[a5c11]

It's funny to see how Windows and Linux completely switched sides. Linux once being the clumsy one, hard to install, even harder to configure, mediocre UX, running on poor device drivers and requiring hours spent on the internet to solve a problem. Today, replace the "Linux" word with "Windows" in the previous sentence.

[SirFatty]

If that really was the case, then this would finally be the year of the Linux Desktop(tm).

[m_rpn]

Every year is the YOLD!

[devnullbrain]

I've not seen the claim you're satirising in years. But I am still seeing the satire years after Windows became the third most common user operating system.

The first is Linux.

The only reason Microsoft can afford to treat Windows with such disdain is that desktop operating systems became an afterthought.

[m_rpn]

The first is Android.

[baobun]

2025 is it!

[trenchpilgrim]

It honestly is, Linux is great on desktop. However, most people have laptops now which are a mixed bag.

[naikrovek]

they have definitely not completely switched sides. Linux is still clumsy and hard to configure if everything isn't configured for you. Linux has worse UX than Windows has ever had (I'm including windows 8 in that comparison)

Really liking Linux doesn't make Windows worse, and it doesn't make Linux better.

Watch someone who is not familiar with Linux and how it works attempt to install it and use it. Do not intervene. Now do that with a dozen different people on a dozen different machines which you do not preselect.

On Windows it is a much smoother experience.

I am making zero statements about any application compatibility or application comparisons between platforms. I am talking only about UX, UI, and installation.

Linux still has so, so very far to go.

And, honestly, there is no operating system which a complete newbie can start using without help in some form. Linux is not some golden child, here.

You like Linux on the desktop, and that's fine. Keep enjoying it. Just be aware that your experiences color your viewpoints, sometimes completely.

I am not a fan of Microsoft, I use Windows about once a month these days, but the UX difference between Linux and Windows is still very large. Very large.

[ruszki]

Yeah, I don’t understand the parent commenter either. Even with my latest laptop, it took days and weeks to make everything work (like audio, my monitors, DPI, VLC/mpv, even networking). And even then I had to turn off some hardware functionality, because it’s so buggy (bye-bye battery life). And this is before introducing Wayland for example…

Also installing is way easier for beginners with Windows. I’m happy that Linux installation now at least reached the level of Windows 98, but I still need to search for things every single time, even when I do it about every other years for several decades now. Just because somebody thought that it’s so important to ask simple users about an implementation detail which almost nobody care about. And this is before bugs… which I encounter quite frequently.

It’s getting better, but by not much. It could be a very stable OS with the right hardware even 20 years ago. That didn’t change, you still need to be very careful if you want a good experience with Linux and a GUI. I had no laptop or PC in the past 30 years on which I could install Linux without serious hiccups if I wanted anything more than terminal. I could almost always make it usable (it was impossible with one laptop), but I always had to give up something, like battery life, game performance, my headset at the time, etc. And of course a ton of time.

[Izkata]

That feels like bad luck to me. I've had a Dell, two Asus, and a ThinkPad over the past decade or so, and except for hibernate with the Dell, everything has just worked out out the box with no tinkering.

[ruszki]

With 2 ASUS? You seem to be the lucky one, not me. ASUS is quite infamous for more than a decade about its bad Linux support. Basic things can work sometimes well, but you need to be extremely lucky to have one which really completely works as intended, like temperature control.

[a5c11]

> Watch someone who is not familiar with Linux and how it works attempt to install it and use it.

What a dumb analogy. My mother can use Windows very well, it doesn't mean she could also install it. The same rule applies to most Windows users. That's why it comes preinstalled, and not with an attached bootable USB stick.

UX of recent Windows versions is crap. The bearish tendency started with 8 and have never recovered, with Windows 11 being the cherry on top of the crap. Telling that as a user of almost every Windows version since 3.11. Microsoft completely changes user interface with every recent version, this is an anti-pattern in UX world. How is that I can smoothly switch between Debian and macOS major updates, and when Windows does the same it is a nightmare? "Oh no, where are the network settings again..."

[pessimizer]

> Watch someone who is not familiar with Linux and how it works attempt to install it and use it. Do not intervene. Now do that with a dozen different people on a dozen different machines which you do not preselect.

Have you done this, or is this just a science fiction story? Have you watched a dozen people install Windows on a dozen different machines?

The reason people sorta know Windows is because they've already used it, not because it is good. And if you don't give them something straightforward like MATE or Cinnamon as a Linux desktop, you might as well compare it to new Vista users, not Win11 users.

You don't have to convince me that Gnome is bad. But everything else now pretty much follows the WinXP paradigm that we're all used to.

[keyringlight]

I think just saying "installing the OS" is a bit of a trap, that's step one, and important step but then you get to all the different subsets of features and software that they use, including not included in the OS or its repos.

