No, the Linux Desktop Hasn’t Jumped in Popularity

The proof is in the pudding: Walmart partnered with a computer company YEARS ago (I think it was eMachines) that offered cheaper hardware with a Linux distro on them. It was their least expensive desktop computer offering at the time. And it failed miserably, because almost all customers wanted Windows and paid the higher price to get it.

In short, Linux has been mass-marketed before and always fails to get past the cash registers.
 
jardows said:
The Technical superiority that Linux supposedly has on the desktop realistically is not great enough to persuade the average user. Until the Linux community realizes this, and is able to design the OS to improve the computer experience in a significant perceptible way, Linux on the Desktop is going to continue to be relegated to the extreme minority.
Click to expand...
That's the problem with the Linux community, they have their heads too far into the code to realize why people in general don't use Linux. You can build the most safe and secure system but if it's not usable by the average user then nobody is going to use it. There needs to be a good amount of software that can be used on the platform to make the platform successful. Oh yes, the Linux community will say that there's lots of software to use but almost none of the software supports commercial standards (there is LibreOffice but that's an oddity in the open source world). And we're not even talking about how a lot of open source software looks like it was designed by someone who has no eye for design.

The community says that commercial standards are evil and bad and that they shouldn't be supported. Newsflash people, the world revolves around those standards and if you want to gain any kind of support outside of a small minority you need to support those commercial standards and that, sadly, includes DRM. Yes, DRM is a dirty word and I hate it as much as the next tech person but like it or not it's not going to be going anywhere anytime soon. If you want people to use the platform DRM will need to be supported. Principles are nice but they don't help you gain market share.
 
trparky said:
That's the problem with the Linux community, they have their heads too far into the code to realize why people in general don't use Linux. You can build the most safe and secure system but if it's not usable by the average user then nobody is going to use it. There needs to be a good amount of software that can be used on the platform to make the platform successful. Oh yes, the Linux community will say that there's lots of software to use but almost none of the software supports commercial standards (there is LibreOffice but that's an oddity in the open source world). And we're not even talking about how a lot of open source software looks like it was designed by someone who has no eye for design.

The community says that commercial standards are evil and bad and that they shouldn't be supported. Newsflash people, the world revolves around those standards and if you want to gain any kind of support outside of a small minority you need to support those commercial standards and that, sadly, includes DRM. Yes, DRM is a dirty word and I hate it as much as the next tech person but like it or not it's not going to be going anywhere anytime soon. If you want people to use the platform DRM will need to be supported. Principles are nice but they don't help you gain market share.
Click to expand...

It also needs to be usable from the standpoint that arcane knowledge and extensive memorization are not needed to do most tasks. Linux fails in that respect so hard. It will never become mainstream because mainstream people can't use it.
 
Chopsticks are for elitist pricks. Everyone has a fork. Regular users don't have time to learn how to use chopsticks because they're not intuitive. You should use a fork because it does everything you need so it's more better.
 
It's hard to have confidence in a metric report that requires the company to go back and change the numbers after the fact.
 
DejaWiz said:
The proof is in the pudding: Walmart partnered with a computer company YEARS ago (I think it was eMachines) that offered cheaper hardware with a Linux distro on them. It was their least expensive desktop computer offering at the time. And it failed miserably, because almost all customers wanted Windows and paid the higher price to get it.

In short, Linux has been mass-marketed before and always fails to get past the cash registers.
Click to expand...
But desktop Linux could succeed here, but not in its current form. Instead of trying to change the world to accept the greatness of Linux, the community must look at what needs changed about Linux so the world will accept it.
 
DejaWiz said:
The proof is in the pudding: Walmart partnered with a computer company YEARS ago (I think it was eMachines) that offered cheaper hardware with a Linux distro on them. It was their least expensive desktop computer offering at the time. And it failed miserably, because almost all customers wanted Windows and paid the higher price to get it.

In short, Linux has been mass-marketed before and always fails to get past the cash registers.
Click to expand...
I don't think you can hang that on the OS. The race to the bottom with Netbooks did not provide a good experience for anyone. Feedback from Dell has been positive about the XPS Developer edition sales, and System76 has been growing like crazy, and Google's higher end Chromebooks are evidently selling enough to where they keep making new ones.

