:tux:
Windows fanbois are the idiots, not regular Windows users
Trying to do something complicated on Linux:
15 step Arch wiki detailing 3 different methods of doing the same thingTrying to do the same thing on Windows:
:bugs-no: :windows-cool:This doesn't make Windows less complicated, it means trying to do that thing on Windows is in fact INFINITY COMPLICATED because it's IMPOSSIBLE. Checkmate MicroShills.
The way they get around this is by not doing anything at all
Checkmate non centrists
The people who think Linux is complicated don't care about why windows sucks
the biggest barrier to desktop linux adoption is difficulty of learning a new, slightly janky user environment. the second biggest barrier is the way Linux People are
I would say the biggest barrier is actually getting a live USB set up so you can use it in the first place. "Boot order? BIOS?"
99% of computer users have never installed an operating system and probably don't even understand that it's something one can do.
Most won't, but I hope that Linux Mint, Kubuntu and the like getting easier to use and more widespread (and global communism instated) means more ppl do in the future.
Like a lot of people's lives don't revolve around their computers honestly the Linux chauvinism on the front page every day is getting tedious.
We get it. You love your operating system or whatever. Can you find something else to post about?
I don't know why you're surprised that we stan the less-capitalist OS on the anti-capitalist forum.
In other words :bugs-no:
I don't care that you like it and post about it I care that they're chauvinist. Why do all the posts need to be about calling people who don't use Linux idiots? Like a lot of people just use their computers to write emails and use a word processor, the idea that you want to constantly bay about how they're morons for not learning a bunch of completely unnecessary and complicated procedures just kind of sucks honestly
What complicated and unnecessary procedures are you having to perform on linux to check your email or use a word processor?
I know you are back peddling in later comments that you misunderstood the posters here but Linux fanboys overall tend to be very pushy seeking nothing less then the global liberation of all computers with "Libre" software.
It's a huge waste of time. If you want privacy then don't do anything electronically. Don't carry a phone with you. It's not like eight billion people with their own devices running "Libre" software will ever happen in a world where we are trying to contain climate/ecological collapse.
Why the scare quotes on libre? Is knowing what your device is doing and having control over that not desirable?
If you want privacy then just don't do anything electronically.
But like why though? Is wanting privacy from ad companies bourgeois?
I dont use linux but i get the idea that if more people used linux there would be more incentive to nake it user frendly and those complicated procedures would dbecome les so. i like the preaching because i hate my os and want to change to linux but like you am afraid of said procedures.
Nah, most people don't care about what OS they're using to have their feathers ruffled by a silly meme and are better served with a tablet OS like iOS anyways.
The meme is targeting Windows fanboys (ie g!mers) and their dumbass rationalizations over why Windows is totally not as complicated to use as Linux. When you're fiddling around with regedit to get your Skyrim with 30+ mods to run or running a bunch of batch files to debloat Windows, you really lost all right to say Linux is so complicated relative to Windows. I'm sorry, the shit Windows users have to go through to uninstall ads is infinitely more complicated than "that doesn't exist in Linux" lol
If Windows users really cared that much about having an OS that's neither janky nor overly complicated, they would just drop Windows and use a Mac. And don't mistaken this for me being an "OS chauvinist" as there's actually a deep rabbit hole in the world of hidden macOS settings that offers a greater degree of control and customization than what most people think a macOS is capable of. I honestly think OOTB macOS is more customizable than OOTB Windows although I have to play around with it some more. Slap on Homebrew to get a package manager going and your macOS is already beginning to resemble Linux. Just setting up a functional Hackintosh is an impressive feat in its own right, a far cry from babies who don't know what adblock is.
The real OS chauvinist has always being the Windows fanboys. They snobbishly look down on Mac users as babies who suck at computers, never mind that macOS is a POSIX with a higher learning ceiling than Windows, but when it comes to Linux users, suddenly it's "wah, Linux is too hard, wah, you have to always use the terminal." Extremely convenient how non-Windows users are either babies who suck at computers or neckbeards who are out of touch with average users, totally not a form of OS chauvinism in its own right.
And this OS chauvinism is almost completely driven by g!mers. How do I know this? What's the number one argument against Linux? It can't run Microsoft Office, it can't run Photoshop, and so forth. But Windows doesn't have a monopoly on Microsoft Office or Photoshop since Mac versions exist for them as well, and from the Mac users I know, they prefer the Mac version over the Windows version. Sure, it's an argument to not use Linux, but the framing of the argument is actually "here's why you should use Windows instead of Linux," which is a silly argument with Mac versions of those programs. The only reason to use Windows instead of Linux or macOS is purely videogames, which means the loudest Windows shills are of course going to be g!mers.
And as a final note, Linux users by and large do not give a shit about Mac users and are fairly chill with them. Because at the end of the day, macOS is just proprietary BSD. It comes with bash and most commands that work in Linux works in macOS as well. In general, "if it works in Linux, it would work in macOS" is true more times than not from my experience even if the actual steps are slightly different. Spotlight is absolutely magnificent, better than every single Linux equivalent (although KDE's search comes close) and certainly better than Windows' garbage search.
tl;dr: "The revolution will not be secured until g!mers have been thoroughly liquidated as a reactionary class." - Mao Zedong
Can you find something else to post about?
