The only thing I see holding people back is software availability. If it could run adobe and games natively I don’t see why anyone would want to pay for windows.
adobe sucks for the same reasons I alluded to in my last paragraph. Money-grubbing corporation company hurts developers by patenting, trademarking, and copyrighting every minor feature in their programs to the point where FOSS alternatives have to bend over backwards to find ways to implement some of the same functionality. The problem isn’t linux, the problem is adobe, the problem is profit-motive, the problem is capitalism.
IDK what distro you use, but I’m using Debian, and it does run games natively–nearly half of the ones I own on steam. Not all of them, but that’s not Linux’s fault, that’s not Gnu’s fault, that’s not Debian’s fault: they already offer compatibility layers and yet that’s not good enough for everyone, and there’s not much they can do beyond that outside of building a windows clone (or at least a partial clone) that would probably get them sued. To run natively, the devs would have to compile it to run on Linux and the ones that don’t are making the choice to not do so–consciously or not, because of profits or not; it’s hard to say why, even indie devs who make free games as a hobby sometimes choose not to, so it’s not as easily dismissed with “because capitalism”
That all being said, the “software availability” criticism can cut both ways. I’ve found so many tools and utilities and apps and FOSS programs that are only made available for linux (unless one is willing to port them oneself), and there isn’t an app or program I use everyday that I haven’t found a linux-compatible alternative for. The glaring exception being games; to me that wasn’t a huge deal, I’ll bite that bullet because I’d rather go without kernel-privileged spyware for an OS–and the same for an anti-cheat engine–than play a triple-A on maximum graphics, play online multiplayers that require microsecond reaction time, or other such use cases where Proton actively hinders UX. Like I said, I’d rather have anti-authoritarian computers than worry about keeping up with the performance spec joneses
Software is definitely at the top of the list in terms of reasons. But the UX/UI definitely leaves something to be desired. I sigh heavily every time an application asks me to edit a text-based config file instead of giving me a GUI. It’s an unnecessary, error-prone process and most importantly I have better things to do than read yet another page of documentation. That doesn’t mean I want the config file to go away, it’s still very useful for a variety of reasons. But I shouldn’t have to mess around with it just to remap keys or other common tasks. Editing a config file should be a last resort for an end user.
You see similar problems when relying on the terminal. I don’t like this idea of the end user being allowed to mess around without a safety net or some sort of guidance.
I think it’s more about trying to change particular industries. If all of Adobes software was available for Linux in a supported and stable versions, you could see changes in the OS used in lots of design and creativity industries, which again would change what OS people use at home.
Also I think the force of being open source and spread over so many distros, is also a weakness in terms of getting the mainstream user to use it. My dad will call me or ask his friend about how you do this and that in Windows, but if our OS per default looks different from what others are using, he will not be able to get the same kind of help from his near community, and will have to rely on a more technical kind of support.
And things have to work out of the box. If I hear “You CAN get it to work” - I won’t use it. I need things to just work, I don’t have time to (nor interrest in) spending a night mingeling with config files to have simple things do the things they’re supposed to.
The only thing I see holding people back is software availability. If it could run adobe and games natively I don’t see why anyone would want to pay for windows.
adobe sucks for the same reasons I alluded to in my last paragraph. Money-grubbing corporation company hurts developers by patenting, trademarking, and copyrighting every minor feature in their programs to the point where FOSS alternatives have to bend over backwards to find ways to implement some of the same functionality. The problem isn’t linux, the problem is adobe, the problem is profit-motive, the problem is capitalism.
IDK what distro you use, but I’m using Debian, and it does run games natively–nearly half of the ones I own on steam. Not all of them, but that’s not Linux’s fault, that’s not Gnu’s fault, that’s not Debian’s fault: they already offer compatibility layers and yet that’s not good enough for everyone, and there’s not much they can do beyond that outside of building a windows clone (or at least a partial clone) that would probably get them sued. To run natively, the devs would have to compile it to run on Linux and the ones that don’t are making the choice to not do so–consciously or not, because of profits or not; it’s hard to say why, even indie devs who make free games as a hobby sometimes choose not to, so it’s not as easily dismissed with “because capitalism”
That all being said, the “software availability” criticism can cut both ways. I’ve found so many tools and utilities and apps and FOSS programs that are only made available for linux (unless one is willing to port them oneself), and there isn’t an app or program I use everyday that I haven’t found a linux-compatible alternative for. The glaring exception being games; to me that wasn’t a huge deal, I’ll bite that bullet because I’d rather go without kernel-privileged spyware for an OS–and the same for an anti-cheat engine–than play a triple-A on maximum graphics, play online multiplayers that require microsecond reaction time, or other such use cases where Proton actively hinders UX. Like I said, I’d rather have anti-authoritarian computers than worry about keeping up with the performance spec joneses
Software is definitely at the top of the list in terms of reasons. But the UX/UI definitely leaves something to be desired. I sigh heavily every time an application asks me to edit a text-based config file instead of giving me a GUI. It’s an unnecessary, error-prone process and most importantly I have better things to do than read yet another page of documentation. That doesn’t mean I want the config file to go away, it’s still very useful for a variety of reasons. But I shouldn’t have to mess around with it just to remap keys or other common tasks. Editing a config file should be a last resort for an end user.
You see similar problems when relying on the terminal. I don’t like this idea of the end user being allowed to mess around without a safety net or some sort of guidance.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Tbf I am a graphic designer haha.
I think it’s more about trying to change particular industries. If all of Adobes software was available for Linux in a supported and stable versions, you could see changes in the OS used in lots of design and creativity industries, which again would change what OS people use at home.
Also I think the force of being open source and spread over so many distros, is also a weakness in terms of getting the mainstream user to use it. My dad will call me or ask his friend about how you do this and that in Windows, but if our OS per default looks different from what others are using, he will not be able to get the same kind of help from his near community, and will have to rely on a more technical kind of support.
And things have to work out of the box. If I hear “You CAN get it to work” - I won’t use it. I need things to just work, I don’t have time to (nor interrest in) spending a night mingeling with config files to have simple things do the things they’re supposed to.