If that happens to pretty tech savvy software engineers, the average user has zero chance of using Linux as a desktop effectively.
This is the overall the most important metric.
When it crashes it's 100% a problem in kernel space. Driver issues, compatibility issues. It is NOT an app. The OS should not give the privilege to an app to crash anything else other than itself.
What you MEANT to say is Linux crashes less than before and likely never crashes for certain hardware.
OVERALL linux will still crash MORE than windows when you look at everything holistically.
Buy hardware designed for Linux and you will have no problems. Ideally, with preinstalled Linux.
All hardware on my system have drivers available from the manufacture SO ALL of the hardware is "designed" for linux. It's just like the OP said there is poor support. So there's bugs in the software because all bug fixing resources are aimed at fixing Windows issues. So basically even the THOUGHT of buying specifically designed hardware for windows is non-existent for windows because basically it ALWAYS works.
For windows the OS and hardware are designed to always work and that's all they care about. This is a major major feature that Linux DOES NOT have. Linux is inferior in every way on this aspect.
No user cares about the morality or the reasoning behind why this windows works with so much hardware. They are concerned with tools that help them achieve their objective. Linux is definitively worse than this on many aspects than windows OR OSX.
It's impossible to have good support for every available software. My Purism laptop works without issues for years. No crashes, no problems with WiFi or suspend. Just buy preinstalled Linux, like I did.
That's why linux is inferior. For windows I don't need to buy preinstalled. I can buy whatever I want.
>It's impossible to have good support for every available software.
Except windows pretty much does this. Yeah there's shady business tactics involved but at the end of the day users just want something that works. Linux fails at doing this. So I don't know why you're advising me to buy preinstalled. I can do that, but it just means Linux is FORCING me to do that because it is an inferior OS from a usability standpoint.
Buying preinstalled solves my problem but it only invalidates your point while validating my point.
It just means that the manufacturer received Windows certification. Similar thing exists for Linux.
> Except windows pretty much does this.
Did you just compare the Linux community with a trillion-dollar company?
I don't need certification. I can custom build a computer and pretty much not ever be worried about incompatibility with windows. Such certifications aren't really things a regular user needs to think about for windows.
>Did you just compare the Linux community with a trillion-dollar company?
I'm comparing Linux to Windows. And I'm saying Linux is inferior from a usability standpoint. So yes I am saying the Linux community built an OS ecosystem that is INFERIOR in terms of usability to an OS ecosystem built by Microsoft. That is a Fact.
It does not matter what you need. The fact is, 99% of computers (and of course their hardware) receive Windows certification, because it's the monopoly that everyone uses. There is practically no way to change that.
> I can custom build a computer and pretty much not ever be worried about incompatibility with windows.
See above why.
I wish Linux computers were sold in retail shops. I have no idea why they aren't.
This is irrelevant. The morality and ethics behind why something is the way it is doesn't matter. Users including me only want something that works. What I need matters because it's statistically representative about what most users need and therefore representative of what classifies as usability according to most users.
Linux is inferior from a usability perspective, and that is literally my only point. This point is factually true. The politics behind operating systems involve ideological battles that really only very few people care about.
If what you say is true and that this usability issue can't practically be changed then linux will always be doomed to be less usable than windows. This is the consequence formed from your logic.
In this case I see no reason not to buy preinstalled Linux. Typically, they buy preinstalled Windows, so I do not see any large difference here.
> Linux is inferior from a usability perspective
No, it isn't. Proprietary apps on Linux may be.
> If what you say is true and that this usability issue can't practically be changed then linux will always be doomed to be less usable than windows.
Yes, although this has been slowly changing for years. One can hope that it's not forever.
There are power users of computers who are not programmers who don't have a clue how to use linux. There are people who customize their gaming rigs and other hardware who are completely unwilling to deal with errors and issues with the OS.
The customization of a PC is made trivial with Windows. Literally anyone can plug in modules into slots on a motherboard and not have to debug a bunch of issues on windows. This is not so with linux. It is a huge difference. Tons of people love computers who CAN'T program. Just like how tons of people love cars and customizing their car but aren't car mechanics. Think of it this way. A lot of people like to tinker but they want that tinkering experience to be streamlined meaning they don't want to be hitting any unexpected or overly challenging issues.
Either way the streamlined experience is the experience you get when you build with a gaming rig with windows. Such is NOT the experience when you try to do the same with linux. In fact with linux, guaranteed something isn't going to work out on your custom rig without some actual troubleshooting. That's the keyword. People hate troubleshooting, but they love customization. Windows provides customization without troubleshooting, Linux provides both.
This is so with any OS for which the modules are designed. Of course, if you try to use something in an unentended way, you get into trouble. No news here.
Yes, most things sadly are designed for Windows now, because it's a monopoly. Not a fault of Linux, but it does make it less attractive.
