This seems to throw the baby out with the bathwater in regards to Linux. Because Linux doesn’t have a desktop that is user friendly in all cases, it can’t ever be a laypersons OS. Except for Mac OS, but that doesn’t count for reasons.
I’m not sure. I guess you have to admit the author is right about the Linux desktop experience: seems nice until a simple task requires some arcane coding and command line fu. Even as a very tech savvy user I run into these challenges. But its usually because I’m trying to make the OS do something (for free, and very custom) that I couldn’t even do on Windows unless maybe there’s an existing app developed to do it (which will be inflexible and pricey).
But is the best option to give up on Linux and make something else? I’m not convinced. Seems like the xkcd “we need a new universal standard!” joke.
Linux makes a perfectly fine OS for the layperson. Linux Mint, Debian anything since Bookworm, modern Plasma is a dream.
Not sure what point you were trying to make about Mac OS. It’s completely unrelated.
MacOS kernel is actually a BSD UNIX and contains no part of Linux.
But I think that’s really interesting, because I think this author would agree that MacOS is a user friendly operating system, even if it might not be a privacy respecting operating system.
And that makes sense, because MacOS has architectural similarities to BeOS through its NeXTSTEP heritage. They both have microkernel architecture, with an extensive system-provided graphical toolkit (both systems use the word “kits” for libraries) in an object oriented programming language (C++ for BeOS; Objective-C for NeXT and MacOS). Both BeOS and NeXTSTEP started development around the same time in the 1990s.
So the complaint about Linux here has nothing to do with the Linux kernel. I don’t think the author cares about system calls, networking performance, or driver support. The complaint is with the GNU tools + GNOME or KDE or whatever user space that has no design guidelines, and where the only real lingua franca is the old sh shell.
I feel like the people warning not to ditch Linux here are mainly worried about hardware support, which is also very valid. But this stuff we’re talking about here is also valid, and it’s a serious problem for Linux.
This seems to throw the baby out with the bathwater in regards to Linux. Because Linux doesn’t have a desktop that is user friendly in all cases, it can’t ever be a laypersons OS. Except for Mac OS, but that doesn’t count for reasons.
I’m not sure. I guess you have to admit the author is right about the Linux desktop experience: seems nice until a simple task requires some arcane coding and command line fu. Even as a very tech savvy user I run into these challenges. But its usually because I’m trying to make the OS do something (for free, and very custom) that I couldn’t even do on Windows unless maybe there’s an existing app developed to do it (which will be inflexible and pricey).
But is the best option to give up on Linux and make something else? I’m not convinced. Seems like the xkcd “we need a new universal standard!” joke.
Linux makes a perfectly fine OS for the layperson. Linux Mint, Debian anything since Bookworm, modern Plasma is a dream.
Not sure what point you were trying to make about Mac OS. It’s completely unrelated.
MacOS kernel is actually a BSD UNIX and contains no part of Linux.
But I think that’s really interesting, because I think this author would agree that MacOS is a user friendly operating system, even if it might not be a privacy respecting operating system.
And that makes sense, because MacOS has architectural similarities to BeOS through its NeXTSTEP heritage. They both have microkernel architecture, with an extensive system-provided graphical toolkit (both systems use the word “kits” for libraries) in an object oriented programming language (C++ for BeOS; Objective-C for NeXT and MacOS). Both BeOS and NeXTSTEP started development around the same time in the 1990s.
So the complaint about Linux here has nothing to do with the Linux kernel. I don’t think the author cares about system calls, networking performance, or driver support. The complaint is with the GNU tools + GNOME or KDE or whatever user space that has no design guidelines, and where the only real lingua franca is the old sh shell.
I feel like the people warning not to ditch Linux here are mainly worried about hardware support, which is also very valid. But this stuff we’re talking about here is also valid, and it’s a serious problem for Linux.