Linux Gaming Is on a Life-Support System Called Steam

[naib]

let's turn the tables for the lulz

Windows on the cloud is on life support
Windows on supercomputers is on life support
Windows doing VXD is on life support
Windows on mobile phones is dead

Where has Linux been kicked off once it was established? Windows continues to be relevant due to the desktop (office, games,...) simply because of the inertia it has built up by proven illegal operations.

They carry on being "relevant" due to the backward compatibility that they are carrying YET this is the thing that weighing them down. If they break it to deal with old poor decisions (NTFS, win32) and people can no longer run their apps, will they stay?

Would Forbes even have reviewed Linux for gaming years ago? Think about it, what is more "life support" or irrelevant ? Reporting it is irrelevant or not reporting because it is irrelevant


I agressively push Linux at work and expose a box I have for heavy simulations. Every time I push it in the majority of the internal IT I keep hearing why it must be windows (even with all the pain, even with having to run three types of AV ...) Now when I speak to the corporate IT dealing with HPC, the response is always "why would you even consider windows"


Cloud and webapps and "good enough" is what will wake people up to why do they need to deal with all the desktop BS that Microsoft subjects it's test subjects to. Desktop Linux (esp using plasma) is making it easier for Joe average. What do people really think is going to happening when the wake-up occurs? butbutbut DX15 is da bestest

 

[dgingeri]

Keep in mind that Microsoft has the best DRM in terms of protecting games from piracy. Denuvo ain't got shit on what Microsoft has. Of course their DRM is strictly tied to Windows so if Microsoft pushes Xbox + Windows gaming then it would be the end of Steam. Microsoft could also start charging developers to use their DirectX but free of charge if developers put their games on their store. Like say if there's a DX13 with proper Ray-Tracing, Microsoft could charge a license fee to use that . For consumers it means better integration with Windows and Xbox.

As far as Microsoft is concerned Valve is just another game developer who hasn't made a game in many years. For the most part Xbox is still a bigger brand name than Steam. All it takes for Microsoft to shut down Steam, Origin, and etc is to flex some muscle. We'll all hate them but that doesn't stop people from buying into it.


No, just no. If you use Steam then it's super easy to do. To install Steam on Ubuntu or Mint is pretty much the same as Windows if not simplier, because Steam is available in the Software Store as well a Minecraft. Sure if you do more sophisticated things like Wine or Emulators then yea you need a command prompt. If you stick with Steam then no need to use a command prompt.

You mean like Windows 8 right?

Yea it's so bad that Microsoft is integrating Linux into Windows.

1. It's easy to install Ubuntu and Mint, and use the things built into it, mostly. There are still a few things that it takes some text file editing to do things that are built in. Adding any additional programs is nearly impossible unless you go to the command line and run some "apt-get install" or "make install" something. Even after that, most programs have to be configured to actually use them, and that requires knowledge of ten different file formats and many times a dozen different programming languages, and THEN deal with documentation that is horrendously over-wordy and missing many of the major things.

My experience with Saltstack was "apt-get install" three different packages and then I had to learn yml, Jinja, and Python to actually configure anything, and even then a basic install wouldn't do squat. I found out later something vitally important was missing from documentation: if you join a minion to a master, it can never join a new master again. THEY NEVER TELL YOU THIS. It is NOWHERE in the documentation, and nothing in the logs tells you what is wrong. It'll say it joined the new master, but then never actually talk to it. Of course, people in their forum told me it was supposedly a SECURITY feature, and then deleted my post! They DIDN'T WANT people to know it! IT'S INSANE! If the master gets corrupted, then you're just SOL on automation on all your systems until you rebuild the ENTIRE structure. THERE IS NO FIX! Four MONTHS of my life trying to get the test lab going according to my boss's instructions was just up in smoke because of those idiots.

In WINE, I had a different experience. I found configuration guide after configuration guide on how to install it, but after I'd get the basic app installed, the next step NEVER matched up with what I was being told. In one guide, the config files were not where it said it would be. In another, the command just returned that the command didn't exist. In another, the supplemental app it told me to install to configure WINE would install and never FIND where WINE WAS. Even then, after much fighting and much struggles, I finally got WINE where it would OPEN, and then I couldn't actually find any instructions on actually installing and running any games on it. I posted time after time in forums all over the place, and people would just tell me it was all my imagination or that I was just too stupid to figure it out. I never managed to get WINE working on Ubuntu 14.04, 16.04 or 18.04 because of this. I've been trying to do this for YEARS, and NOBODY seems to have accurate information on it. I have a system sitting right next to me right now that I built back in October, a Core i7 5930k with a GTX 980 Ti GPU that I have been trying to get working with WINE. I got Steam working, sure. That was fairly easy, but WINE is just beyond me.