Yes all hardware is designed for either windows or windows and linux, never both and linux is always an after thought. That is why windows is superior from a usability standpoint.
Yes, it's not the fault of linux. But in the end that's not really what matters.
I've can't recall ever have an issue getting my sound working that didn't involve opening settings and making sure the right input/output were selected.
I feel the need to add this to the conversation so people are not dissuaded from trying great open source projects.
The difference is we know already what works with our equipment and what doesn't, so we don't wait until the last minute to figure out if some gadget can be used in an important setting? Also important, some of the engineers that "for some reason prefer Linux" know something that you don't, like the importance of adopting open standards and buying from hardware companies that do not lock you in into their ecosystem?
How many dongles were people forced to buy to continue using whatever peripheral they had already working?
Can you please stop with the goal-post moving?
Linux is, by your own logic, Inferior from a usability or "just works" standpoint. We all agree on this, therefore: End of discussion on this baseline.
Where we disagree is the extent of this incompatibility. Linux IMO is even worse then the baseline above. On linux, my graphics card (arguably a peripheral) has melted down and crashed the OS on me many times. I have a lot of trouble getting my xbox controller to connect with bluetooth to the OS. So anecdotally I would say that even your base line of linux just being inferior is too high.
That's not the end of the story because these small issues extend way past peripherals. You can keep the argument focused on peripherals if you want but this is really a general issue affecting linux and FOSS.
- Webex doesn't provide screen sharing in larger meetings via WebRTC. It really sucks, since it works in smaller ones and people really get suprised by this.
- The last time I used Webex via their "desktop" app, they didn't properly support pipewire.
- Same with zoom, except that they don't seem to provide browser meetings at all sometimes & their app doesn't seem to support pipewire
I've had no issues with jitsi or bbb in the meantime, since they simply allow me to use my browser. Same with other screen recording software. For me, it's pretty clear that the issue lies with vendors trying to make people install their software and then not properly supporting it on linux.
This impedes the usability of linux for this purpose, but there's little that can come from people other than the vendors. Open Source software seems to work fine.
Can you not capture your screen manually and make it available to your browser as a generic web cam? (Not that you should have to, but still.)
> [Zoom] don't seem to provide browser meetings at all sometimes
Last time I used it they were engaging in website trickery. You had to click the link to download (and maybe do something else) before it would present you with the "join from browser" link.
But I can confirm that it works just fine in the browser on Linux.
I could but I didn't anticipate that issue with larger meetings and it caught me by surprise
My understanding is that the web cam also uses different compression, leading to issues with readability
> Last time I used it they were engaging in website trickery. You had to click the link to download (and maybe do something else) before it would present you with the "join from browser" link.
Tried that since I've already heard about these dark patterns, but wasn't able to. It's easier and more intuitive to add a local account on windows.
If the average user means past normal Windows users, maybe yes at first (all changes need relearning a little bit)
But a 0 experience person? It will take maybe less to an user to learn PopOS than Windows.
Personally I prefer Linux, especially for software development. But the company’s default Linux distro (Fedora) can make life “interesting“ when working remotely. E.g. most screenshare only sort of works with Wayland. And now the audio fails, seemingly at random. (At least, I haven’t worked out the trigger yet.)
Unfortunately, as others have noted, there isn’t a huge incentive for companies to support desktop Linux. But it seems worth persisting to avoid the total dominance of one OS controlled by one company.
Having said that, given day to day needs like video calls, it’s probably worth using a less cutting-edge Linux distro at work!
Talk to anyone who installs beta iOS versions and ask them how much crap they have to deal with.
I choose to use Linux despite the bad UX and bad stability for end user. Linux server (and packages) are supremely stable, but any package involving end-user stuffs (sounds, graphics, even Firefox) is an entirely different story altogether.
LibreOffice specifically had serious stability issues a few years ago but has been much better lately. You could run Microsoft Office under Wine all along though (or use Google Docs, etc). Nothing preventing you from paying for stable software in that particular case.
Admittedly 3D graphics (not 2D office applications) can be rocky depending on your vendor. I've had good luck with AMD lately (but not in the past). That's entirely the fault of the vendors (AMD & Nvidia) though. Integrated Intel is and always has been absolutely flawless.
This isn't like some caveat. This is huge. It's pretty bad in terms of overall usability.
You could not have chosen a worse example distro to throw in your flawed presumption. Debian is one of the most rigorously tested and sought after distros specifically for its stability.
There's nothing wrong in you preferring to use Windows or Mac. But throwing unsubstantiated claims around is foolish.
This can also be because this random enterprise want to use something other than zoom for some godforsaken reason.
Spend all that time to get your setup working, but congratulations, it doesn’t work with GloryOnlineMeeting 2.4.