Why, no really tell me why we need to embrace nontechnical Linux users? What exactly does Linux have to gain? Because afaik nontechnical users dont donate, don’t contribute, and dont even appreciate the software or the work maintainers put into it (and they complain far more often). Theres always “x feature doesnt work” or “y app isn’t compatible” and suddenly “Linux isn’t ready yet”.
Well, first of all that’s just elitist/gatekeeping thinking and i find it quite frustrating. If you think about it, it’s kind of like the “we don’t want immigrants, they cause much work, cost us much and don’t contribute”.
A higher market share always comes with benefits and with drawbacks.
There will always be more people who contribute if the market share is higher. The same with hardware compatibility.
Having widely adopted open source software will always benefit the community.
Theres a fundamental difference between installing an operating system and immigration. That difference is the value of human life. Once again Linux is not a corporate product, there is no commercial benefit in mass adoption. Furthermore the people who contribute are for the most part technical users. Using your example the fact is nearly every country gives citizenship to skilled workers far faster and for a very good reason.
Okay, I see that this comparison wasn’t really good. Thinking more about it it reads like a straw man argument and i’m sorry for that.
It indeed woudn’t offer a commercial benefit, but I do really think that it would offer a benefit humanity. Because it would lessen the power that Mocrosoft has over the computer market. If the market share is high enough it would even spark innovation because Microsoft and co would be forced to innovate to keep their market share.
I know many people who would like to have an alternative to Windows, without the hurdles Linux still comes with. And I would like to be able to tell them that there is one but sadly I can’t.
Thats the fundamental problem ive been trying to get at, people fundamentally view Linux incorrectly. Linux is not a Windows competitor (at least directly) and I think thats a good thing. Linux will never run all windows software because its not Windows, that doesn’t mean its not ready. Linux will never function exactly like Windows and thats imo an amazing thing (and for those people who want their system to work like Windows they have Windows).
Linux should embrace the things that make it stand out and not try to copy other operating systems, that doesn’t make it non-user friendly. For example I love tiling, I love that Cosmic has embraced tiling, however keyboard based tiling is not naturally intuitive to Windows users. In addition I would argue that you arent forced to use the terminal, however the terminal is so powerful that its hard to ignore it. That doesn’t mean Linux GUI apps are weak, it simply means Linux TTY/TUI software is extremely powerful.
Heres the thing, I think to a certain degree Linux is a benefit for humanity. However we need to be honest about what it is and what it is not. I think naturally rather than convincing people to switch with lies or deceit we should instead focus on strengthening the community we already have. We need more people contributing to wikis, more people on forums answeing questions, and more people in IRC/Matrix chats to help people.
My final point is this, Linux (as much as I love it) fundamentally cannot challenge Microsoft in any meaningful way. OEMs simply have no reason to switch (and in many cases Microsoft has pressured OEMs to continue using windows in an illegal manner). My point is for us thats ok, Linux right now is arguably not in a bad place. Sure there are issues with legacy apps and wayland but we are slowly progressing and with the release of Cosmic I belive Linux is progressing in a distinct manner.
Why, no really tell me why we need to embrace nontechnical Linux users? What exactly does Linux have to gain? Because afaik nontechnical users dont donate, don’t contribute, and dont even appreciate the software or the work maintainers put into it (and they complain far more often). Theres always “x feature doesnt work” or “y app isn’t compatible” and suddenly “Linux isn’t ready yet”.
Well, first of all that’s just elitist/gatekeeping thinking and i find it quite frustrating. If you think about it, it’s kind of like the “we don’t want immigrants, they cause much work, cost us much and don’t contribute”. A higher market share always comes with benefits and with drawbacks. There will always be more people who contribute if the market share is higher. The same with hardware compatibility. Having widely adopted open source software will always benefit the community.
Theres a fundamental difference between installing an operating system and immigration. That difference is the value of human life. Once again Linux is not a corporate product, there is no commercial benefit in mass adoption. Furthermore the people who contribute are for the most part technical users. Using your example the fact is nearly every country gives citizenship to skilled workers far faster and for a very good reason.
Okay, I see that this comparison wasn’t really good. Thinking more about it it reads like a straw man argument and i’m sorry for that.
It indeed woudn’t offer a commercial benefit, but I do really think that it would offer a benefit humanity. Because it would lessen the power that Mocrosoft has over the computer market. If the market share is high enough it would even spark innovation because Microsoft and co would be forced to innovate to keep their market share.
I know many people who would like to have an alternative to Windows, without the hurdles Linux still comes with. And I would like to be able to tell them that there is one but sadly I can’t.
Thats the fundamental problem ive been trying to get at, people fundamentally view Linux incorrectly. Linux is not a Windows competitor (at least directly) and I think thats a good thing. Linux will never run all windows software because its not Windows, that doesn’t mean its not ready. Linux will never function exactly like Windows and thats imo an amazing thing (and for those people who want their system to work like Windows they have Windows).
Linux should embrace the things that make it stand out and not try to copy other operating systems, that doesn’t make it non-user friendly. For example I love tiling, I love that Cosmic has embraced tiling, however keyboard based tiling is not naturally intuitive to Windows users. In addition I would argue that you arent forced to use the terminal, however the terminal is so powerful that its hard to ignore it. That doesn’t mean Linux GUI apps are weak, it simply means Linux TTY/TUI software is extremely powerful.
Heres the thing, I think to a certain degree Linux is a benefit for humanity. However we need to be honest about what it is and what it is not. I think naturally rather than convincing people to switch with lies or deceit we should instead focus on strengthening the community we already have. We need more people contributing to wikis, more people on forums answeing questions, and more people in IRC/Matrix chats to help people.
My final point is this, Linux (as much as I love it) fundamentally cannot challenge Microsoft in any meaningful way. OEMs simply have no reason to switch (and in many cases Microsoft has pressured OEMs to continue using windows in an illegal manner). My point is for us thats ok, Linux right now is arguably not in a bad place. Sure there are issues with legacy apps and wayland but we are slowly progressing and with the release of Cosmic I belive Linux is progressing in a distinct manner.