At least the GPU drivers got a bit better. When I first started this project of getting a Linux gaming machine going, it took a dozen command line commands, removing old open source drivers, reboot, and then attaching to the Nvidia repository, then installing the new drivers, reboot, and then updating to newer drivers, reboot, etc. FAR worse than Windows, but at least it worked as people said it did. Then, FINALLY, in 18.04, Ubuntu allowed me to install the drivers from the app manager, and it WORKED. That was a FIRST. I was thrilled, until I actually wanted to DO anything with it.

With how I rail against it, you might think I don't use it. That would be a mistake. I do. I'm a sysadmin. I can't do my job if I don't use it. I just think it is a horrible product with a horrible premise. I have also used AIX (an OS for engineers by engineers, and only usable by engineers), HP-UX (an OS developed by demons with Satan himself as the lead dev, specifically to drive humans crazy), and Solaris (an OS developed by hundreds of monkeys throwing crap on walls to see what sticks, and surprise, surprise, it is all just unusable crap). I also administer Cisco (I swear they make it more difficult intentionally) switches and ASAs, HPE storage, Dell/EMC storage, Palo Alto (I love you, PA!) firewalls, and VMWare (you crazy freaks) vSphere and vCloud. I'm certianly no stranger to Linux or the command line. I work as a Cloud Support Engineer for a crazy amalgamation of companies that were smashed together through acquisition and they expect us to support it.

Sure, if you want to just install the basics and only run what the app manager allows you to run, it's pretty simple to use Ubuntu or Mint, just not if you want to do anything further.

2. As for that Windows 8 video, I was working desktop support when Windows 8 came out, and I have NEVER HEARD of most of the problems that guy had with it. He has got to be one of the most incompetent and accident prone computer users I have ever heard of. THE WEATHER APP?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Seriously, he must have set a key combo to the weather app somehow accidentally that coincided with his typing, and then he claims that he couldn't find the X to close the app, when it is right in the upper left like it has always been! I have never seen such a moron on a computer before. I admit that Windows 8 had some user missteps (from things the people MS researched with SAID they wanted, including the touchpad swipe gestures and 'removing' the start button) that they fortunately backpedaled on. I've never used Windows 8 on a laptop, specifically because of those idiotic swipe gestures that so many morons found trendy back then, but I did use it, and I adapted to it in minutes. It didn't even take me half an hour to figure out where everything I needed was. I left my parents on Windows 7 because of those idiot changes people claimed they wanted. As for the 'removal' of the start button, it wasn't actually removed, but reduced to the 16 pixels in that corner of the screen, and was easily accessible, if you read anything about Windows 8 before trying it. However, they did change things back quickly (and for free) in the later versions, considering upgrades to 8.1 and 10 were completely free.

As for his lack of a sticker with the product key, that would be the fault of the MANUFACTURER, not MS. The fact his laptop was missing that was something the manufacturer failed to do. His blaming MS for it is asinine, especially considering that MS REQUIRES manufacturers to put that sticker on when they sell computers with it installed. In addition, MS has had the ability to download the install media from their site from the product key since Windows 7. How do I know this? BECAUSE I USED IT to download an ISO, the DAY Windows 8 came out! He's just a moron.

I will admit he has a point with the Metro apps in the Windows Store, and the naming of the 'charms' bar. (Those are asinine.) I wish they'd just throw the whole thing out. They still keep trying to get people to use it, and the interface is horrible. Even the calculator and calendar apps are horrible with it, even in Windows 10. I would prefer they go back to the old on those and just chuck the whole Windows Store App style entirely, but there are morons in their research groups that keep telling them to keep going on it.

As for his noting that they use high res icons for the apps but no labels, that's happening with Ubuntu and Mac OSX right now. I do, indeed, HATE that. Whenever I get on a machine where I log in for the first time (as a sysadmin, I do that a LOT) I change the settings on the taskbar INSTANTLY to NOT stack and use small icons so that it shows the labels. Again, that was something morons requested so that they could run more stuff without filling up the task bar. At work, I run 18 tabs in Chrome, Notepad++, a password keeper, a software phone app, the HPE 3Par storage management console, Putty Manager, Remote Desktop manager, Outlook, and Virtualbox for a Linux (Ubuntu Server) VM, and I can still read all my labels. It's a matter of being responsible in what is run, and some in the general population refuse to be responsible for themselves.

