• bort@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago
    1. Users are finally figuring out that some Linux distros are easy to use

    so recommending arch linux to newbies was counter productive all along?

    suprised_pikachu.bmp

  • wingsfortheirsmiles@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Number 2 was huge for me, and it hit home when I realised that 99% of my Steam library was supported. Thankfully I don’t need to use any Windows only apps (Adobe suite, etc) so the decision to move over to Linux was trivial personally

  • Meldrik@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    A major reason that Windows is “popular” is because it’s pre-installed on desktops and laptops. Users don’t have a choice when they go to the store to buy a laptop for doing banking stuff or save pictures from their old camcorder.

    It’s the same way with browsers. IE was “popular”, but only because that was the browser that was pre-installed on Windows. The IE browser was complete shit.

    • caustictrap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      When people build new gaming pc they still choose to install windows, because everything just works.

      • Meldrik@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s not the segment I am talking about. I’m talking about “regular folks”, who know nothing about IT, but need a laptop for whatever reason. Checking their bank, mail… That’s the majority of Windows users. Not the PC builder. They probably don’t even know what “Windows” is, if you asked them.

        If Linux were pre-installed on PC’s, most people wouldn’t even notice a difference, because all they need is a browser and maybe an office suite, for very simple work.

      • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Gaming PC means video games, video games have historically been Windows or maybe Mac compatible. Only in the past couple years have game makers started making Linux compatibility a priority, and even then its a small percentage.

        Until all systems align, Windows will continue to dominate. But things like HTML5 over Flash are helping those efforts!

      • rah@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        because everything just works

        No, it’s because they believe everything will just work.

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I can list the biggest one without having to look: Because the most popular alternative has progressively gotten worse for the past 12 years, and what was once a quality OS (sure,it had its faults and flaws, but I’ll concede that Win7 was objectively a good OS) has now morphed into a combination of spyware and adware.

    • anamethatisnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Microsoft being uninterested in Windows Desktop and focusing on Saas and the cloud is indeed the first bullet point.

      1. Microsoft isn’t that interested in Windows
      2. Linux gaming, thanks to Steam, is also growing
      3. Users are finally figuring out that some Linux distros are easy to use
      4. Finding and installing Linux desktop software is easier than ever
      5. The Linux desktop is growing in popularity in India
      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Users aren’t finding it out. The distros just actually got usable and stopped being super elitists.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I get the sense that Microsoft doesn’t care about their desktop users and as much as views desktop as another small side market.

        MacOS only runs on their particular hardware, so Linux is free to gobble up market share limited mainly by user technical know how and the general shift to most web traffic coming from mobile.

    • Case@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      10 was bad. 11 is… awful.

      I’m running it on my daily driver / gaming rig to learn its flaws and how to work around them, because work may be moving that direction. My hardware, my license, not like they can stop me.

      I’ve never had more problems with any OS than 11 on day to day stability issues. Vista? At least it had direct X 10. 8? Yeah, a total design fuck up, but even supporting it professionally I never had this many problems.

    • dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also the updates situation has caused many to dislike Windows.

      Linux is a perfectly viable OS at this point, it’s not just for tech geeks. I did have a problem with my USB Wi-Fi adapter during the install but other than that everything was just as smooth and less creepy than Microsoft.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      what was once a quality OS (sure,it had its faults and flaws, but I’ll concede that Win7 was objectively a good OS) has now morphed into a combination of spyware and adware.

      The last objectively good Microsoft OS that didn’t have any significant user-hostile features was Windows 2000, IMO. Windows 7 – specifically, before invasive “telemetry[sic]” started getting backported to it from 10 – was just the last version before the hostility got bad enough to get me to switch.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The last objectively good Microsoft OS that didn’t have any significant user-hostile features was Windows 2000, IMO

        Hard agree. Windows 2000 was rock solid, reasonably lightweight and had no shenanigans going on in the background. It’s EOL (edit: actually I think it might have been a specific version of directx only being supported on XP maybe) was one of the things that pushed me to Linux.

        That and the native Linux Unreal Tournament 2004.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Okay, let me rephrase: to the extent that any Microsoft OS could be described as “objectively good,” Windows 2000 was the last one of them.

          • rah@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Okay, let me rephrase for you: in choosing which of Microsoft’s stinking piles of shit was the least stinky, some people chose Windows 2000. However, most people just left the stinky area and didn’t look back.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              You do realize I was conceding your point, right? You don’t have to be a jerk about it.

  • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    There’s still some stuff I’m tied to Windows for, namely music players (MusicBee and Apple Music but they can be used in a VM) and VR. But it’s nice to see Linux growing.

      • luci_tired@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        vlc sucks for music because it doesn’t have gapless playback, and not everyone wants to use a streaming service.

        • Peter1986C@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          My music player suggestions for local playback on Linux. Please note that you could pick any of these no matter the desktop environment if you do not care about consistently in look and feel. In that case I suggest to go with Strawberry.

          • On GTK environments: Rhythmbox, Exaile
          • On QT environments: Strawberry, Clementine and somewhere next year Amarok should be through its revival that KDE has announced not too long ago.
        • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Not to mention, Apple Music is so much better than Spotify for my needs and Cider isn’t cutting it for me right now. Once they’re not as reliant on MusicKit, I might give it a go again.

      • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        MusicBee. Tried it on WINE. Not great. Linux players also don’t do a lot of what MusicBee does OOTB, and if they do it’s not as seamless as MusicBee. (tag hierarchies are the main thing, but the playlist functionality is also good.)

        Thankfully it runs fine in a virtual machine.

        • ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Musicbee was the only thing keeping me from switching for years. Simply put, it’s the best music player and even better is that it’s open source.