Do I want people to use #Linux? Yes.
But I'm also very aware of how much of a support network is needed if you are going to be using any particular software. Even companies with $$ to spend fail frequently by focusing on their software and not enough on their socialware.
#Windows problems: Like a friend who eats a terrible truck stop sandwich, the problem isn't my friend, it's the regulations that allow poisonous food to exist in the first place. For now: #sympathy.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
Juank Prada Art
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • • •it happens with every OS unless you pay for support?
Neither Windows nor Mac OS will guide your through troubleshooting anything except for whatever you may find on their support sites, which usually ends up being either a wiki or a forum with lots of answers that don’t match your case.
My experience: its usually easy to find the solution for a problem in Linux forums than in Mac OS or Windows ones
Also my experience: the solution in Linux tends to be more complicated
Martin Owens :inkscape:
in reply to Juank Prada Art • • •@juankprada
Yes. But the wikis are good because the demand is high and the threshold where you need to look at a wiki is much lower.
Buying support, or a computer with Linux on it is best.
Though if we want people to use Linux, we're going to have to already have people using Linux. For all that casual and moral support people get when using the thing that everyone uses. Catch22, but not impossible.
Juank Prada Art
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • • •I meant to say, between windows’, Mac’s and Linux’s wikis I usually find the information clearer and more easily digestible in Linux’s wikis.
Regarding more people adopting Linux, I think ISVs need to start targeting the platform more.
As much as I love free software alternatives (and use them professionally as much as possible), there is a gap between the available software in Linux and what the current industry is demanding
Martin Owens :inkscape:
in reply to Juank Prada Art • • •@juankprada
You'll have to recognise that Free Software is a political project, not a technological one. ISVs that don't understand the political arena will always be on the back foot in the linux world.
I'm not sure you can get to ISVs without having a convincing economic model for Free Software. And once you have that, why do you need proprietary software at all.
Juank Prada Art
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • • •I’m not sure if I would call it political but rather ethical, but I think I get what you mean.
And about ISV I think Steam and the gaming industry are doing it arguably ok. Not necessarily in the most ethical way but doing it nonetheless, right?
Martin Owens :inkscape:
in reply to Juank Prada Art • • •@juankprada
Valve are a good example, they have learned how integrate themselves. Provide large amounts of compatibility, contribute to proton and provide a mechanism to provide funding to suppliers who play nice with Linux.
Politics is just ethics for three of more people.
Juank Prada Art
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • • •right , but hardly the core of their business and their platform is free software/open source. So they are building a whole private led software business on top of a free platform (Linux) without adhering to the Free Software ideals. They do contribute as you say. So in the rethoric of Free Software ecosystem, is private software acceptable as long as it contributes something to the free software ecosystem? 🤔
Why Valve is succeeding while Microsoft is not?
Martin Owens :inkscape:
in reply to Juank Prada Art • • •@juankprada
Games get a pass.
And we're happy to have this provision so long as it doesn't monopolise. I'd be much more unhappy if proton were proprietary. See how unhappy nvidea drivers make Foss people compared to steam. The drivers have consequences, the games are less politically urgent.
We must hold onto *why* we want software freedom. It's not a purity test, it's a real and material matter of rights over our property.
LovesTha🥧
in reply to Juank Prada Art • • •@juankprada I find the difference (ignoring Mac that I haven't used) comes in the more difficult issues. The imple one they are pretty similar, but the difficult ones it is hafter to find the root problem in windows so finding the right solution is hit and miss.
In Linux the core skill to teach new users I how to diagnose issues. Once they have that small skill a solution is just r good search engine away.
(A pity about those....)
eshep
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • •I think the single biggest problem with mass linux adoption is choice. Most people only want choice in the way of choosing one thing over another. When presented with a seemingly infinite platter of decisions, most are going to be too overwhelmed to want to make any choice at all. This is why many people are okay with all of their OS decisions being made by someone else; it allows them to communicate with others in a familiar setting. By having my UI look identical to that of everyone else I know, I'm presented with a level of comfort that linux is just not able to provide without (initially) limiting the freedoms we enjoy from it.
Linux as a mass-consumer OS is doable, but to do that, everyone needs to presented with a homgeneous experience. From there, people would then have the freedom to do as they wish. However, this presents us on the linux side with the biggest problem we could ever imagine... agreeing on what will be "the face of linux". In order to provide this initial homogenous experience, a single program (for every software choice any of us have ever made) would
... show moreI think the single biggest problem with mass linux adoption is choice. Most people only want choice in the way of choosing one thing over another. When presented with a seemingly infinite platter of decisions, most are going to be too overwhelmed to want to make any choice at all. This is why many people are okay with all of their OS decisions being made by someone else; it allows them to communicate with others in a familiar setting. By having my UI look identical to that of everyone else I know, I'm presented with a level of comfort that linux is just not able to provide without (initially) limiting the freedoms we enjoy from it.
Linux as a mass-consumer OS is doable, but to do that, everyone needs to presented with a homgeneous experience. From there, people would then have the freedom to do as they wish. However, this presents us on the linux side with the biggest problem we could ever imagine... agreeing on what will be "the face of linux". In order to provide this initial homogenous experience, a single program (for every software choice any of us have ever made) would have to be chosen as "the one" that will be presented as "linux" to the general consumer. Who makes the call on "what does linux look like"? Why should any particular program be chosen over another?
Martin Owens :inkscape:
in reply to eshep • • •@eshep
Why would you even advertise Linux at all?
Surely the brand you want to build is the one you have control over already.
Shared resources are an ideal, but cooperation also has it's costs I think. Though I favour it.
eshep
in reply to Martin Owens :inkscape: • •