Yes, Windows 8 had more than a few mistakes, as did Vista, as did Win Me. Vista's mistakes were more about changing up the driver formats for no apparent reason. Win Me mistakes were more about how they wanted to make things pretty at the expense of functionality. MS learned from those and hasn't made those mistakes again. In each case, there were still options to run older versions for a while until a new version came out that corrected them. That merely reinforces my point about singular leadership.

Linux mistakes happen all the time, and it seems nobody learns from anyone else and the mistakes keep being made over and over.

Microsoft has begun integrating the Linux command line into Windows as a way to get Linux users to use Windows more. It's a misguided thing, and likely won't get used hardly at all. It doesn't run most Linux apps, and it doesn't even have any graphical options. It's actually better, if you want to use Linux, to use a Linux VM. (I do.)

 

[Dr. Righteous]

Wine is native.

Wine is not an emulator. Its in the name.

Wine is an open source implementation of the Windows API that is all.

DXVK is a an actual translation layer from DX to Vulkan.

So really you should say.... Give me Vulkan native games. Vulkan native tends to run faster on Linux no matter if they are using Linux compiled binaries or the wine binary libraries.

Would agree on this but I think there is a undercurrent steering things that isn't immediately apparent. That would be the general decline of gaming on the PC. Gave development is console driven and that is why gaming on linux which unshackles game development in many ways has not been taking up by the big studios. I think part of it is the declining interest in gaming because much of the PC user base is getting older. I don't think this space is being taken up by "the kids" since most of them game on consoles. Computer illiteracy is still pretty high; meaning that a lot of people don't find a computer a useful tool in their every day life except for things concerning social media which can't be considered productive. For those of us who use a computer daily for productive work that is it's main purpose. Gaming is for one's free time. And that is something that is becoming a more rare and precious commodity.

 

[ManofGod]

let's turn the tables for the lulz

Windows on the cloud is on life support
Windows on supercomputers is on life support
Windows doing VXD is on life support
Windows on mobile phones is dead

Where has Linux been kicked off once it was established? Windows continues to be relevant due to the desktop (office, games,...) simply because of the inertia it has built up by proven illegal operations.

They carry on being "relevant" due to the backward compatibility that they are carrying YET this is the thing that weighing them down. If they break it to deal with old poor decisions (NTFS, win32) and people can no longer run their apps, will they stay?

Would Forbes even have reviewed Linux for gaming years ago? Think about it, what is more "life support" or irrelevant ? Reporting it is irrelevant or not reporting because it is irrelevant


I agressively push Linux at work and expose a box I have for heavy simulations. Every time I push it in the majority of the internal IT I keep hearing why it must be windows (even with all the pain, even with having to run three types of AV ...) Now when I speak to the corporate IT dealing with HPC, the response is always "why would you even consider windows"


Cloud and webapps and "good enough" is what will wake people up to why do they need to deal with all the desktop BS that Microsoft subjects it's test subjects to. Desktop Linux (esp using plasma) is making it easier for Joe average. What do people really think is going to happening when the wake-up occurs? butbutbut DX15 is da bestest

Only the last part you mentioned of those 4 is correct, the other three are not.

 

[ThatITGuy]

Your second point is a big one.

I swear I have never seen a steam survey pop up while I'm on Linux. My wife has a windows box around, when I'm at her place I will sometimes use her windows machine which I have few of my steam games on. I swear it seems that machine pops up a survey every month. lol

Wait, so you and your wife have separate places? I am both curious and slightly jealous.

 

[ThatITGuy]

I'd just like to chime in and say that after trying to switch to Linux at least a dozen times over the last ten years or so, I'd always come back to Windows. Something never worked, a game I liked wouldn't run, or the UI's were just so alien that I couldn't wrap my head around them. Linux was typically relegated to a secondary entry on my boot loader that would seldom find any use.

About two months ago I upgraded my PC to an i7-9700K from a 4770K, and decided to move over cold turkey to Ubuntu 18.10. Having dedicated enough time to actually learn the intricacies of Gnome, I've found that most of the tools I used for development can be found/accomplished natively, The system feels light, fast, and I have a workflow where I've had to make no compromises. There's a great feeling in looking down at the tower and not seeing the hard drive light flashing like mad when the machine is idle.

As for gaming, I'm more of a strategy type and with the Total War, Civilization, and Paradox titles available natively I have everything I need. Only issues I've had with Proton are with anti-cheat enforcing software. I've even found open source software to control my Corsair keyboard, mouse and headset.

