Why Linux is Best for Most People
Why Linux is Best for Most People
Linux isn’t just for experts. Some Linux flavors are specifically designed for average users.
I think that Linux is the worst for middle-tier tech people.
For elderies, kids or someone that just visit social media, listen to music on Spotify and edit photos from vacations this it is perfect. They might learn where the app store is, how to open up menu and that's all.
For tech saavy, programmers, engineers I... don't really get how you can use Windows at all until you are forced by your environment. Going from Windows to Linux to do work is just like going from ChromeOS to MacOS.
But the worst would be the midtier, a friend who does a joke in "ohshit.exe" style, but don't know what is an executable. That has multiple free games from Epic Store he never plays but must be installed and work. That have bought Photoshop and "original" MS Office licence years ago for outdated version but keep it, because "original". And that has some amateur audio eqippment that even if Linux have build-in drivers for, would complain the .exe installer from that "download for free" website does not work.
For tech saavy, programmers, engineers I... don't really get how you can use Windows at all until you are forced by your environment.
It's funny you say that, as I'm a windows desktop person but have tons of Linux servers I managed at home. I'm never going back to Linux as my desktop machine because Windows 'just works' and I don't have to spend multiple evenings a month trying to figure out why something updating destroyed my UI or troubleshooting why something that worked last night now doesn't work.
I like Linux, but I do IT shit all day and don't want to be forced to work on my own problems. I want to choose to cause/work on those problems. There's a difference lol
I have the opposite experience.
Windows consistently gets in my way. Linux has been a breathe of fresh air and stays out of my way. It just works.
I now use Linux as my desktop at work (Debian 12) and at home (EndeavorOS).
Damn this is the opposite of my experience. As much as I appreciate some aspects on the philosophical side of Linux, and the lack of spying etc, but really the main reason I've stuck with it is that it just works.
My updates don't break things, my updates only happen when I allow them to happen, I don't have to periodically run disk cleanup and crap like that to remove dozens of gigabytes of useless data like old windows updates, my search works properly, I dont get ads in my OS after some updates that I have to find out how to disable, I don't have shitty MS apps that I can't uninstall, dark mode actually applies to my entire system so I don't get blinded at night when I open XYZ program.
I probably lose a couple of hours every month on my work laptop just doing silly Windows nonsense that I just don't have to deal with on Linux.
A good way to fix this, I guess, would be teaching children to use GNU/Linux alongside or in place of Windows when they're learning how to use computers in digital literacy classes.
Because this isn't an OS problem, it's a familiarity problem.
Agree, a lot of Windows weirdness is taken as like it's like computers work overall. An example I give is when program freeze everyone knows Ctrl+Alt+Del to get the task manager. On Linux mostly there is Ctrl+Alt+ESC and click on the window to kill it.
For generations, parents have been giving kids their old cars or buying a used beater so they can learn to drive.
We need to get a generation of parents giving kids their old laptops or buying a cheap one off eBay with a light linux distro to extend its life.
And are there even industry standard equivalent programs available for graphic designers on Linux?
Most FOSS alternatives tend to be a significant step back for folks used to their closed source industry counterparts like for example Adobe. The available video editing software is either a step back or closed source (DaVinci Resolve).
It's probably the proverbial chicken-and-egg situation.
I mean, for UI-UX, Figma, Lunacy, etc. are available via browser. But I despise web-based clients.
That's a wonderful example. My average tech friend was an early adopter of SteamOS and called me a lot about wine.
For tech saavy, programmers, engineers I... don't really get how you can use Windows at all until you are forced by your environment. Going from Windows to Linux to do work is just like going from ChromeOS to MacOS.
I do native Windows, Linux and Android development and much prefer working on Windows since I like the software and tooling there better. At home, I don't really want to fiddle with Linux anymore than I want to. Spending 2 days trying to fix my work PC's Ubuntu installation not being able to detect my Nvidia GPU has scared me off bothering with it.
Coincidentally, I did not have fun switching over to my Ubuntu partition at work today and finding out my Bluetooth mouse stopped working with it all of a sudden.
Ubuntu installation not being able to detect my Nvidia GPU
NVidia and Linux... don't get along very well. They've also been caught violating the GPL in their drivers, resulting in the kernel being hardcoded to block them in some instances. There is good reason why Valve picked an AMD APU in their handheld
Ubuntu partition at work today and finding out my Bluetooth mouse stopped working with it
Modern bluetooth controllers store the paired devices on their onboard memory, rather than only in the OS (allowing your bluetooth peripherals to work in the BIOS etc). If the two paired device lists fall out of sync, this could lead to erroneous behavior, especially since you're dual booting two completely different operating systems using completely different driver implementations to talk to your hardware
Just wanted to share why things are broken - not trying to persuade you to change your workflow. Use whatever works best for you!
