could be avoided by going with Linux instead of windows. 

 

When your computer gets old and the hardware no longer compares to what's currently available, you can't install the latest version of windows on it. You can try, but I don't think windows 8.1 will run very well on an old Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz with only 1GB ram. That's one of the major problems with windows. It just keeps getting bigger and bloatier (is that even a word? lol) and the only reason it runs fairly well on modern hardware is because modern hardware is that much faster and most PCs use more than 4GB ram to handle all the extra processes it runs in the background. With Linux, there are certain distros made for older, slower hardware that can significantly extend the life of an old PC (like the Core 2 Duo with 1GB ram) allowing the person to continue using that PC for basic use. There's no fear of not having the latest version of windows to make sure it's compatible with the latest browsers, file types, programs etc. and again, there's no virus or malware risk either. 

 

I could go on, but the point is; there really is a place for Linux among the "average Joe" user, and the key to that is just a little education. Most people don't know how to use windows much beyond the basic GUI interface and with Linux, that's all they need to know - if they're a basic user. Beyond that, once you learn a few simple terminal commands, it may surprise you what you can actually do with it. I'd much rather spend time learning more about my OS instead of wasting that time trying to keep it free of malware and junk. The time you spend using your PC should be enjoyable and productive, not be inundated with maintenance chores in order to keep it safe and running smoothly.

I hate to nitpick an otherwise solid post, but

 

there's no virus or malware risk either.

Is false. No if's, and's, or but's about it. There IS still a virus/malware risk on Linux. It's toted as this virus free OS, when that's simply not true.

 

Is the virus risk significantly lower compared to Windows? Yes, this is true. But there have been many viruses made for Linux over the years.

 

Here is a list of malware that has previously threatened Linux:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats

 

Yes, most of those are no longer a threat due to updates to the Kernel or other security fixes, but the point remains: Viruses and malware do exist. Besides, the number one biggest way to get infected is via Social Engineering (Fake FB messages, and the like), and the average Joe is significantly more vulnerable then that.

 

Anyone who uses Linux, unless some Security Guru/Power User, should at the very least perform Monthly/Weekly Scans using a free anti-virus, for which there are several Linux options.

 

The best tool in protecting yourself from viruses in called common sense... Completely free and cross-platform  

Common sense is the foundation, yes. However, common sense is no longer enough, especially for Windows, and even for Mac OS X now, since there have been some very nasty viruses released for that OS recently.

[MEC-777]

The best tool in protecting yourself from viruses in called common sense... Completely free and cross-platform  

Unfortunately, sometimes even that isn't enough with windows. I use a well-known anti-virus program (AVAST), run malwarebytes on a regular basis (in safemode) and I'm super-cautious. Yet some how, some malware programs/bugs STILL got onto my system, and to this day I still haven't been able to completely get rid of them all. Spent a lot of time (too much time) researching these stupid malicious programs and attempting to remove them (some solutions which involve installing yet another unknown program I don't know/trust - yeah not happening) without success.

 

This is one of the main reasons I dislike windows. It's like a giant electro-magnet for this type of thing, whether your cautious and try to avoid it or not. Nobody should have to deal with this and the reality is; a lot of people do have that choice, if they'd only be willing to try a different OS.

 

I'm not saying Linux is a substitute for using common sense, but you shouldn't have to tip-toe around the internet and hope you don't pick up some bad software along the way. You should be free to use your PC without worry.

[MEC-777]

I hate to nitpick an otherwise solid post, but

Is false. No if's, and's, or but's about it. There IS still a virus/malware risk on Linux. It's toted as this virus free OS, when that's simply not true.

 

Is the virus risk significantly lower compared to Windows? Yes, this is true. But there have been many viruses made for Linux over the years.

 

Here is a list of malware that has previously threatened Linux:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware#Threats

 

Yes, most of those are no longer a threat due to updates to the Kernel or other security fixes, but the point remains: Viruses and malware do exist. Besides, the number one biggest way to get infected is via Social Engineering (Fake FB messages, and the like), and the average Joe is significantly more vulnerable then that.

 

Anyone who uses Linux, unless some Security Guru/Power User, should at the very least perform Monthly/Weekly Scans using a free anti-virus, for which there are several Linux options.

 

Common sense is the foundation, yes. However, common sense is no longer enough, especially for Windows, and even for Mac OS X now, since there have been some very nasty viruses released for that OS recently.

 

You're right, it's not completely virus/malware free, but in comparison to windows, it practically is and the risk is magnitudes lower.