--- TLDR ---
I've tried Linux in the past and always returned to Windows. Went cold turkey after a recent hardware upgrade and found it worthy. YMMV.

Same for me (although I hated gnome and switched to using KDE and XFCE). I still keep a Windows box just for newer games or games that do not run on Linux very well, but that is becoming fewer and fewer. I actually went from 3 machines running Windows (2 desktop, 1 laptop) and 1 junk laptop I occasionally threw Linux on to play with, to now just 1 desktop still having Windows on it, and everything else running Linux.
I think for me the biggest thing was I always was afraid to move to Linux because "Some day I might want to do ____, and that cannot be done easily on Linux." I have come to the realization that 1) I actually don't really do anything that complicated 2) Linux can do almost everything Windows can do.

 

[naib]

Only the last part you mentioned of those 4 is correct, the other three are not.

hahahah hahahah ORLY https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500
usage of windows on the cloud is declining
VXD is heavily linux orientated

 

[trparky]

For Linux to really go mainstream

There needs to be one unifying distro of Linux simply to get things done. Yes, I know... the Linux community is all about choice but as I said before in a previous post in this thread, the average user couldn't give a rat's ass about choice. All they care about is if it works; nothing more, nothing less. Build one distro of Linux for the average user where any and all decision making has been taken out of the hands of the user for the average user doesn't want to make those decisions, they just want to sit down at their computer and do what needs to be done. Of course you can build in a "power user" mode that enables advanced stuff but again, that's not for the average user. Do that and that Linux distro will be the one that kills Microsoft.

As for everyone else in the Linux community, the existence of that distro I'm talking about above won't at all take away the choice that Linux users oh so much love to say that they want. You can still have your choice of distros, it just means that you don't get any support when things don't go right. The software company would disavow you if you choose to go your own way.

 

[Stoly]

2019 is poised to be the year of Linux on the desktop.

As was 2018, 2017, 2016.... you get the idea...

 

[Stoly]

I'm appreciative of Valve's efforts in this regard, but in th egrand scheme of things, dual booting just for games isn't that much of an inconvenience.

Or you can just use windows...

 

[odditory]

I think part of it is the declining interest in gaming because much of the PC user base is getting older. I don't think this space is being taken up by "the kids" since most of them game on consoles.

FortNite would like a word. There it's kids, and adults whose brains never fully formed.

You're partially right though - there's a generational shift happening in gaming, with a critical mass of iPad kids that have only known free mobile games.

 

[horskh]

A derogatory statement on the internet was said about a technology I enjoy. Must resist the urge to rage.

Many folks here enjoy building their own computers. Running a Linux desktop can be the software equivalent. You learn about how the OS components come together. You pick your preferred distribution, and within that you may pick your desktop and other software. It's a learning experience. But in the end, if you really don't like it, you haven't spent anything on it.

 

[Stoly]

I think its funny how there´s supposed to be an "avegare joe" Linux

I recall at some point Ubunto, Debian, Mint, Manjaro were supposed to for the Average Joe...

I'll just keep waiting for the next Average Joe Linux.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Or you can just use windows...

Nah, that would be about 1000 times more frustrating than having to reboot every once in a while.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I think its funny how there´s supposed to be an "avegare joe" Linux

I recall at some point Ubunto, Debian, Mint, Manjaro were supposed to for the Average Joe...

I'll just keep waiting for the next Average Joe Linux.

In many ways Ubuntu/Mint are easier than Windows.

I can pop in a Mint USB install thumbdrive, and be up and running with a fully installed Mint install in less than 10 minutes. I don't need to hunt down drivers, most of my software is already installed, it just works.

Windows on the other hand, now I have to go on a hunt for specific chipset drivers, video card drivers. What sound chipset, LAN chip and Wifi chipset did I have again? Got to find those drivers. Oh, the ones on the Motherboard/Laptop manufacturers site are old? Now I have to hunt them down from the chipset manufacturers site. in 99% of cases on a modern Linux distribution, you don't have to do this. Just pop in the install disk, and install. Every driver you need is built into the kernel.

The only time Linux is more difficult is if you are trying to get it to work on bleeding edge hardware, because it takes a while after launch for the community to come up with working drivers for the hardware, and for it to make its way downstream from kernel.org to the distributions shipping it. In that interim, you can usually get things working, but then you may have to fight with custom kernels, patches, etc., which can be a pain. Most of the time, this is not the case though.

The GUI of the various desktops available on Linux are every bit as easy to use as the Windows GUI is.