Like veganism! :vegan-tofu:
Linux may not always be user friendly, but it is never user hostile in the way that Windows often is.
The thing about Linux though is that Linux based developers won't add 15 lines of code to a program. Instead they'll add 15 lines of code to a fucking readme so you can enter them one by one into the fucking terminal,
And guess what?
2 of those lines don't do shit because that developer installed 14 layers of dependencies to their computer 9 years ago and forgot that they don't come stock, which means they don't even mention that it might be a problem or what the fuck to do
Once you finish Googling the fix for the fix for the fix for the fix for your problem, you can run some neato stuff
I installed linux back when vista came out and i wss so pissed. And this was my impresion about it. Also thete was no word prossesor with a functional spellcheck wich meant everything i wrote was giverish. After a year or 2 i had to format and went back to windows.
no word prossesor with a functional spellcheck wich meant everything i wrote was giverish
I believe you
Windows: Works out of the box fairly smoothly for two years, before bloat slowly drags your machine into a ditch and drowns it in a puddle full of malware
Linux: 48 consecutive hours of installation by several people with PhDs in software, but once its done you'll be able to run it until the hardware breaks.
I'm not a genius or anything but when I switched to ubuntu recently it didn't try to make connect to the internet and register an account during the goddamn setup phase. Oh also all my drivers just installed automatically :thonk:
no computer is user friendly, theyre insanely complicated and the only reason anything seems easy is because someone's tracking you.
ppl just use what theyre familiar with until they're literally forced to do something different with a new set of insane assumptions and metaphors about fake words and pictures in a box.
i inform my particularly intelligent owl to go to the library and write my particularly intelligent screeds to hexbear.net, a christian website
I found a witch's circle out in the forest behind my house that is fond of calzones that I make. It reaches into a mycelium network and a tree broadcasts my posts to a satellite.
Neither windows or linux (or macOS , android, iOS or plan9 for that matter) are user friendly.
Computers by design are an intricate series of obfuscations and metaphors whose ease of comprehension has more to do with the amount of flight time logged by whatever poor soul happens to be using em than some fake made up metric meant to grade those obfuscations and metaphors.
well user friendliness is a metric you can design for. No computer is ever secure either in that there will always be some unaccounted vulnerability but you can say a computer is sufficiently user friendly for the target audience just as it can be sufficiently secure for the organisations needs
User friendliness still assumes familiarity with a ton of strained metaphors from the days of Xerox being a personal computing company. It's mostly about not making things worse, but it pretty much always fails to make things better.
The only exception is the Inception "BWAAAAAAT" button app. That one counts as user friendly.
User friendliness is neither a valid metric nor something that can be designed for. Slathering b*ttercr*am frosting onto the whirring sawblades slowly advancing towards my face doesn’t constitute design.
Security is fundamentally different from any useful definition of user friendliness in that it operates on the terms of the computer only. There is no difference between a tcp vulnerability that requires use of nmap and packet manipulation or one that requires clicking a few buttons in excel. Both are insecure and do not require that a person be involved.
no usability as in ease for a user to understand how they are doing something is in fact a measureable and important metric.
Similarly security policy has to consider users and their allowed behavior and levels of authentication. I'm sorry but computers don't exist in a vaccuum and have users
Any metric of usability requires that the evaluator make a series of arbitrary and capricious assumptions first.
Even a person who doesn’t accept the fundamental inhumanity of computing has to recognize that all usability evaluators have some stake in the subjects, process or broader ideas they’re evaluating and do nothing to document or control for these assumptions and often obfuscate them.
Security is at least measured in ways that can sometimes avoid a big ol bag of made up assumptions about what’s important.
emulator what are you talking about you test usability by trials with prospective users or other humans. Something not being testable by a machine doesn't mean it can't be tested
Oh well if it’s a trial that changes everything.
Never seen incorrect or completely off base results come from a trial. Good thing we have an unimpeachable method of designing studies and evaluating results that never falls victim to systemic problems whose root lies in the very assumptions our institutions are founded upon.
Wait, is that Unpublished Corporate Research’s music I hear?
everyone linux thread here is so hilariously out of touch with the average pc user
trying to explain what wayland server is to 55 year old Barbara from accounting :morshupls:
Yes Barb I know you've never seen a CLI in your life, but on the other hand have you considered that someone on an online forum put linux mint on their mom's laptop and it works better than windows? Idk just makes you think
My parents were really bad at Linux but my grandma had no trouble with it when I put Ubuntu on her laptop
For the average PC user a mobile OS really is the most optimum thing for them to have, Windows just gives you enough rope to hang yourself
Lots of people cite "I gave my grandma Linux and she can use it" as proof of it being decently easy to use but considering prior to that they've been using a Windows XP box with 0 problems with minimal intervention for 15 years just kinda says that Linux is equally usable in that use case.
