What Linux Needs To Do To Reach The Masses.

[Artim]

I'm kinda like Malspa as far as this goes: Why do we need to appeal to "the masses" anyway? I use Linux to keep older hardware going strong, and I'm not a gamer like most computer users my age. I used to be a "Linux evangelist," always looking for opportunities to "convert" my friends, family, and schoolmates to Linux. But most don't feel any need to change their OS, and until they do, my efforts fell flat and I was dismissed as some kinda geek (which I'm totally not!).

But:

When their computers won't keep up with the high requirements of Win10 and/or they can't afford a new computer, then a few are willing to listen, and I give them a few Live DVDs or USBs to try out and see if one might suit them.

But really, out of all the people I've shared desktop Linux with, only one is still using it, even on brand new high-end superduper hardware. Probably because he's not a gamer and just uses it for schoolwork and web surfing.

[JayM]

One more to add to the list: automatic scaling. Windows 10 detects your hardware including native monitor resolution and scales itself accordingly so fonts and icons are easily visible. Every Linux DE requires that the user manually set scaling.

[manyroads]

The basic tone of this discussion reminds me of home owners. A few do their own repairs (like me), but most hire the work out (Apple/Win).

[JayM]

I'm kinda like Malspa as far as this goes: Why do we need to appeal to "the masses" anyway?

The higher the Linux market share in the end-user desktop and laptop realm the more likely it is that app developers will make Linux versions. People keep demanding an office suite that's fully compatible with Microsoft Office. How about actual MS Office for Linux? Many people keep a dual-boot solution due to certain games and apps that won't work in wine. What if there were native Linux versions of them? What if $YEAR was finally the Year of the Linux Desktop? What if computer manufacturers stopped making machines that were designed with only Windows in mind so you could painlessly run whichever OS you wanted on them, or choose which OS came preinstalled on it with no more having to dual-boot to be able to do whatever you wanted to on your computer? What if (dare I say it) Windows went more or less bye-bye and Linux, which is open source, became the predominate OS?

[Eadwine Rose]

The basic tone of this discussion reminds me of home owners. A few do their own repairs (like me), but most hire the work out (Apple/Win).

I am glad to be able to apply both worlds to the situation.


Both lin and win and DIY and DNY person haha.



But Linux will never be reaching the masses.. they're simply too late, they should have done that back when Windows was still tiny.

That is why Windows is so powerful: the money behind it, it's big and very well known, it supports pretty much everything that is new, and there is only ONE windows and it's linear.. you just pay more to get a few more features in the release (home, pro, etc).

Catching up to that is not going to happen because there are too many Linux varieties out there (who aren't willing to work together to boot) and too little resources.

[handy]

G**gle did it with android, due to the world's smart phone addiction.

[j2mcgreg]

For all intents and purposes, Microsoft is a monopoly and it will take a major breech that is undeniably attributable to a Microsoft failing and / or a malware attack that renders a global swath of PCs unusable with a lengthy period of time (like Boeing's problem with it's new 737) to break their stranglehold on the market.

[JayM]

But Linux will never be reaching the masses.. they're simply too late, they should have done that back when Windows was still tiny.

Linux was terminal-only until XFree86 came out in May 1992, and even then XFree's GUI was quite primitive compared to even Windows 3.0 which came out almost exactly two years prior. XFree86 was just an open-source clone of X11 for Windows which dated from 1987, and that's what XFree looked like. So Windows has always had the lead over Linux. Linux was originally just a (command-line) open source clone of Unix back when the masses were still struggling to get their heads around DOS. (In fact, in those days the actual masses weren't really interested in using home computers at all. PCs were mainly for hobbyists, nerds, niche gamers and businesses.) Just because someone's been ahead of you for most of a marathon race doesn't mean you can't still pass them though.

[komer]

Post deleted by author.

[dreamer]

G**gle did it with android, due to the world's smart phone addiction.

Has anyone wondered why Android apk packages are small compared to Flatpaks and Snaps? I have.

Maybe Google solved the problem with sandboxed apps without using a lot of data?

I think Flatpaks and Snaps make Linux look inferior on a technical level and that's not good. I'm not saying Flatpak and Snap are bad per se, just that they make Linux look bad.