The real reason many consider Linux to be "difficult" is because they have an irrational fear of the command line, when in reality the command line is often much EASIER than using any GUI, as long as you are mentally inclined to give it an honest chance.

Even today, I usually do many tasks on Linux in the command line rather than the available GUI tool, because I find it more efficient and easier than to ahve to use my mouse to hunt and peck through graphical menus.

I think most people could get used to the GUI and overcome their irrational fear of the command line. The two places where Linux fall down are as follows:

1.) Hardware compatibility for new hardware. Let's face it. With the exception of Nvidia's binary GPU drivers, most of the time it just isn't there, and as hardware enthusiasts we tend to want to buy the latest and greatest. This becomes a problem.

2.) Commercial software/games availability. Usually there is an Open Source work-alike that offers 90% of the functionality as the paid Windows software does, but 90% isn't 100%. For the times when you absolutely have to have the brand name software package, there are hacks such as WINE, but they are never ideal.

So, as long as the two points above aren't a problem for you, absolutely anyone can use Linux. My mother in law in her 70's can use a Linux laptop, as can my stepson, and he started at age 5.

 

[trparky]

I think its funny how there´s supposed to be an "avegare joe" Linux

I recall at some point Ubunto, Debian, Mint, Manjaro were supposed to for the Average Joe...

I'll just keep waiting for the next Average Joe Linux.

It won't become an "Average Joe" type of Linux until big companies support it and by that I mean a Linux distro that you can install and use iTunes, Quicken, TurboTax, Photoshop, etc. on it and not have to worry about if it'll work or not. On Windows it's generally known that if you go to some software company's web site and download a piece of software it will work with 99% certainty. With Linux, not so much since it still does not have wide spread commercial software support and backing.

Contrary to what the Linux community thinks, commercial software is here to stay. Not all software (despite what that zealot Richard Stallman thinks) can be free; some software has to be commercial software.

irrational fear of the command line

There's a reason why GUIs were made, to make computers easy to use. We left the command line back in the 1980s, leave it there where it belongs!!!

when in reality the command line is often much EASIER than using any GUI

That is if you can remember all of the various command line commands and syntaxes. Nope, we made GUIs so that we don't have to remember that shit.

Commercial software/games availability. Usually there is an Open Source work-alike that offers 90% of the functionality as the paid Windows software does, but 90% isn't 100%. For the times when you absolutely have to have the brand name software package, there are hacks such as WINE, but they are never ideal.

When it comes to a business, 90% functionality is not enough; it's 100% or nothing.

For instance, LibreOffice... for your average home user it may be fine. For businesses? Nope. I myself have seen LibreOffice, despite all the work that's been done to make it more compatible with Microsoft Word, completely mangle a Microsoft Word document. The formatting is completely and utterly screwed up, fonts screwed up, etc. For a business, that's not acceptable.

Until the Linux community understands that 90% compatibility isn't enough Linux will never be able to completely crush Microsoft under the heel of their boots.

Which is something I don't understand. Doesn't the Linux community want to see Microsoft dead... DEAD... DEAD!? I certainly do. So why don't they?

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

It won't become an "Average Joe" type of Linux until big companies support it and by that I mean a Linux distro that you can install and use iTunes, Quicken, TurboTax, Photoshop, etc. on it and not have to worry about if it'll work or not. On Windows it's generally known that if you go to some software company's web site and download a piece of software it will work with 99% certainty. With Linux, not so much since it still does not have wide spread commercial software support and backing.

In a way using Windows is a lot like driving an SUV. Most people will never take their SUV offroad. They don't need one. It is a silly waste of money and fuel for them, and it comes with all sort of risks for on road use. But it is aspirational. They CAN drive offroad, should they ever desire to do so.

Same with windows. Most people don't need or use Photoshop, TurboTax or Quicken. They do their taxes in a online TurboTax or H&R Block web browser window, don't want to pay for expensive software like Photoshop and don't do any kind of bookkeeping. You don't even need iTunes to use an iPhone anymore.

As long as they can access Facebook in a browser, and their kids can type their school essays in a no-cost word processor (probably Google docs most of the time) they are fine. They'd probably not need anything more than a Chromebook.

Linux would work just fine for these people - the majority of all home users - especially since they probably are not spending extra money on the latest and greatest hardware.

The typical computer user rarely does anything outside of a browser (YouTube, Netflix, Amazon, Taxes, webmail, you name it).

It's the aspirational nature of it that sinks it. The "I could if I wanted to (but I probably never will)" aspect. That's the problem.

Contrary to what the Linux community thinks, commercial software is here to stay. Not all software (despite what that zealot Richard Stallman thinks) can be free; some software has to be commercial software.