Maybe if you don't make shit devices, people might want to buy them?
 
jardows said:
But desktop Linux could succeed here, but not in its current form. Instead of trying to change the world to accept the greatness of Linux, the community must look at what needs changed about Linux so the world will accept it.
Click to expand...
It never will succeed for a few reasons:

1. No guidance. There is nobody in charge to tell people how to consistently do things, therefore all the aspects of it will have varying logic, and therefore work very differently, and therefore won't interact properly. Also, with no guidance and nobody in charge, stuff doesn't get done, and we get tons of half finished crap for programs.

2. No help. In 20 years I have tried using Linux, I have been able to find very little help to figuring out how to do things. I'm a systems admin with 20 years of experience in Windows, FC storage, VMWare, and up through server level hardware, and it took me over 12 hours of looking through forum posts with so much unrelated crap to figure out how to configure nxlog to transfer log information securely. Oh, sure, there was documentation on what each setting did and what all the program was capable of doing, but no instructions on HOW to do it. It's like handing a child the user manual on a car and expecting them to just know how to drive from Chicago to Denver. So what if they know that the brake pedal makes it stop and the accelerator makes it go, if they don't know how the road system works, they'll be incapable of doing much of doing much of anything. The "community" is hardly of any help, either, as most responses are complete non-answers. It's like Linux people specifically train on how to answer and still not answer questions, from documentation to forum posts. That's all I've ever been able to get out of them.

3. it's HARD. A lot of Linux requires far, FAR more work to configure or do compared to Windows. This is from a severe lack of automation. Oh, sure, people can build their own automation, but they don't, at least not for anyone else to use. The vast majority is done through command line, which sucks for most users and requires massive amounts of memory on the part of the user. Computer memory can be upgraded and increase, user memory can't. Let the computer do the automation so the users don't have to remember so much. That WAS the point of computers. The people behind Linux have lost this and seem to think that they need to save computer memory at the cost of user memory. That's backwards. Microsoft gets that. That's why Windows takes up more memory each upgrade. It's actually doing more for the user, and that's what they're supposed to do.
 
fdY26jS.jpg
 
jardows said:
But desktop Linux could succeed here, but not in its current form. Instead of trying to change the world to accept the greatness of Linux, the community must look at what needs changed about Linux so the world will accept it.
Click to expand...

As long as Microsoft and Apple have intellectual property rights and copyright protection of their proprietary home and business productivity software for their own proprietary OS's, which the majority of the world uses, then Linux will never be able to make the necessary changes to put it in a position to succeed, imo.

Aside from that, Linux has a market share which is but a blip on the overall bigger picture, so it's not worth the time, effort, and money for even most third party software producers to create their offerings that they already have for Apple and Microsoft for Linux. The business/enterprise segment drives the success or failure of OS's and software just because of the sheer volume, and Linux is used way less in a production capacity throughout the business segment than it is for general use/leisure in the consumer segment...and most of that consumer segment usage is in the enthusiast sub-segment, which is smaller still.

The bigger problem with Linux in the eyes of both enterprise and consumer segments is the segmentation of Linux, itself - there are just so many distros (and even multiple GUI choices within those distros), and most of them have their own issues, nuances, and problems that cause a hell of a lot of confusion on which one is the best solution for each segment. Enthusiasts love having the variety to choose from, but Joe Schmoe office worker or Jane Doe home keyboard commando won't have the slightest of clues as to which one would serve them best for what they want to accomplish. That leaves the "one and done" approach, depending on familiarity or brand affinity = either Windows or MacOS, as a much easier solution.
 
There's no money to be made in selling OSes, just in selling hardware. There's really no point in sinking a ton of money into making a good Linux desktop.
 
dgingeri said:
If you honestly think that regular users would accept Linux as an OS, try giving one of your relatives a Linux machine, explain how much more stable and secure it is, and let them try it out without your help. They'll run back to their Windows machine inside two hours.

It's been tried. A town in Germany tried pushing Linux to their city workers for years. They had constant problems with users being unable to figure out how to do things on it, and had training nightmares on nearly every aspect of the OS. They also had all sorts of administration nightmares with it, such as pushing updates and permissions. The went to Windows 8 rather than stay on Linux. Windows 8. If that doesn't say it all, I don't know what does.
Click to expand...

Linux is just an operating system, there is no reason whatsoever why a modern distro would not be accepted by consumers. Once again, you appear to be living 20 years ago - Modern Linux is every bit as easy as macOS, in fact due to their UNIX roots both operating systems are remarkably similar.

