I actually do. All the time. And I think you should too. Don’t understand why people seem to think there’s something wrong with that.
When you tell people to use Linux and they have any issues or something is unclear, they’ll ask you every time. Not sure how many people I could support simultaneously.
Well, I do. In fact I’ve installed Linux on 4 classmate’s laptops, after insisting for some time.
People don’t have any reason to recommend Windows because it’s the regular OS everyone already uses.
Linux may be an improvement for a lot of people’s use cases but a vast majority of them don’t even know it exists and its not just for servers and stuff. Mac people probably do this too.
With the amount of fuck-ups from Microsoft, this might not be necessary, but:
The average user doesn’t want to install the operating system or doesn’t care about it as long as they can do their things, and those who care can easily do so today. Thus, IMO, advertising to the end user is a waste of resources.
Focus on permeating it in governments, institutions, and OEMs to increase market share and break the “Linux is complicated / incompatible / for developers” stigma, then organic adoption out of these environments will grow - at least among people who can actually use it with the supported software.
Really, this seems to be the best way to spread Linux adoption to me. I would bet that Linux got at least a good few users from the Steam Deck coming with it pre-installed. Big way to show people that for most things the average user doesn’t need to go into the command line to use their system for what they need as well. Of course, continued improvement in the software included in the most popular distros would really boost Linux adoption as well. I’ve seen plenty of people say they’d make the switch - if only they could use MS Office or Adobe software on it. Alternatives like LibreOffice, Thunderbird, Kdenlive and the GIMP have come a LONG way since I first made the switch around 2009, but especially the Adobe software still outclasses the competition when it comes to features. MS Office isn’t as hard to let go of, especially since you can still use Office 365 Online on Linux and LibreOffice is closer to having all the OOTB features of MS Office than the other programs are to Adobe, but you have to convince people to give it a try first and a lot of employers still require MS Office for work.
I will also say, though, that it was only due to Windows Vista otherwise bricking my laptop back then that I even made the switch. I’d heard of this mysterious OS named Ubuntu so I thought I’d give it a try to save my laptop before I bought a new one, especially since I was living abroad at the time and didn’t want to deal with the hassle of buying a computer with a foreign language version of Windows on it. So I had a friend burn me a copy of Ubuntu 8.10, it worked like a charm, and I only ever since ran Windows at home when dual-booting for a couple years for gaming purposes before Proton became a thing. I didn’t even know Ubuntu was Linux until I’d installed it and started learning how to use it in earnest. Really showed me how even then Linux wasn’t so difficult to use for the average computer user.
break the “Linux is complicated / incompatible / for developers” stigma
This is entirely on Linux developers and users.
Try searching “how to x on Linux” and tell me you’re not immediately sent into the CLI.
The thing is, without a unified GUI it’s impossible to get an answer to “how to X on Linux” that doesn’t involve the CLI (and that’ll work for everyone). Even the ones that do are often distro-dependent.
People can still get things done by searching for “how to X on <distro> using the GUI”.
CLI can be good. The benefit of CLI is that it is fairly easy to build GUI front ends on top of a solid based.
Not to mention CLI makes “quick fixes” easier.
I’m a die hard Linux user. I don’t spend much time telling people about it outside of actual tech conversations that should include the topic. I did raise my kids with a lot of Linux desktop use on their machines. They uniformly find the Windows 10/11 experience to be horrible, so I guess I’ve managed success on that front.
The crazy moment was when one kid was about 10 years old and he busted open the terminal without promoting to get something done. He already knew it was faster and more powerful so he just started learning the tools.
I danced a little jig in my head once I realized what had just happened.
@azimir
All I will say is your kid is smart and you should be a very proud man :)
I suggest as a linux dude myself, keep encouraging him :D and as an extra suggestion if he wants to learn more about Linux see if he wants to try out arch linux because that has taught me a lot over the time I have used it :D
There’s a circular reasoning happening that’s causing Windows to stay dominant. Why isn’t professional software being developed for Linux more? Because it doesn’t get used in the workplace. Why doesn’t Linux get used in the workplace? Because it doesn’t have professional software support.
You need to break one of these things to succeed.
Agreed. Both things need to happen when they can.
If you live with the applications available on Linux ( or prefer them as I do ) then you can use Linux in the workplace.
At the same time, some “professional” applications are going to need to start targeting Linux. Some do. More need to.
There is an implied contract above. If you need professional applications and they become available on Linux, you have to use them ( and pay for them ).
Yes I’ve observed small examples of this at various places I’ve worked where the devs want to use linux but the company want everyone on windows or macOS.
The problem is that enterprise software like RMM which the companies usually need for compliance/security/insurance reasons don’t have working linux versions. It’s particularly intractable because most devs think of this software as basically being malware so you’re never going to get a coordinated effort to assist the SAAS companies with compatibility/integration.
Linux isn’t competing with Windows or MacOS.
It doesn’t follow the capitalist model of a market, and that’s a good thing.
I think I don’t even want Linux to become too popular. It will attract the wrong kind of attention. First, being more targeted by attackers it may become less safe. Most importantly, I don’t even know how but I know that if Linux becomes a huge market for home users, corporations will look at it and go “uh, big market sitting there let’s monetize it” and there is absolutely no way Linux won’t become shittier in more ways than one when thousands of big corporations out there are trying to get their hands on Linux users and our data in multiple different ways. Again, I don’t know how it will happen but I don’t like having this kind of attention on Linux.
I don’t see how that could happen. You can always choose another distro, or make your own if absolutely necessary. But I understand why you’re concerned.
Idk, where there is potential for data mining and money there is a will and a way.
I am worried about stuff that is widespread like systemd, KDE, GNOME, flatpak, a bunch of stuff which is mantained by companies like redhat and canonical, etc. I also worry stuff like what was attempted with the XZ backdoor becomes more common.
We can always hop to other distros but if the high level polished stuff that we’ve taken a long time to achieve gets compromised these safer distros may end up being a worse experience and set us back years or decades.
I think I am fine with home use Linux growing a little bit, maybe if we get just under 10% or so that can be good in terms of software availability and just more people working on open source projects. Too much popularity idk, I am not onboard with that rn.