When you're looking at consumer usage of a PC for anything that remotely makes sense to do on that platform I think windows has the advantage of decades of a different software ecosystem. Cumulatively there's a huge broad library of software that linux can't touch, or gets partway there but falls short. For example I can tag music files on linux, but it's painful compared to something like Mp3tag (which has been going for about 17 years). Or if I want fan control on my 9 year old intel platform I need to learn about and add a kernel parameter and manually detect sensors before I get started whereas it's straightforward on software available on windows.

[AlienRobot]

I wouldn't compare the installation process since most people can't install Windows, but Linux does have an astounding gap in basic usability.

Every time I see a gnome app without a menubar I can't help but feel like Linux shoots itself in the foot just because Windows has two feet.

[naikrovek]

Well, the comment I was replying to cited ease of installation, so I did, too.

> Linux shoots itself in the foot just because Windows has two feet

This is exactly the opinion that everyone who is not accustomed to all of the GNOME nonsense gets after using GNOME. And GNOME fans are far too used to things to even hear that it is imperfect.

[scuff3d]

It's funny how we see these threads every few months, and it's always the same thing (referring to the discussion below this comment as well).

Linux people (myself included) are utterly blind to the rough edges on Linux. Even something like Mint, which is probably the best starting place for someone coming from Windows, can have weird issues depending on your hardware.

On the other hand, Windows users are hilariously misinformed about the state of the Linux Desktop. To hear them talk you'd think we're still back in 1997.

All of that said, for anyone curious, it is 100% worth trying out. Linux has come a LONG way. Mint is great for general usage, Bazzite is a good choice for gaming. Unless you're playing competitive shooters it's basically a guarantee the games you want to play run on Linux. There will be some rough edges and stuff to get use to, but IMO it's worth a try at least.

[my_brain_saying]

To be fair to Linux, Windows has many, many rough edges as well. The difficult part for newbies is that those rough edges are _different_. In the long run I feel pretty confident saying that Linux is overall better, and that's because of the customizability. Ultimately, with some experience, one can essentially choose one’s own rough edges :P

[scuff3d]

The problem is where the rough edges are at.

On Windows they are mostly off the beaten path. I have a Windows PC setup as my media computer because my wife doesn't want to deal with Linux, and I've never once had an issue with the audio or Bluetooth.

On my Fedora desktop and Arch laptop I have audio/Bluetooth issues at least every couple of weeks.

In addition, my wife needs access to Adobe products, my brother needs access to Office. Those are non-negotiable for them because in both cases it's for work.

I'm a Linux fan, I don't even want to go back to Windows for my personal computer, but Windows is still a smoother experience for the majority of people.

[duxup]

If find that if it doesn't work out of the box, you're still in for a very clumsy time in Linux land.

[TheCoelacanth]

Installing windows has been harder than Linux for at least 15 years. Windows just came pre-installed for most people.

[JohnLocke4]

Convention and the terminal holds it back. A terminal looks like the 1970s but feels like the future

[luma]

I'd rather suspect it has a lot more to do with 40+ years of application backward compatibility and the ludicrous stack of software available for the platform.

[xtiansimon]

> “terminal holds it back”

Presumably the it here is Linux? That’s not what I would have said. The terminal makes maintaining your own systems much easier because it’s all text. Opposed to having to mix screen shots and instructions. Which is to say, I don’t imagine people who can’t handle the terminal (and are on Windoz) are doing any maintenance or configuration beyond a few GRRR items they’ve convinced themselves is ultimately intolerable.

From a small business I’d say what keeps the accounting office on Windoz is software (ie. quickbooks, excel). But a close second would be tighter integration of file management and core office apps (ie email). It’s very easy to rename, move, copy, files on windows. You can perform many of these file management tasks inside an app experience (ie saveas dialog box). Apple has the mindset with their suite of Apple productivity apps, Chromebooks are very easy for general users to get their head around. If Linux could roll up a Chromebook environment with a QB clone into an expert system (e.g. no. We don’t need pictures, videos or games folders), I think our firm would consider the switch. It would certainly have the appearance of stability productivity, and simplicity which is always a plus when your job is not maintaining IT systems. (Now we just need to find new outsource IT for troubleshooting)

[AlienRobot]

To me it's sad that Linux never became a good desktop OS, Windows just became worse and worse until it became worse than Linux :(

When I upgraded to 7 I tried Linux and I simply hated that I had to deal with the terminal and install strange third-party programs from strange forums to get anything working. Then I had to upgrade to 11 and I had to run strange terminal programs to install it without without creating a Microsoft account, and everyone recommends using some third-party Windows power tools to fix what Microsoft did to Windows. I could not believe it. IT IS THE SAME THING!

Now I'm using Linux, and I don't like it, but least it isn't spyware.

[hamandcheese]

> When I upgraded to 7 I tried Linux

Most Linux distros have come a long way in the last decade and a half. Windows is worse, yes, but Linux is also better.