The situation in Germany had more to do with under the counter deals and politics than the success of Linux, there are a great many people disappointed in the transition back to Microsoft. As a tech my 'loan PC' that I sometimes leave with people runs Ubuntu 17.10, I run Ubuntu because this is a PC that was left over from a job and I'm not going to fork out for a Windows license when Ubuntu does everything I need the PC to do, it's basically immune from viruses/malware and partly as an experiment - To see how my clients cope with Ubuntu. So far I've had nothing but praise for the OS, the users that just cannot seem to keep infections out of their Windows install love it.
 
DejaWiz said:
As long as Microsoft and Apple have intellectual property rights and copyright protection of their proprietary home and business productivity software for their own proprietary OS's, which the majority of the world uses, then Linux will never be able to make the necessary changes to put it in a position to succeed, imo.
Click to expand...

Apple?! What business/productivity software does Apple have that's worth a damn?!

Millennials are different to gen X/Y, they haven't had the exposure to MS marketing the rest of us have been forced to endure. As a result they're quick to use the G-Apps range of products as opposed to fitting a whole office out with MS products, they prefer the lower cost and freedom it provides and they understand that the compatibility issues encountered when using Microsoft Office with open ISO standards have more to do with Microsoft themselves than alternate office suites.

As stated, even Adobe are beginning to show interest in Linux and we're moving to a cloud based generation - The bulk of Microsoft's income is made in the cloud these days. The days of consumers being tied to a platform due to companies holding productivity software at ransom are numbered.
 
jardows said:
Then why is there no modern distro being accepted by the consumers?
Click to expand...

You've completely missed the point, even though I explained it earlier?!

If Linux was force installed on 99% of OEM machines bought in retail chains, right now we would be talking about Windows acceptance and Linux would be the popular OS of choice. The decision to use anything but Windows is not a choice offered to the average consumer that hasn't got a clue and doesn't even know that the OS is an installed component of their new PC/laptop and can be replaced.
 
BulletDust said:
You've completely missed the point, even though I explained it earlier?!

If Linux was force installed on 99% of OEM machines bought in retail chains, right now we would be talking about Windows acceptance and Linux would be the popular OS of choice. The decision to use anything but Windows is not a choice offered to the average consumer that hasn't got a clue and doesn't even know that the OS is an installed component of their new PC/laptop and can be replaced.
Click to expand...
And you have missed mine. If this is the barrier to Desktop Linux adoption, how is this barrier overcome?
 
jardows said:
And you have missed mine. If this is the barrier to Desktop Linux adoption, how is this barrier overcome?
Click to expand...

With Microsoft releasing Windows 10 - Get out in the real world, it's a mess and people hate it.
 
Jardows, all I'm reading from you is "I'm in my comfort zone and can't be arsed" and "20 years ago...".
 
Frobozz said:
I don't think you can hang that on the OS. The race to the bottom with Netbooks did not provide a good experience for anyone. Feedback from Dell has been positive about the XPS Developer edition sales, and System76 has been growing like crazy, and Google's higher end Chromebooks are evidently selling enough to where they keep making new ones.

Maybe if you don't make shit devices, people might want to buy them?
Click to expand...
Currently drooling over the XP13 myself. That will be my NEXT notebook. Currently have a macbook air 13" dual boot with Ubuntu 17.10/macosX
 
BulletDust said:
Linux is just an operating system, there is no reason whatsoever why a modern distro would not be accepted by consumers. Once again, you appear to be living 20 years ago - Modern Linux is every bit as easy as macOS, in fact due to their UNIX roots both operating systems are remarkably similar.

The situation in Germany had more to do with under the counter deals and politics than the success of Linux, there are a great many people disappointed in the transition back to Microsoft. As a tech my 'loan PC' that I sometimes leave with people runs Ubuntu 17.10, I run Ubuntu because this is a PC that was left over from a job and I'm not going to fork out for a Windows license when Ubuntu does everything I need the PC to do, it's basically immune from viruses/malware and partly as an experiment - To see how my clients cope with Ubuntu. So far I've had nothing but praise for the OS, the users that just cannot seem to keep infections out of their Windows install love it.
Click to expand...

I was trying Ubuntu 17.10 on my macbook:
* Sleep works as I would expect
* Function keys work (eg: keybaord backlight just works, screen brightness just works, etc...)
* Touchpad works and sensitivity is reasonable (but not perfect)
* Wifi just works
***I added my works wifi-guest network to my personal laptop and it auto-found the 3 wireless printers we make available and added them to my system with the correct drivers without me even doing ANYTHING except type the wifi password.

Linux has come a LONG way.
 
