[fainpul]

Then at least let the company that makes your niche software know that you want a Linux version of it, even if you don't use Linux (yet). We need to solve this chicken / egg problem. Nobody wants to use Windows, they want to use some specific application. If most software is available on Linux too, then consumers can actually choose their OS.

[sigmoid10]

Most software is already available on Linux. I've successfully run Linux in corporate jobs where everything runs on the MS/AD/Azure stack. The issue is not that you can't do it, the issue is that you have to spend extra work at every corner to get things running, because unlike Windows Linux doesn't take your hand and hide all the nasty bits from you, while it tries to juggle a million cases in the background. Windows is really great at that - until it breaks. Then you're usually screwed. Like, if the problem is close to the kernel, you can't even fix it theoretically. Best you can do is wait for an official MS patch. On Linux things break more often, but you can usually fix them without having to resort to extreme measures. It's a fundamentally different usage philosophy that plays very hard into the strengths of techies. So non-technical users will always shy away from Linux.

[sombragris]

> the issue is not that you can't do it, the issue is that you have to spend extra work at every corner to get things running, because unlike Windows Linux doesn't take your hand and hide all the nasty bits from you, while it tries to juggle a million cases in the background.

You may have to spend extra work to get things running; but once it's done, it runs forever without a hitch.

I know, I use Slackware. It's regarded as a very technical distribution and some manual configuration is expected but once it's done, it's done. I have configs from > 20 years ago that I still use without a hiccup.

[sigmoid10]

>but once it's done, it runs forever without a hitch.

Yeah... no. If you're dealing with changing systems, you'll need continued support from maintainers. And there's a lot of stuff out there in the business world that is commonly used and breaks all the time. Stuff will break. If not, it is not getting updated. In that case I'd be more worried about security than compatibility.

[sombragris]

Yeah... yes. There are systems which are continuously maintained but don't break all the time. Yes, stuff will break but this is way less common in Linux.

Claws-mail has all my email for over 15 years. My inbox is several gigabytes in size, which claws handles flawlessly. And the software is continuously maintained. I'm using version 4.4.0 now, which was released 16 days ago on March 9.

So... yes.

[sigmoid10]

Turns out email clients are quite simple (mostly because the protocol is ancient) and also something everyone in every company uses. But many OSS clients still die eventually. And once you get into the actual business application world, you're in for a world of pain on Linux. Especially if you go near AD/Azure/Entra. Heck, the fact there is not even a stable name for this mess of a software suite tells you enough. And yet every big company relies on it.

[lstodd]

I don't know what are these nasty bits windows is supposedly hiding, or what exactly breaks more often on Linux. For me it's exact opposite: my linux just never breaks. I don't do anything special, just plug in the hdd into new box bought when old gets too slow for new tasks, continue as nothing happened.

Uptimes of half a year are not uncommon, the record so far is 400+ days. I just don't shut it down unless there's a serious kernel or hardware upgrade.

It just works, non-kernel updates, stuff being plugged/unplugged, couple times I swapped sata hdds without turning off power (which is simple, they are hotplug by design, just don't drop the screws onto motherboard and don't forget to unmount+detach first).

Now, when I used to and test some cross-builds for windows (win7-win10 era), I had another dedicated windows machine for that. And even though I tried to make it as stable as possible, it was a brittle piece of junk, in comparison.

So in my experience, yes, linux is fundamentally different usage philosophy: you don't need to think about what crap Microsoft will break your workflow with next Tuesday.

[aleph_minus_one]

> Then at least let the company that makes your niche software know that you want a Linux version of it, even if you don't use Linux (yet). We need to solve this chicken / egg problem.

To solve the chicken/egg problem, the GNU/Linux distributions should generate some very (in particular binary) stable interface for writing applications (including GUI applications) on GNU/Linux - like WinAPI on Windows. With "stable" I mean "stable for at least 20-25 years". This interface must, of course, work on all widespread GNU/Linux distributions.

[nananana9]

Even if we don't agree on a userspace ABI, this is still fine-ish, as long as you can statically link everything you need. Unfortunately the nerds maintaining the core libraries REALLY don't want you to do that, and the answer to "how do I build a portable Linux GUI program" goes more or less like:

"Build musl libc statically, set up a toolchain to use it, build libc++ for that toolchain, get libwayland, link that statically (which their build scripts don't support, roll your own), get xcb,libxau,libxwhatever and build those statically as well, and implement TWO platform layers, dynamically checking for wayland support. There's like 5 different ways to set your window icon. Yes, you need to implement all of them. Now for loading the graphics API......."

On Windows it's a call to RegisterClassW followed by CreateWindowW.

[swiftcoder]

It's an old joke, but it's also accurate in this case - isn't what you are asking for just WINE?

[aleph_minus_one]

> isn't what you are asking for just WINE

An operating system is a style of thinking about your work. WINE is a way to get Windows applications to run (by now run decently) under GNU/Linux. These Windows applications are nevertheless foreign bodies in the whole kind of thinking which GNU/Linux is built around.

[bombcar]

The joke is that the most stable Linux API for applications is ... WIN32 via WINE.

It's sad because it's true.

[sznio]

I think that eventually, Win32/WoW64 will be the stable common API for Linux programs - or at least games. I won't be surprised if it outlasts Windows.

[krater23]

I don't want windows or linux, I want a OS where I don't notice that it's there. When I have to think about my OS, then the OS has a flaw. And currently nor Windows or Linux can deliver that anymore. Windows 7 after some customizations and Windows XP had this, but M$ destroyed it. Linux never had this and I don't expect that this will come in the future.

[tasuki]

> I want a OS where I don't notice that it's there.

I guess you want a Mac. That's fine.

I value freedom and things not mysteriously breaking and functionality not disappearing, and am quite happy investing a the time and knowledge upfront, so I use Linux.

And then there are people who want to have a system which works out of the box initially and who don't want to learn anything and don't mind it breaking later, and they choose Windows.

To each their own.

[Copernicron]

> I guess you want a Mac. That's fine.

Have you seen liquid glass? "Don't notice it's there" does not at all apply to the latest UI changes. Everything is bouncing and jumping and sliding in ways that deliberately call attention to itself. MacOS does not stay out of the way anymore.

[alexb_]

Company? Most of the time this stuff is years (sometimes DECADES) old. That's why it doesn't work on Linux in the first place.