This is certainly the case for professionals and office use, but for she overwhelming majority of home users, I'd argue that no, it isn't.

There's a reason why GUIs were made, to make computers easy to use. We left the command line back in the 1980s, leave it there where it belongs!!!

That is if you can remember all of the various command line commands and syntaxes. Nope, we made GUIs so that we don't have to remember that shit.

This is just a prejudice. The command line is in many cases a MUCH more convenient and quick way to do things. The only reason more people don't use it is because of this mental fear that it is "hard" because you have to type.

When it comes to a business, 90% functionality is not enough; it's 100% or nothing.

For instance, LibreOffice... for your average home user it may be fine. For businesses? Nope. I myself have seen LibreOffice, despite all the work that's been done to make it more compatible with Microsoft Word, completely mangle a Microsoft Word document. The formatting is completely and utterly screwed up, fonts screwed up, etc. For a business, that's not acceptable.

Until the Linux community understands that 90% compatibility isn't enough Linux will never be able to completely crush Microsoft under the heel of their boots.

I agree. And this will never change. LibreOffice is much better today than it was even 6 months ago. They are always improving, but it will be a constant game of catch-up to try to reverse engineer compatibility with a closed source product released by an opaque organization.

The real problem here is that we are treating proprietary formats like Microsofts .doc(x), .xls(x) and .ppt(x) as if they were some sort of standard. They aren't. They are proprietary formats designed without any consideration for third party applications.

That said, there are other applications that don't have this problem. Gimp - for instance - can do 90% of what a current Photoshop can do, with out the nasty $25/month subscription fee. It may not look exactly the same, and some things may take a little bit more work, but in general you can accomplish 90% of what you can in Photoshop for free. Most users don't need the full Photoshop feature set, and would be happy to trade that last 10% for the fact that it is free, if they only knew about it, because otherwise their alternative is Ms Paint, which is VERY limited.

Which is something I don't understand. Doesn't the Linux community want to see Microsoft dead... DEAD... DEAD!? I certainly do. So why don't they?

I like things the way they are, or at least the way they were maybe 5-7 years ago.

Windows serves a purpose, as does Linux. If either of them were to go the way of the dodo, we would be worse off.

Linux doesn't need to take over the world. It is an OS by geeks for geeks, and that's the way I like it.

The changes that would need to be made to get it universal adoption would by necessity ruin what many of us love about it.

If I wanted Linux to be Windows, I would just use Windows.

 

[Stoly]

In many ways Ubuntu/Mint are easier than Windows.

I can pop in a Mint USB install thumbdrive, and be up and running with a fully installed Mint install in less than 10 minutes. I don't need to hunt down drivers, most of my software is already installed, it just works.

Windows on the other hand, now I have to go on a hunt for specific chipset drivers, video card drivers. What sound chipset, LAN chip and Wifi chipset did I have again? Got to find those drivers. Oh, the ones on the Motherboard/Laptop manufacturers site are old? Now I have to hunt them down from the chipset manufacturers site. in 99% of cases on a modern Linux distribution, you don't have to do this. Just pop in the install disk, and install. Every driver you need is built into the kernel.

The only time Linux is more difficult is if you are trying to get it to work on bleeding edge hardware, because it takes a while after launch for the community to come up with working drivers for the hardware, and for it to make its way downstream from kernel.org to the distributions shipping it. In that interim, you can usually get things working, but then you may have to fight with custom kernels, patches, etc., which can be a pain. Most of the time, this is not the case though.

The GUI of the various desktops available on Linux are every bit as easy to use as the Windows GUI is.

The real reason many consider Linux to be "difficult" is because they have an irrational fear of the command line, when in reality the command line is often much EASIER than using any GUI, as long as you are mentally inclined to give it an honest chance.

Even today, I usually do many tasks on Linux in the command line rather than the available GUI tool, because I find it more efficient and easier than to ahve to use my mouse to hunt and peck through graphical menus.

I think most people could get used to the GUI and overcome their irrational fear of the command line. The two places where Linux fall down are as follows:

1.) Hardware compatibility for new hardware. Let's face it. With the exception of Nvidia's binary GPU drivers, most of the time it just isn't there, and as hardware enthusiasts we tend to want to buy the latest and greatest. This becomes a problem.

2.) Commercial software/games availability. Usually there is an Open Source work-alike that offers 90% of the functionality as the paid Windows software does, but 90% isn't 100%. For the times when you absolutely have to have the brand name software package, there are hacks such as WINE, but they are never ideal.