I mean I can do work on Linux (and I install LibreOffice every time I get a work laptop), but worrying about weird formatting issues going from LO to Office always makes me rely on stuff like Google Docs for anything I need to make sure looks correct.
The difference is that when Linux has a short coming, it's because they are an understaffed volunteer work force. When Windows isn't that great, it's purely asshole design.
Some of it is also just dysfunction at Microsoft. There's discussion threads on HN about Microsoft's organizational problems. A big thing seems to be that trying to improve stuff when that's not your department is very frowned upon, because it creates work checking, verifying, building, documenting etc. over there. And Microsoft's management obviously has priorities, so the people actually responsible for some piece of software aren't working on it either most of the time.
Compare this with any free software project. The whole world is pretty much encouraged to send in patches. And if the maintainer has no time or is a dick, you can publish your patches even without them.
I mean I just uninstalled candy crush in the apps list and moved on with my life. As far as issues go I would much rather deal with that than, say, not having the drivers for my extremely common wifi adapter on install, leaving me without an internet connection with which to download drivers until I figure out how to use my phone's mobile hotspot via USB, at which point I find that there aren't any bespoke Linux drivers for my extremely common wifi adapter, so I have to download some drivers gerryrigged from the windows version of some random dude's GitHub, and even then my internet speeds are consistently slower than on my windows install.
Because if something like that happened it would probably dampen any nascent desire to use Linux as my daily driver
especially one that I paid for
Well there's your problem.
And maybe it's different on 11 but on 10 I haven't seen any advertisements in forever? I just turned it all off in the settings. Yeah of course I don't like that it's there in the first place, but it's not too hard to get rid of on an individual level. Data harvesting is another thing but once you're at the point to actually care about that you'll probably have the literacy to download a script to minimize it.
As far as compatibility I already had the adapter before deciding to try a Linux install. The pitch of "try out this new operating system that may not work with your current peripherals" is not a compelling one for most people, besides.
And that really sucks! I'm just speaking from personal experience, and I've got other experiences with Windows that lead me to try Linux in the first place, though I'd wager that this specific issue is a more common occurance on Linux than Windows...
So, uh, something like that hasn't happened to me in at least 5 years. Have you had such an unfortunate experience more recently than that? Because in my (recent) experience, linux drivers tend to be pretty good (at least recently, and like, research your distro too I guess, arch and slackware won't install shit, but mint and other such user friendly ones usually will.)
I dunno, it just kind of feels like the era of linux being incapable of drivers (which was absolutely an era that existed) is over now, you know?
That's what I'd heard, but this happened to me like 2 months ago. It's kubuntu, which I figured would be mainstream enough to not have this issue, but apparently not
The one (1) thing that's noticeably more complicated on Linux than Windows is setting up shared folders. It's installing samba and fiddling with smb.conf vs turning on network discovery and going through properties > sharing > share. Everything else is on par or easier. Like, you still can't create your own custom hotkeys in Windows without relying on third-party software lol
You havve to restart your pc several times adjust the dates change some windows defender bullshit and pray to the rng thistime it will work. Windows uses the date as seed for some encryption bullshit so if it is even a second of you are fucked.
That's ass and might explain why some of my attempts to get that to work, didn't work
I think some distros (Ubuntu?) make shared folder setup as easy as right clicking it and finding the relevant option. Otherwise, yes, this is a pointlessly sore spot for Linux.
At least for Xubuntu, Debian, and Arch, you have to manually install samba first. After that, it depends on the file manager. For Nautilus, Ubuntu's default file manager, the steps are largely similar to how you would set it up in Windows. For everything else, the GUI way of doing it seems to be unreliable, which is why most Linux guides on how to set up shared folders just default to editing smb.conf.
I tried to set up a shared folder on Pop_OS and found a tutorial telling me that I could just right click the folder in question - but for some reason the relevant option is just greyed out. I ended up emailing myself the file after an hour of trying to get it to work.
Key point: all of the things listed here in Windows can be done with a GUI (and the third one was a fake hack anyways).
bottom was me when I was trying to install WSL on a pirated W10 LTSB system and I finally accepted that "gaming" wasn't worth it
so i was like "oh windows throttles it?"
i found the steps to do it. it made my speed way worse. so uhhhhhh no lol.
I can't run disco elysium on linux though. No penguin computer for me :tux-cry:
the rome total war remastered does not work in windows 7 so im thinking of installing a linux dual boot. Which would you recomend for a noob? Is there one with more than one dezktop? Wich windows xp emulatirs whould you recomend? Wich windows 10 emulators? Which word prossesor has a specheck?
I always recommend Linux Mint Debian Edition to people new to Linux.
There are a few with more than one desktop preinstalled but it's not a good idea: you end up with a mishmash of applications.
To emulate Windows you could try Bottles. It uses wine as a backend and comes with 2 presets for programs and modern games. If you want a full virtual machine you can try Boxes.
Mint comes with libre office, it's got spell checking and opens simple MS Word files.
If you like the way windows looks, kubuntu. I've installed it for my elderly family members who were complaining their laptops were too slow even after I installed the windows LTSC version for them.
the rome total war remaster does not work period lol