BulletDust said:
With Microsoft releasing Windows 10 - Get out in the real world, it's a mess and people hate it.
Click to expand...

BulletDust said:
Jardows, all I'm reading from you is "I'm in my comfort zone and can't be arsed" and "20 years ago...".
Click to expand...

And this is yet another barrier of Linux adoption. Attitude of those who promote it. I am in the real world. I speak with lots of people, and help lots of people with their computers. My day job is helping the average user get connected to the Internet. I deal daily with the lowest common denominator in computer users. Some like Windows 10, some do not. Your assumption that your perspective is the only valid one and all others can be dismissed out of hand does nothing to convince that Linux should be mass adopted.

I am looking at the reality that Desktop Linux adoption is not having any significant increase despite Windows 10. It was the same situation when Microsoft released Windows ME, and people were looking at Desktop Linux, and stories abounded about this city or municipality, or this corporation switching to Linux. Then Windows XP came out, and all that new interest in desktop Linux evaporated.

Don't think you need to convince me personally about the "greatness" of Linux. Remember, I prefer FreeBSD over Windows, but since I can't have MS Office, I can't use it every day. I am speaking of the general computer public's refusal to adopt Linux as a Desktop OS, and you seem oblivious to anything within Linux itself that needs changed to facilitate that. That is all I am asking in this thread - that someone who is actually within the Linux community examine why Desktop Linux is not being adopted, and what can be done to change that.

All I have gotten so far in answer is "It's more secure, it's more stable, there's no telemetry, and The System is rigged against Linux." OK, the first three aren't convincing anyone (especially considering how some point to Google OS as an example of Desktop Linux adoption - it's just as if not more so riddled with data collection than Windows 10), how do you overcome the last? Instead of answering that question, you resort to attacking me personally? I guess that is my answer from the Linux community as to why it won't ever see mass adoption.
 
In many ways it's not that Linux fights Windows or Mac for desktop superiority it's that all desktop systems fight Mobile and tablet convergence.. and also increasingly for most purposes outside of productivity the console space.
 
Last edited:
jardows said:
And this is yet another barrier of Linux adoption. Attitude of those who promote it. I am in the real world. I speak with lots of people, and help lots of people with their computers. My day job is helping the average user get connected to the Internet. I deal daily with the lowest common denominator in computer users. Some like Windows 10, some do not. Your assumption that your perspective is the only valid one and all others can be dismissed out of hand does nothing to convince that Linux should be mass adopted.

I am looking at the reality that Desktop Linux adoption is not having any significant increase despite Windows 10. It was the same situation when Microsoft released Windows ME, and people were looking at Desktop Linux, and stories abounded about this city or municipality, or this corporation switching to Linux. Then Windows XP came out, and all that new interest in desktop Linux evaporated.

Don't think you need to convince me personally about the "greatness" of Linux. Remember, I prefer FreeBSD over Windows, but since I can't have MS Office, I can't use it every day. I am speaking of the general computer public's refusal to adopt Linux as a Desktop OS, and you seem oblivious to anything within Linux itself that needs changed to facilitate that. That is all I am asking in this thread - that someone who is actually within the Linux community examine why Desktop Linux is not being adopted, and what can be done to change that.

All I have gotten so far in answer is "It's more secure, it's more stable, there's no telemetry, and The System is rigged against Linux." OK, the first three aren't convincing anyone (especially considering how some point to Google OS as an example of Desktop Linux adoption - it's just as if not more so riddled with data collection than Windows 10), how do you overcome the last? Instead of answering that question, you resort to attacking me personally? I guess that is my answer from the Linux community as to why it won't ever see mass adoption.
Click to expand...

Well my friend, my day job is that of a PC/Mac/Linux tech, I deal with the masses and my experiences differ wildly from yours.

The only barrier to Linux adoption is Microsoft themselves - Naturally.

/dev/null said:
Currently drooling over the XP13 myself. That will be my NEXT notebook. Currently have a macbook air 13" dual boot with Ubuntu 17.10/macosX
Click to expand...

I'm drooling over an XPS13 for my daily work machine running Ubuntu Mate. As a tech I really have no need for Windows on my work lappy - I have Windows 7 as dual boot, never boot into it.

Linux has come a looong way and is now as usable as any other OS out there - BTW, I got the crappy trackpad on my kbuntu based lappy set up perfectly, loving it. :)
 
GNUse_the_force said:
In many ways it's not that Linux fights Windows or Mac for desktop superiority it's that all desktop systems fight Mobile and tablet convergence.. and also increasingly for most purposes outside of productivity the console space.
Click to expand...