 

With windows it's so easy for things to be downloaded/installed without the user even being aware of it. Windows is windows, regardless of who's machine it's installed on and it's on the vast majority of PCs, making it a prime target. 

 

With Linux, nothing is installed unless you authorize it. You need the "sudo" password and root access to do much of anything beyond using a pre-installed program. Also, because of the tiny number of users, that makes us a much smaller target, not worth their time attempting to exploit. It makes more sense to go after windows users who are far greater in number. As long as the user sticks with using programs from the repositories or only software from reputable developers, there should be almost no risk.

[dalekphalm]

You're right, it's not completely virus/malware free, but in comparison to windows, it practically is and the risk is magnitudes lower.

 

With windows it's so easy for things to be downloaded/installed without the user even being aware of it. Windows is windows, regardless of who's machine it's installed on and it's on the vast majority of PCs, making it a prime target. 

 

With Linux, nothing is installed unless you authorize it. You need the "sudo" password and root access to do much of anything beyond using a pre-installed program. Also, because of the tiny number of users, that makes us a much smaller target, not worth their time attempting to exploit. It makes more sense to go after windows users who are far greater in number. As long as the user sticks with using programs from the repositories or only software from reputable developers, there should be almost no risk.

All too true.

 

Though I feel like we must acknowledge that Microsoft IS trying to do something about the security permissions in Windows (Starting with UAC in Vista). Each iteration is more and more secure. Windows 8/8.1 is the most secure Windows yet. Not at the level of Linux, no. But it's getting better.

[AxelRantila]

 

I'm not saying Linux is a substitute for using common sense, but you shouldn't have to tip-toe around the internet and hope you don't pick up some bad software along the way. You should be free to use your PC without worry.

At times (If I'm stretching things a bit), it feels like the opposite it an argument from Linux users to as of why I should switch from Windows

[Humbug]

I'm a Linux noob, i like Linux and use it. But not very knowledgeable with it. A few things annoy me about it and make it harder for me to use than windows. E.g. Installing new software: on windows just download and run an exe and your're done. Same with installing new GPU drivers on windows. Wish it were that easy on Linux when it comes to installing new things from outside the official repositories.

[Albatross]

I'm a Linux noob, i like Linux and use it. But not very knowledgeable with it. A few things annoy me about it and make it harder for me to use than windows. E.g. Installing new software: on windows just download and run an exe and your done. Same with installing new GPU drivers on windows. Wish it were that easy on Linux when it comes to install things from outside the official repositories.

 

Drivers are usually located straight away in "additional hardware"

Software can be installed easily through "Software Center/Synaptic Package Manager/.deb files/etc".

 

 

 

edit

 

scratch out the last part, read it stupidly lol

[Humbug]

Drivers are usually located straight away in "additional hardware"

Software can be installed easily through "Software Center/Synaptic Package Manager/.deb files/etc".

edit

scratch out the last part, read it stupidly lol

Ya inevitably You will want to install stuff that is not provided in their package manager. For example the moment AMD releases a new catalyst beta on Linux i install it without waiting months for it to get pushed to me. Install processes and dependancies seem So much easier on windows. It may be my lack of knowledge that's the issue, but that's just my experience as a user. I push through that pain because i like computers But how many people would?

[Albatross]

inevitably You will want to install stuff that is not provided in their package manager. For example the moment AMD releases a new catalyst beta on Linux i install it without waiting months for it to get pushed to me. Install processes and dependancies seem So much easier on windows. It may be lack of knowledge that's the issue But that's just my experience.

 

Yea, I understand what you mean. I read it like an idiot the first time.

 

Drivers could definitely stand to be a lot easier or a bit more convenient.

[shujin]

No, people in western world are born in homes with computers in them and they naturally learn to use them, same way you naturally learn to control a TV as a kid to find nickelodeon. From your own link: 2014 - Ubuntu has 22000000 users - that's less than an average European country.

I know linux can be faster and more stable, but being better is relative. And having more software is THE argument. Having a stable linux platform is useless for me if I can't get programs I use on daily basis on it.

There one thing elitists have to understand: You are not the majority. Average windows user does not want or need command prompt and doesn't even need to know what it is, all they want is Office and internet, maybe some facebook game or minecraft. What they don't want is stuff they don't know how to use, like OpenOffice I'm sure you were about write down in response. They fear change because it's something they don't want or have time to understand.

Also, tell me the % of computers on a shop floor that come with Linux preinstalled? Because again, the average user won't know how to properly format and install linux, not to mention re-partitioning hard drives, and what about their family photos, will they lose that, or browser bookmarks I guarantee they won't back up?