So, as long as the two points above aren't a problem for you, absolutely anyone can use Linux. My mother in law in her 70's can use a Linux laptop, as can my stepson, and he started at age 5.

I can easily have windows intalled in less than 15 minutes. (actaully I'm installing windows 10 on a laptop later, I'll let you know how it goes.) About the only drivers I'll need is video card drivers and wifi maybe.

 

[trparky]

Most people don't need or use Photoshop, TurboTax or Quicken. ... They do their taxes in a online TurboTax

Some of us don't want to do stuff in the web browser, some of us want to have a desktop program. And besides, if you have anything more than a simple W2 form like if you have a 401K to report and associated capital gains and losses, you need the full TurboTax to do your taxes.

Of either of them were to go the way of the dodo, we would be worse off.

I don't see it that way. If Microsoft died tomorrow under the boots of Linux the world would rejoice.

Linux doesn't need to take over the world. It is an OS by geeks for geeks, and that's the way I like it.

What's wrong with a little world domination?

 

[odditory]

I can easily have windows intalled in less than 15 minutes. (actaully I'm installing windows 10 on a laptop later, I'll let you know how it goes.) About the only drivers I'll need is video card drivers and wifi maybe.

Yeah installtime is a moot point these days - recently I've done both a Mint install and Windows 1809 (with 99% of the bloat removed from the ISO except for WMR) - installing from a fast USB3 flashdrive to a fast NVMe and installtime is like 30-60 seconds for either OS. Probably a tad faster for Linux since it doesn't have setup wizards trying to trick you into a MS account or having to turn off all the data collection crap that's defaulted to Full blast.

My goal this quarter is transitioning everything I can to Linux so that my W10 box is a glorified VR host box - least until Valve hopefully and finally shatters the Linux VR barrier with the new HMD they've been working on.

 

[ChadD]

There needs to be one unifying distro of Linux simply to get things done. Yes, I know... the Linux community is all about choice but as I said before in a previous post in this thread, the average user couldn't give a rat's ass about choice. All they care about is if it works; nothing more, nothing less. Build one distro of Linux for the average user where any and all decision making has been taken out of the hands of the user for the average user doesn't want to make those decisions, they just want to sit down at their computer and do what needs to be done. Of course you can build in a "power user" mode that enables advanced stuff but again, that's not for the average user. Do that and that Linux distro will be the one that kills Microsoft.

As for everyone else in the Linux community, the existence of that distro I'm talking about above won't at all take away the choice that Linux users oh so much love to say that they want. You can still have your choice of distros, it just means that you don't get any support when things don't go right. The software company would disavow you if you choose to go your own way.

We already have... Google calls it chromeos. No it doesn't have a "power user" mode but that is a good thing. The truth is normal every day users can't handle power user modes and balk at any attempt to give them home editions. Just look at windows. No one at all wants windows home. No one wants windows -s. In the case of windows -s isn't it what everyone here is talking about. A stupid simple more secure easy to use OS. Yet even regular users that would be fine with that and benefit from -s hate the idea. If ChromeOS had power user mode every one would turn it on and it would be a mess.

Anyway short of games chromeos pretty much what people like you are talking about when you say one distro... so my point, be careful what you wish for. Or you'll get ChromeOS with a steam client.

I'll stick with GNU/:Linux. We really pretty much where Linux needs to be for the main stream. I use manjaro and it is the way to go. The main issue I find is Linux people tend to suggest bullet proof workstation aimed distros like Ubuntu and Suse. They are great get work done distros but imo there are terrible gamer / power user distros. Manjaro is semi rolling with 3 testing rings ... its rock stable, and yet provides users very current software so they don't have to go breaking their workstation installs with third party installs for simple things like GPU drivers ect.

For some reason windows users hold Linux to an unrealistic standard. For linux to win some of the Linux doubters over I really believe it would have the be windows 7 with the easy of mac os with the features of 10 with the stability of a Linux server.... all while offering the one click easy installs a degree beyond android / ios and the other mobile OS that dominate the PC world.

 

[trparky]

Or you'll get ChromeOS with a steam client.

I don't have a problem with that.

For some reason windows users hold Linux to an unrealistic standard. For linux to win some of the Linux doubters over I really believe it would have the be windows 7 with the easy of mac os with the features of 10 with the stability of a Linux server.... all while offering the one click easy installs a degree beyond android / ios and the other mobile OS that dominate the PC world.