I must fit in the middle here. I know that virtual drives exist, I've had a friend install one on my computer, but I never got it to work. I installed an old game off of a disk once, but when it quit working I had no idea why or what to do. I had a laptop and installed Ubuntu on it, and just never used it because I didn't know what it would be good for and I got tired of constantly updating/fixing/troubleshooting it.
I'm used to the options and menus of windows, Linux is just confusing to me.
Before you can even entertain the arguments in this article, don't you first need to address the barrier to entry of installing an operating system in the first place? This isn't even a hurdle specific to Linux, I don't really think the average user has the technical know-how to install any operating system onto a computer.
Yeah, it makes me think back to the CD days. I think just having a Windows install CD already premade for you made the process at least semi approachable.
Last month when I was installing an OS (it was proxmox, not exactly beginner friendly, I know) the first boot disk creator I used "worked" but ended up failing in the install. The second one worked though.
All in all, creating your own install disk is nice and flexible, but it really is a barrier for the average user.
Hilarious. In what world is a Linux a good choice for “Elderly people who are not familiar with advanced technology and prefer clean and simple computer usage”.
The elderly people I know already struggle with the systems they’ve used for years. And when something goes wrong, they can ask basically anyone and someone will be able to help them.
Now insert Linux (which “flavour”? Who knows, pick one) and see who can help with even basic tasks or problems. This is fantasy shit.
My mother used Linux Mint as her last OS just fine. She struggled more with her phone than Linux. Just using browser, mail client and writing the occasional letter you're pretty much OS-agnostic.
However, while that does work, sometimes updates break something (regardless of distribution). Windows mixes shit up which makes the elderly not finding something again but Linux updates may result in the DE not starting for some reason. I moved to Linux 100% myself but I still won't ever recommend it to anyone who isn't fine with tinkering or has access to family tech support.
Some Linux distros change less than Windows in appearance over the years.
Also easy to set configs back to default if things go astray, as everything is a file.
Have you tried introducing an "oldy" to it lately?
I showed my parents who used Windows but Apple for phones and they took to Ubuntu like duck to water!
Another argument in the style of "Linux cannot be used by the common public, because Linux is not used by the common public".
Windows is super annoying to help someone with it, as you can barely do anything. Let's say that after the update the graphical interface is not starting, what can be done? Because you cannot Ctrl+Alt+F3 to get into a console mode. Or that for remote help I can a dictate command that sends me the info or open SSH to me instead of recieving blurry photos of the screen. Like Android, easy to help if they just don't know where a thing is, super hard to fix deep system problem.
It’s not because it’s not used by the common public, it’s because there aren’t normie-friendly resources and or a company help desk that average people rely on when they need assistance. It’s all well and good for people to say these things are easy to learn and they don’t break, it in the real world, for people who don’t really care about this stuff but have to use it for a few random tasks, it’s nice to know there’s a place that will help you. Not everyone has a techie friend or relative.
The issue is not with the software itself (although there are issues there) as much as it is with non-commercial nature of Linux. It’s great that there’s a thriving community of people who are passionate about this stuff and get great use and enjoyment out of it, but many of the reasons people love it are also reasons why it will probably never be a viable mainstream option.
My great-aunt asked for a PC when she was 85 and her grandchild moved abroad. I installed Linux mint with a few scripts and shortcuts to ease her life, and she picked that up (check email, Skype, nothing super sophisticated ofc). I guess if it's a new thing, windows does not the advantage of being already familiar, and Linux is more stable in my experience, which leads to less random errors.
Im not saying it’s impossible, but it’s not “the best”. Even in your example, you set everything up. But if something goes wrong, will you be there to fix it? With a Mac, which is lately idiot-proof, if something breaks there’s an easy number to call or places you can take your machine.
Again, not saying it’s unusable, but just being usable wasn’t the claim.
Yeah I agree, when old people have trouble using an iPhone which is one of the simplest OSs to use, there's no way that they can use Linux, yes it's good but it's not as simple to use as an iPhone. And they can get help with their iPhone from anyone, or at the Apple store, there's no Linux store they can get help from.
Permanently Deleted
I have installed Ubuntu and Linux Mint for retirees who need a machine that they can browse the internet and check emails. Some of them have been using those distros for years with minimal issues.
Massive disagree. Most Linux distros are far far easier for people who just want the basic use case of loading a browser or playing a song.
I think you have this idea in your mind of Linux being this complex system where you need to open the terminal and be a hacker man. That's not what desktop Linux is like unless you're going for some niche neckbeardy setup.
If an old person had a PC with, say, Linux Mint, ChromeOS, or even Ubuntu on it, they'd almost certainly struggle far less than they would with Windows.