Go work in a computer store, whatever your local equivalent of a PC World/Best Buy is, and look at an average consumer, then you'll understand why linux has no space in everyday life.

if we would suffice ourself with "the average user want that" we wouldn't go anywhere cause the average user is never wanting to improve. With this mentality we wouldn't even have internet. I have never used linux either and it is only because I don't have the time right now. But if it develop well, I can see it as the future easily.We absolutely need to push thing forward instead than simply saying it's worst cause that will not bring anything. anyway no one can predict the future let's just see what will happen.

[LePawel]

if we would suffice ourself with "the average user want that" we wouldn't go anywhere cause the average user is never wanting to improve. With this mentality we wouldn't even have internet. I have never used linux either and it is only because I don't have the time right now. But if it develop well, I can see it as the future easily.We absolutely need to push thing forward instead than simply saying it's worst cause that will not bring anything. anyway no one can predict the future let's just see what will happen.

Sure no one can predict the future, and sure average user does not push the tech forward. But they are the majority of consumers, and if you want linux to dominate you'd have to convince them most of all.

[CreasingMass]

Wut ._.

[MEC-777]

At times (If I'm stretching things a bit), it feels like the opposite it an argument from Linux users to as of why I should switch from Windows

 

Could you elaborate/explain that a little more? Not sure I understand what you mean...

 

Ya inevitably You will want to install stuff that is not provided in their package manager. For example the moment AMD releases a new catalyst beta on Linux i install it without waiting months for it to get pushed to me. Install processes and dependancies seem So much easier on windows. It may be my lack of knowledge that's the issue, but that's just my experience as a user. I push through that pain because i like computers But how many people would?

 

Linux Kernels have GPU drivers included - drivers that, for most people and for the most part, would work just fine.

 

But in your case you're talking about the latest drivers (many people don't even know what drivers are) and installing them. I also assume you are a gamer looking for the latest software updates to give you better performance. Because of that, I can tell you're an above average user who has a special need/knowledge beyond the basic (you want the latest/bleeding edge software). The average user simply needs a working PC that performs relatively well and can complete the tasks they need it to (browsing, videos, music, word/excel docs, doing their taxes - basic stuff). Having the latest GPU driver and being able to easily install it isn't an issue for basic-use type users. 

 

I agree with you though, GPU drivers is one area that is in great need of improvement on Linux. Steps are being taken to make it better and it is improving, but there's a still a long way to go in that regard. But again, to the basic/average user, they don't even know what a GPU driver is, let alone need to be concerned with how to install it.

[AxelRantila]

Could you elaborate/explain that a little more? Not sure I understand what you mean...

I think we can all agree upon that common sense is a good foundation  for protecting yourself against viruses and the such. However when people start going "[Non-Windows OS] do not have viruses/security vulnerabilities", it almost feels to me that it is a substitute for common sense

[shujin]

Sure no one can predict the future, and sure average user does not push the tech forward. But they are the majority of consumers, and if you want linux to dominate you'd have to convince them most of all.

someday linux will be as easy to use as anything else and this day it will be awesome ^^. It's just important to don't forge our mentality into "it's hard to use and only geek use it" cause that's what will hurt it the most.

[LePawel]

someday linux will be as easy to use as anything else and this day it will be awesome ^^. It's just important to don't forge our mentality into "it's hard to use and only geek use it" cause that's what will hurt it the most.

It's not my mentality, it's people's mentality, nothing you can do about it Unless you want to wipe out a generation or two.

[Mauri]

Sure there are bugs everywhere, and I understand you want this to happen, but 95% of gamers won't switch to an OS they don't know how to use because it's 10% faster in cases X Y and Z. Windows was, is and will be most popular system on the PC because Apple has no gaming support and linux is nerd-stereotyped and no steamOS or steam machine will change it.

The average joe does not know about linux, so they don't associate it with nerds, or anything at all, so it's not the stereotype that's keeping linux from taking off. However, it is true that linux takes higher know-how of computers to use properly, and it will never take off unless it becomes much more user friendly.

[shujin]

It's not my mentality, it's people's mentality, nothing you can do about it Unless you want to wipe out a generation or two.

Well you can speak of it show people how it work their is so much more thing you can do

[LePawel]

Well you can speak of it show people how it work their is so much more thing you can do

Of course! Why didn't I think about spending my time to try an convince tens if not hundreds of millions of users and teach them what I've learned about a system over period of X years (I've actually touched linux once)! Totally doable.