If that happened, Microsoft would quite simply be dead. You would see Microsoft's market share nose dive faster than you can say "oh shit." You have no idea how many people want to escape the clutches of Microsoft yet Linux is not quite there yet, not quite to the point where it would be the ultimate Microsoft killer. Like I said a few short sentences before, if that happened you'd see people jump ship so freakin' fast people in Redmond, WA would have whiplash. Microsoft would be dead in a matter of months and the world would rejoice.

Linux is by far a much better, much cleaner, much more reliable operating system than Windows could ever hope to be. Unfortunately, due to the ease of use and the huge software library that Windows supports, Windows is what we're all pretty much stuck with. We're stuck with it, it doesn't mean that we like it. Hell, many of us geeks hate it that we're shackled to Windows due to the dominance that Windows has in the industry. If Linux could break that dominance the world would rejoice.

 

[KarsusTG]

I don't really see the point as all PC gaming is on the support system of Steam. Other than gog, there are very few viable options.

 

[dgingeri]

let's turn the tables for the lulz

Windows on the cloud is on life support
Windows on supercomputers is on life support
Windows doing VXD is on life support
Windows on mobile phones is dead

Where has Linux been kicked off once it was established? Windows continues to be relevant due to the desktop (office, games,...) simply because of the inertia it has built up by proven illegal operations.

They carry on being "relevant" due to the backward compatibility that they are carrying YET this is the thing that weighing them down. If they break it to deal with old poor decisions (NTFS, win32) and people can no longer run their apps, will they stay?

Would Forbes even have reviewed Linux for gaming years ago? Think about it, what is more "life support" or irrelevant ? Reporting it is irrelevant or not reporting because it is irrelevant


I agressively push Linux at work and expose a box I have for heavy simulations. Every time I push it in the majority of the internal IT I keep hearing why it must be windows (even with all the pain, even with having to run three types of AV ...) Now when I speak to the corporate IT dealing with HPC, the response is always "why would you even consider windows"


Cloud and webapps and "good enough" is what will wake people up to why do they need to deal with all the desktop BS that Microsoft subjects it's test subjects to. Desktop Linux (esp using plasma) is making it easier for Joe average. What do people really think is going to happening when the wake-up occurs? butbutbut DX15 is da bestest

Windows had a lag for a bit, but is recovering now with Server 2016. As a Cloud Support Tech for about 2 months now, I have seen 5 companies move off Linux web and database servers to Windows specifically because they had stability and support issues. First off, they had major problems getting competent Linux admins. Second, while the OS didn't have stability issues, the apps they had were major sources of stability problems. One particular major national restaurant chain moved off their Linux based POS control system because they were having to reboot the servers upwards of three times per day. Since they implemented their Windows based POS system, they haven't had any stability problems. (They still have some restaurants on the old system, and, working overnight, I have to reboot their Linux VMs in a certain order every night at 2:00AM. They get rebooted during the day when they hang up, so it is not as consistent.) Many of these Linux applications were custom built, and built poorly.

We've also had issues recently with Linux VMs being compromised and deposited with hacker tools. Hackers love to hide their tools on someone else's server, so if they get caught they don't have the evidence right on their systems, and can recover their abilities quickly after an arrest, but we've begun to catch them and remove such tools lately. We actually have network analytics now that detect the activity of those tools, and shut them down. Every single time we've caught that, it has been on a Linux server, and not once on a Windows server, among ANY of our 400+ customers and 2600+ VMs and dedicated servers. Oh, Linux definitely has some security problems. Winidows servers do get infected and become bots sometimes or have compromised web sites, especially unprotected ones, but they don't become the tool boxes and C&C servers of the hackers. I am well aware of how much hackers LOVE Linux. (Guess what, so do corporate managers.)

I'd blame it on the apps, but that is not the entire story. A big thing is companies are having a hard time finding competent Linux admins to care for their systems, which leads to about $10,000 to $12,000 additional pay for Linux admins in my area. In Denver, Windows admins make about $65,000/year, while Linux admins make about $75,000 and up. I was shopping for jobs for over 5 years, up until December, when I got my current job. (My last two employers SUCKED, so I was looking for jobs as I worked there.) I know the job market well, and there are a LOT of jobs for Linux admins right now, but they are declining, even while the job market expands, specifically because it costs so much more to support Linux systems.

I do have one more example: https://www.zdnet.com/article/munic...t-of-dropping-linux-and-returning-to-windows/

It may be a big fad in IT to move to Linux, but it is definitely not working for many companies. It's still good for small jobs. I know haproxy is a great app for load balancing and redundancy in web pages and apps, for example. It just doesn't have the cost effectiveness for major corporate work for many companies.