Windows is not easier. You just think it's easier because you're more used to it.
That’s absolutely not the idea I have in my head. If you read most of my replies here, I think I explain pretty clearly that the main issue I see with Linux is not actually the software itself, it’s that there’s not a good, normie-friendly support system for when things do go wrong or things aren’t immediately obvious.
I also tend to advocate for MacOS more than Windows. Although I’ve used both my whole life, I find macOS a lot more intuitive than windows, and I would generally never recommend windows unless there’s a specific need for it.
What age do you mean when you say "elderly"? For me they are 80/90 and do not have a computer or mobile.
What do you mean ask anyone, most of their friends are dead and their children are adults who live far away and are as computer literature as our parents.
Mid 60s and up, around retiring age (or at least that’s retiring age where I am).
Linux is clearly great and can even be used by non techie elder people, but only if you can stick around in case they encounter any difficulty. Why? Because they can ask anyone to get some help on windows, but most people would be scared to even approach something they don’t know, so they wouldn’t help these old people on Linux.
Is it a shame? Yes, but that’s the reality.
I guess that if you put an elder on a prepared Linux computer with nothing more to setup, the elder would be perfectly fine using it. But if they want to add a program or anything, that’s when they gonna need your help and presence.
Since getting a steam deck, I legitimately wish I knew way more about Linux than I do now. The thing is basically a grown up toy in many ways more than just video games.
If anyone has recommendations to resources I could use to better familiarize myself with accomplishing basic tasks with (arch) Linux, I’d appreciate it.
Linux academy used to have a free course for beginners.
I've been working through linuxjourney.com and have learned quite a bit
I used it for gaming until I found that face tracking on Linux (mostly on the output side) is a pain in the butt. It's great for most things these days and I still keep it on my laptop but it's now the niche things it doesn't do well.
No need to worry about viruses
I've encountered viruses on Linux servers. It's definitely something to worry about.
Even if viruses do infect a Linux system, they would have little to no damage. By default, Linux systems run with restricted user permissions and access, which can still be even more hardened using SELinux and AppArmor to the point that each application can be isolated from one another. Making the infection spread impossible.
True - those do help. By the way this is something MacOS does better at. For example the / filesystem is mounted read only. You literally can't write to it at all (software updates get around this by creating a new snapshot of the disk, writing to that, and then rebooting telling the firmware to use the newly created snapshot... which it will only do after firmware level integrity checks against malware). Software, by default, has almost no access to the write to even parts of the disk that the user has access to. It also can't access the internet or printers or bluetooth or cameras or any of that. Access to these things works much like a firewall - there's a white list of things the software can get to. And even then, there are some things that still can't be reached (for example your camera can only be accessed if the user grants permission).
Safer files
Eh. I don't think Linux is any better than other operating systems at that.
Compared to other operating systems, Linux is not resource-hungry. Meaning it used less RAM and CPU usage
I disagree. MacOS is more efficient... a Mac with 8GB of RAM and a slow CPU is generally going to be better at every day tasks. Ever heard that Macs have incredible battery life? That's because they're efficient. I'm pretty sure the CPU in my laptop is technically capable of draining the battery in about 45 minutes, but in real world use I get about 18 hours of battery life out of it - because the software works really really hard to keep CPU idle. On slower hardware that translates to excellent performance.
Sure - install the right software on a Linux system, it won't need much in the way of resources... but on MacOS you can run modern state of the art software efficiently - a lot of that comes down to low level features like GCD and ARC. Both of which can be used on Linux (they're open source) but in practice you won't find any software that actually uses them. On MacOS pretty much everything uses them.
Free to use; Flexibility
100% agree. That's where Linux really shines (I think you should have lead with those) and these are the two reasons I run either Linux and MacOS for 99% of my computing life. I even have Linux VMs running on my Macs most of the time. Use the best tool for the job (I even have a couple Windows PCs, though those are rarely used).
At this level, aren't MacOS and Linux close siblings compared to Windows? They do share ancestry. Are we comparing mandarins and clementines, when pears exist.
I agree with your statements however Immutable Linux and flatpaks with SELinux are a thing nowadays.
It could be because I'm a Gentoo user with DWM, but Mac has larger footprint than my Linux.
a lot of that comes down to low level features like GCD and ARC.
Ah, almost but this shows you're just bullshitting (knowingly or not). Those are programming features and neither serves resource efficiency but security and preventing other errors. Important things, but managing memory manually in C will be faster and less resource-intensive than any smart-pointer variant. Doing so flawlessly is hard though.
Actually GCD is a library (libdispatch) rather than just a language feature and can be used on other platforms: https://github.com/apple/swift-corelibs-libdispatch