See, it's this attitude that Linux is for coders and difficult to use that's 20 years in the past.

I'll state it again, modern Linux is no harder to use than macOS, in fact the two are so similar it's uncanny.
 
BulletDust said:
See, it's this attitude that Linux is for coders and difficult to use that's 20 years in the past.

I'll state it again, modern Linux is no harder to use than macOS, in fact the two are so similar it's uncanny.
Click to expand...

I know, i agree (see my username lol) my point is all desktop systems are too hard for the average user beyond the same level of interactivity a phone or console offers.
 
MavericK said:
And that is super awesome, I applaud people for doing that.

Problem is there is a select group who keeps trying to push it as some sort of viable Windows alternative for the masses...which, it is not.
Click to expand...

I have to both agree and disagree. Yes there is a group who keep pushing it on people who it is not yet fit for, but i disagree about it not being a viable alternative. The 'masses' could use all the same functions they do on Windows on Linux, that is to say very basic document editing, web browsing, banking. If we are talking about the new influx of 'pewdiepie' level gamers' / twitch streamers then yes your right Linux would be too hard for them.. but so would Windows if it wasn't already pre-installed and required for use in schools with learned basic GUI functionality. Outside of that demographic, the average non techie user these days even struggles with Windows now they are predominately computing on smart devices.

Overall tech literacy is dropping not rising, the devices are the only things that are smart these days. Interest in actual computing is waning.
 
GNUse_the_force said:
I have to both agree and disagree. Yes there is a group who keep pushing it on people who it is not yet fit for, but i disagree about it not being a viable alternative. The 'masses' could use all the same functions they do on Windows on Linux, that is to say very basic document editing, web browsing, banking. If we are talking about the new influx of 'pewdiepie' level gamers' / twitch streamers then yes your right Linux would be too hard for them.. but so would Windows if it wasn't already pre-installed and required for use in schools with learned basic GUI functionality. Outside of that demographic, the average non techie user these days even struggles with Windows now they are predominately computing on smart devices.
Click to expand...

I am thinking of the dozens of people I deal with every day who seem to have trouble using Windows, let alone something like Linux. So yeah, I am not saying capability-wise it's not viable, but from a mass user perspective I believe it is not.
 
MavericK said:
I am thinking of the dozens of people I deal with every day who seem to have trouble using Windows, let alone something like Linux. So yeah, I am not saying capability-wise it's not viable, but from a mass user perspective I believe it is not.
Click to expand...
That was my exact point. well one of them ;)

Capable but not viable is probably where were at with Linux for the masses. Perhaps it should stay that way ?
 
jardows said:
And you have missed mine. If this is the barrier to Desktop Linux adoption, how is this barrier overcome?
Click to expand...
Same way having to register to vote is. It's an extra step that isn't required anywhere else. Why do you think chrome books took off? They are cheap and you don't really need to install anything to do stuff. This really isn't a hard concept.
 
GNUse_the_force said:
That was my exact point. well one of them ;)
Click to expand...

Indeed. I also have some experience trying to convert folks to Linux (used to work for a small repair shop where the owner LOVED to push Linux). For the most part, people either straight-up said no, or the transition period...didn't go well.

Granted this was a few years ago, but still.
 
dgingeri said:
If you honestly think that regular users would accept Linux as an OS, try giving one of your relatives a Linux machine, explain how much more stable and secure it is, and let them try it out without your help. They'll run back to their Windows machine inside two hours.

It's been tried. A town in Germany tried pushing Linux to their city workers for years. They had constant problems with users being unable to figure out how to do things on it, and had training nightmares on nearly every aspect of the OS. They also had all sorts of administration nightmares with it, such as pushing updates and permissions. The went to Windows 8 rather than stay on Linux. Windows 8. If that doesn't say it all, I don't know what does.
Click to expand...
I've done it. Most people have no problem whatsoever.
 
Really Linux should be the defacto starting development platform for games & software commercial or not. Those developers can then push the software out to x,y,z platform afterwards. The freedom to share ideas, code within a community of 1,000,000 developers would allow for a much faster rate of change and optimisation. If the creative side of the industry moved over ( with relevant software ) then that would be a great starting point.
 
