I blame the Linux gatekeepers, keeping people on Windows. By pushing out misinformation to Linux newbies who ask a question online, and scaring them away.
You’re talking about Arch and Gentoo users, aren’t you?
New user: which distro should I use?
Arch users: definitely Arch, it’s so easy and stable!
Unfortunately, they are the loud minority and other arch users don’t tell them to spout such nonsense. Recommending the distro to linux newbies is not helpful. The minority will be willing to open a console in order to get stuff done. When I started, all I wanted was it to work and never see a console. Recommendations like gentoo and arch might’ve turned me a way from linux altogether.
i mean tbh ive never had issues with arch i couldnt solve without a quick google(neither has a update ever broken anything) and manjaro sets everything up 4 u
That’s fine for tech literate people willing to spend time on that. But non tech newbies don’t want to open a console. Recommending Arch to them is a shit move.
There are no Linux gatekeepers. There are assholes everywhere, that’s the human condition. I came across these assholes and I learnt that I should take advice and consider it myself.
If you close your brain and listen to random online people without thought, you’ll have a bad time, Linux or no Linux.
This stereotype of people in Linux or open source as assholes is FUD spread by people who have a vested interest in spreading it.
I’ve found people mostly very helpful and courteous.
Am I the only one that doesn’t mind? It’s an OS and we all have free will. I have both and enjoy using both OS. Maybe because I’m 38?
Well, first of all, determinism precludes any notion of free will. Second, even if we allow random chance, free will is still an incoherent idea. Behavior is either caused by certain factors, in which case it is deterministic, or it is at least in part random, in which case it is just that - random. There’s just no conceptual mechanism - that I am aware of - that allows for free will to be anything more than an illusion.
The problem I have is normalization. People complained about micro-monetization in video games, but that was normalized. People complained about corporate interest in open source, but that’s normalized. Now people are complaining about your operating system advertising to you against your will, it will be normal soon.
I complained that Microsoft was doing that and this and made it difficult for me to change x.
Then in Linux I changed x and broke my system and complained about how I fucked up.
So well one has advantages over the other in some aspects and in others the other one is better.
I personally don’t like windows because of the ads, weird settings, and the spying software. My whole experience is not that great on windows. And I love tinkering in Linux.
So what’s the statement here? As long as it doesn’t affect you, you shouldn’t care about how it affects others? That’s kind of a shitty way of thinking.
In a sense I wouldn’t berate coworkers and family for smoking and drinking stating facts about the detriment to their health every chance I get. I’d lend a hand when they need me the most, when they’ve looked in the mirror long enough, when they are looking for change.
It’s a fact I’ve come to realize some people don’t want to change others have a limit they reach before they can change. If your always there to help when they need it, the outcome will almost always be better.
I don’t like being told what’s best for me or what I should be doing as much as the next guy so I don’t really bring it up unless they ask.
Linux is really just the kernel the OS runs on. What people dislike are some of the stupid choices a distribution’s maintainers make. Like, Ubuntu used to be a great entry-level operating system for people who wanted to get into Linux but didn’t want to ditch all the things they understood from Windows or MacOS. It provided a level of comfort and ease of use. Which is great, and something the Linux community needs. But then Canonical started injecting snap package bloatware with everything and it’s just a mess. You have as little control over snap updates as you do Windows updates unless you completely disable the service, which is hardly trivial for a new user.
unless you completely disable [snap updates], which is hardly trivial for a new user
Tbh it probably shouldn’t be trivial for new users to disable updates. I’ve seen way too many Windows/macOS users running a years out-of-date version of Chrome.
In Linux you have to do sudo systemctl disable snapd, which produces a warning about snapd.socket. New users sometimes get a little freaked out about disabling stuff in systemd, especially after they find out what systemd is and does and how important it is. They’re afraid of bricking their installation and you have to be like “no, that won’t happen. Yes, I’m sure it won’t happen. No, you don’t need to reboot. Just replace disable with stop in those commands again and it won’t run anymore. Yes, I’m sure it’ll be fine.” So the commands are trivial, but the psychological toll of doing stuff via the command line that you perceive as dangerous, for truly novice Linux users, isn’t to be underestimated.
Did you respond to the right comment? I was trying to say that instructing new/novice users to disable snap updates is probably a bad idea.
I’ve been running Kubuntu for years now; it’s convenient to use for me for professional reasons, but I’ve never used to snap to get new software. I’ve never disabled the the service. Are there flavors of 'Buntu that are “unsnapped”, if you will? I know I should just search for it, but I thought I’d just ask.
I stopped using Windows over a decade ago and Padme is right. My windows using friends are always mad about some change or another and I’m just chill as a cucumber.
In my last job I had colleagues using Windows, and they were super chill. When they turned on their computer in the morning, it took 20 minutes to boot, install the latest updates and log on. I had to start working right away, while they were having their third coffee and second cigarette, waiting for their computer to get ready. I’m sure it wasn’t healthy, but relaxing.
did they ever start actually doing anything useful?
between sharepoint and microflop dynamics-CRM, azure and windows (whatever the fuck version)
and mother-fucking oracle, I can often go days after booting up before I can do anything useful.
Sometimes I think the only people who can do any work are the procurement team and the only work they can do is issue MS purchase orders.
That sounds like poor IT policies to me. In previous office jobs I’ve had, our computers were configured with our working hours and we wouldn’t shut them down at the end of the day, so that any updates could happen off the clock and minimize that sort of disruption.
Depends on your perspective, I’m sure the guys who got a 30 minute on the clock break weren’t complaining about poor IT policies lol
I’ve done something similar, “Oh shit, gotta take a break boss, computer decided it wanted to update, fuckin windows amirite?”
I feel a sense of ownership over my OS. I tinker, I experiment, I break things and sometimes I fix them.
I still get mad, but it’s our problem. We got here together and I know that we can do better.
Windows feels like renting. The landlord only shows up when I’m not ready, fixes stuff that wasn’t broken, doesn’t fix any of the things that I need fixed, keeps raising the rent and installing hidden cameras. If I want to fix anything, it costs way more, is way harder because the landlord won’t tell me where anything is, gets un-fixed every time the landlord visits, and after all that it’s just fixing someone else’s house.
