Linux is great for technical people, or at least technically-inclined and patient people, who can overcome the inevitable technical obstacle that most of us don't even think about. It's also great for people whose needs are so basic-- email client and web browser basic-- that once they're set up with a default everything, they have no interest in doing anything that might present a technical obstacle.
Neither of those user groups are the problem. The problem is the majority of computer users that have real practical skill born from computer use at school, work, while gaming, doing art, etc. They want to do enough with their computer to run up against technical obstacles, but
a) don't have the significant amount of prerequisite knowledge we take for granted to generalize what they know to other operating systems
b) don't have the subject matter interest to inspire them to get that knowledge
and those two things mean
c) view any extra steps required to do something on Linux (e.g. use wine to run software they've been using for a decade) as a needless hassle that prevents them from doing what they really want to do, rather than a satisfying problem to solve because configuring the computer is part of the fun.
So if they hadn't already given up on Linux, they might ask one of the bazillion "Hey I'm a bit of a noob here, but..." questions on reddit or whatnot only to receive a barrage of conceited responses by zealots who make it very clear how put-out they are by their question-- which they didn't have to read, let alone answer-- and how rude it was for them to not read entry 427 on the FAQ which leads to a page of resources that might have addressed part of their problem. If nothing else has already discouraged them from continuing, that sure will.
Unless someone with those users' needs at the forefront of their design practice Bluesky's Linux (some like pop os are making a solid effort), it will never ever work as a general-purpose desktop OS.
Please give Linux a try. Don't let the perception deceive you. Perceptions are slow to change and a lot has changed in that time.
> They want to do enough with their computer to run up against technical obstacles,
They will solve those problems the exact same way they solve them on Windows: Google, StackOverflow, forums, GPTs, or whatever. There's even an advantage in Linux as there's a large number of highly technical users already doing exactly the same thing and will share knowledge.
> use wine to run software they've been using for a decade
Wine for what? Word? I think most people will use the browser.
If you mean games, I think Steam has got most of that covered. Proton hides in the background for most people.
But these users also happily will install engines for game modding and other things. Give what I see these people doing, Wine seems like child's play.
> only to receive a barrage of conceited responses by zealots
I agree! That sucks! I do try to fight this and there has been serious strides in this direction over the last decade. In fact, I'd argue that the suggested distros were part of this response. The attitude you see on EndeavourOS, PopOS, or Ubuntu forums are very different. Hell, even the Arch forums are getting better! Sometimes they provide links to the "dupe". They're almost to the state of StackOverflow! But I mean... let's not expect that to be ever fully resolved. We lost the war for the Noob Guide (I fought for that and was a contributor!), but at least we got Manjaro and Endeavour in return ;)
I really do mean it, things have changed a lot in the last 10 years. I'm sorry for those experiences. I hated them when they happened to me and I step in when I see them happening. It's the only way we can make change. But what you describe does not seem to be the state of things I see today, but it does describe the state of things I saw (and experienced) in the past.
> Please give Linux a try. Don't let the perception deceive you. Perceptions are slow to change and a lot has changed in that time.
I've been using Linux for nearly 30 years-- professionally and as a desktop OS-- and am also a UI designer. I've even used everything from AIX to Solaris and even HP-UX on an old phone switch. What I'm saying is coming from the usability designer focus on the experience of new users and the problems they have.
>They will solve those problems the exact same way they solve them on Windows: Google, StackOverflow, forums, GPTs, or whatever. There's even an advantage in Linux as there's a large number of highly technical users already doing exactly the same thing and will share knowledge.
The difference is they don't generally have those problems on Windows or MacOS. How many windows users encounter serious problems... say... updating their video card drivers.
> Wine for what? Word? I think most people will use the browser.
Trivializing the needs of non-technical end users while also trivializing the difficulty of adopting new tech paradigms is really at the root of the problem in FOSS usability, in general. Lots of people use adobe products, video editing software, games, random utilities for hardware peripherals, CAD software, industry-specific or worplace-specific programs... there are lots of things that users who sit between software developers and users that would be fine with a chromebook.
> d argue that the suggested distros were part of this response. The attitude you see on EndeavourOS, PopOS, or Ubuntu forums are very different.
For users that don't want to 'use a computer,' but want the computer to solve whatever problem they're having in the way they're used to solving it, that's already a nonstarter. I'd wager that no more than 10% of computer users have seriously researched a technical problem trying to troubleshoot it. I'd wager about 20% of that already small crowd has consulted formal software documentation. It's just not a natural process for most computer users. It would be great if people were more interested enough in how computers work, even superficially, but many are not. It's just the way it is. People don't need encouragement to try linux-- they need a fundamental shift if the way they approach computer usage-- as a complex tool rather than a flexible appliance. There's a gulf of requirements that aren't being met to bridge that gap for all but the lowest-level users.
> one of the bazillion "Hey I'm a bit of a noob here, but..." questions on reddit or whatnot only to receive a barrage of conceited responses by zealots who make it very clear how put-out they are by their question-- which they didn't have to read, let alone answer-- and how rude it was for them to not read entry 427 on the FAQ which leads to a page of resources that might have addressed part of their problem.
Today's Linux support forums are nothing like this. You only get an angry response when you start out by whining about how Linux "can't" (doesn't, with your current understanding) do what you want, or doesn't behave exactly like what you're familiar with. You might get asked to pay attention to the forum rules and guidelines banner that tells you to use some inxi invocation or whatever to get your system info - and that will link to a fully detailed guide on how to do it, as well as how to format your post properly.
If anything, the Mint forums for example are too eager to assume you're a noob, and will suggest awkward foolproof approaches to everything that don't respect what you're trying to accomplish if it's a bit advanced.
Okay, the Arch forums will respond to you with just a link to the Wiki if you're asking something that's well covered in the wiki. That's supposed to be a hint to read one specific wiki page (and they told you which one); they won't waste breath on "how put-out they are by your question" because a) they aren't, and b) typing more words is the thing that would make them put out. The point is that if you can't make sense of the wiki, then you should ask something more specific. And if you don't know what a word means, you should look it up.
And if we're talking about "users that have real practical skill born from computer use at school, work, while gaming, doing art, etc." then they should be capable of those things.
Back when I was developing said "real practical skill", being assessed as having that "real practical skill" entailed understanding that far fewer people seem to have nowadays. I don't just mean things like poring through manpages or reasoning about command pipelines. Nowadays it seems that people can be perceived as computer literate without things like having a working mental model of a "file" or a "path".
Neither of those user groups are the problem. The problem is the majority of computer users that have real practical skill born from computer use at school, work, while gaming, doing art, etc. They want to do enough with their computer to run up against technical obstacles, but
a) don't have the significant amount of prerequisite knowledge we take for granted to generalize what they know to other operating systems
b) don't have the subject matter interest to inspire them to get that knowledge
and those two things mean
c) view any extra steps required to do something on Linux (e.g. use wine to run software they've been using for a decade) as a needless hassle that prevents them from doing what they really want to do, rather than a satisfying problem to solve because configuring the computer is part of the fun.
So if they hadn't already given up on Linux, they might ask one of the bazillion "Hey I'm a bit of a noob here, but..." questions on reddit or whatnot only to receive a barrage of conceited responses by zealots who make it very clear how put-out they are by their question-- which they didn't have to read, let alone answer-- and how rude it was for them to not read entry 427 on the FAQ which leads to a page of resources that might have addressed part of their problem. If nothing else has already discouraged them from continuing, that sure will.
Unless someone with those users' needs at the forefront of their design practice Bluesky's Linux (some like pop os are making a solid effort), it will never ever work as a general-purpose desktop OS.