GNUse_the_force said:
Really Linux should be the defacto starting development platform for games & software commercial or not. Those developers can then push the software out to x,y,z platform afterwards. The freedom to share ideas, code within a community of 1,000,000 developers would allow for a much faster rate of change and optimisation. If the creative side of the industry moved over ( with relevant software ) then that would be a great starting point.
Click to expand...

I think Linux is way too fragmented with all the various distros for that to be viable. The Linux landscape today seems to be what the OS landscape was 30+ years ago when all the big dogs were pushing their own OSs (such as Microsoft, IBM, Apple, etc). Once a certain single distro becomes the defacto go-to for enterprise and home users alike, then I think more 3rd party developers would start coding software for Linux, allowing it to become a successful OS.
 
DejaWiz said:
I think Linux is way too fragmented with all the various distros for that to be viable. The Linux landscape today seems to be what the OS landscape was 30+ years ago when all the big dogs were pushing their own OSs (such as Microsoft, IBM, Apple, etc). Once a certain single distro becomes the defacto go-to for enterprise and home users alike, then I think more 3rd party developers would start coding software for Linux, allowing it to become a successful OS.
Click to expand...

Yea, it is still a bit too fragmented although there is quite a lot of convergence on using Gnome based environments, dropping 32bit libs, single AMDGPU driver, single Nvidia driver ( realistically as the FOSS one is too slow ). Kernals are all pretty much at the same levels for the top 5 distros too. Installation is simpler than it has ever been, i don't think it could actually get any simpler.
 
GNUse_the_force said:
Really Linux should be the defacto starting development platform for games & software commercial or not. Those developers can then push the software out to x,y,z platform afterwards. The freedom to share ideas, code within a community of 1,000,000 developers would allow for a much faster rate of change and optimisation. If the creative side of the industry moved over ( with relevant software ) then that would be a great starting point.
Click to expand...
No way will that happen in the modern world where intellectual property must be kept secret. Intellectual property equals money, lots of money. No company in their right minds would allow potential competition a peek at their ideas.

Software is still a problem on Linux. People still can't play a damn Blu-Ray on Linux without having to jump through dozens of hoops. It shouldn't be like that but it is. Why? Because they refuse to bake in what is necessary for media distribution into the base OS which is DRM. Until I see things like iTunes on Linux it's just not going to take off on the desktop.
 
GNUse_the_force said:
Yea, it is still a bit too fragmented although there is quite a lot of convergence on using Gnome based environments, dropping 32bit libs, single AMDGPU driver, single Nvidia driver ( realistically as the FOSS one is too slow ). Kernals are all pretty much at the same levels for the top 5 distros too. Installation is simpler than it has ever been, i don't think it could actually get any simpler.
Click to expand...

But see that's just it. It isn't "too fragmented". It's only fragmented inside the community and it isn't even viewed as fragmented at that point. Inside the community it's only options.

It's not fragmented at all in terms of what flavor of Linux an OEM would offer the general public. The only option for the general population is Ubuntu because you have Canonical's backing and support and OEMs can actually GET support. The work Canonical has put into 17.10 is phenomenal. They did great work and I'm not an Ubuntu user but I'll still praise them because they deserve it.
 
Linux is not too fragmented at all, in my opinion Windows lacks freedom that Linux doesn't. If you want to talk fragmentation, Windows 10 has fragmentation in the one UI - We have a UI for touch and a UI for desktop all muddled into one and not excelling at either, such problems are not an issue under Linux.

You don't use all distro's at once, you pick a distro and stick with the UI that works perfectly for you. If you want a desktop along the lines of macOS, you have a desktop along the lines of macOS. If you want a desktop along the lines of Windows, you have a desktop along the lines of Windows - None of this "here's the UI, like it or lump it" crap.

Once again, it's not 20 years ago. Linux has developed and matured just as much as any other OS out there, if you can use macOS, you can use Linux. Funny thing is, most so called techs can't use macOS, all they can use is Windows - Downright hilarious if you ask me!

In relation to Bluray, that's something best kept to dedicated hardware. As a HTPC enthusiest I've tried every Bluray solution there is for about the last 10 years under Windows - None of them have been as reliable as dedicated hardware and I've had to jump through hoops with solutions like AnyDVD to even remotely keep things working. Having said that, I've had very few issues ripping my Bluray's to mass storage under Linux and no issues ripping HD-DVD's.

Software was a problem under Linux, it's not anymore - A great many software applications I use under Windows are available under Linux, with the exception of malware, viruses and PUP's.

As stated earlier, I've switched people to Linux, never had a problem - It's just an OS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top