It's easier to disable all the garbage than remove the garbage?
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
860 points (97.3% liked)
Linux
12090 readers
282 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because Linux is still an enormous hurdle for a lot of people, and completely incompatible with lots of proprietary hardware people actually need.
Stop pretending like you don't understand why 98% of PC users still choose Windows. I'm not one of them, but let's not delude ourselves, it is tiring.
98% of Windows users, use windows because that’s what the OS that came with the computer they could afford.
98% of windows users probably don’t know what version they are on or even what windows is
OEMs pay MS to put it on the computer. Why do you think that is?
As if Linux PCs are more expensive?
Apple computers, which is a higher market share than Linux, are more expensive. That’s what I was getting at.
Windows became dominant because of enterprise software sales 20 years ago. Now everything runs in an electron wrapper that can run on any platform or in the browser.
PCs don’t even have optical drives anymore. No normal consumer even knows how to install a program today, let alone is considering legacy program compatibility when making a computer purchasing decision
I am qualifying my statements based on interactions with my coworkers of whom I deploy and manage their PCs. I could probably install mint on 50% of their PCs and the only reason they’d notice is because Microsoft office looks different and is called Libre Office for some reason
Do you think it’s possible for these same users to use the “M365” version of the Office apps?
On purpose? Not likely. Also I don’t expect them to be able to handle save and open of files using the web versions of M365.
But I think they would use libre office and not question that it wasn’t Microsoft office since it would open their files like they are used too.
No. If it did Google would be winning with their incredibly weak Chromebooks.
What is a "normal consumer"? All of them? No. Enough of them that many platforms are dependent on that knowledge, yes.
That sounds like an extreme bias.
Are 98% of PC users using proprietary hardware incompatible with Linux? That would be pretty crazy, considering that that list of hardware is miniscule.
Like, I get where you're coming from, Linux isn't a 100% perfect drop in replacement for Windows that covers every single scenario and edge case. But it's never going to be that, and I don't think it needs to be that. It's still good enough to recommend over Windows. That hurdle won't get any shorter if people don't at least try using it.
Hardware compatibility is just one of a long list of reasons. The primary of which is usability. Linux can be completely free of ads and pop-ups but it doesn't matter if it can't do the things you need it to do, or it's too complicated to make it do them.
I don't know where you got this binary position. No, it doesn't have to be, that's not the point.
You can recommend it all day, if it can't do what the user needs it to do, you're wasting your breath. Some of them aren't mandatory but many of them are deal breakers.
No one is suggesting anyone shouldn't try it. But trying it also costs time and (probably) money.
The DE is not the problem...
Most Linux distros these days are more usable and less complicated than Windows. It's not difficult for most people to get it to do the things they need it to do. This view that Linux doesn't have the software selection or features comparable to an Enterprise Operating System ™️ like Windows is largely outdated and misguided.
Mkay, sure, uh huh. You're being awfully discouraging without explicitly telling people not to try Linux, but c'mon, we know what you're doing.
Abso-fuckin-lutely not. You're just lying.
It isn't.
I am not discouraging anything. I am being realistic. You are not.
K you wanna try and actually substantiate any of your points, or are you just going to continue to give a "nuh uh, you're wrong I'm right" argument?
I could but as a Linux user there's no way you don't already know this. You're just in denial.
Could you? I don't believe you.
That's fine.
LOL, I probs shouldn't feed the trolls, but here goes nothing.
We just bought a new PC. And because my family members are kind of adamant on using Windows, we will probably install the latest iteration that M$ has offered.
Funny enough, I am also the techie within the family. As such, I am expected to set it up so that it works as conveniently as possible.
Oh boy... From my reading on the subject, it seems to have become a gargantuan effort to rid Windows 11 of all of its anti-consumer mishaps. Only after doing so, can I actually start setting it up for our use case.
By contrast, if I'd install any beginner-friendly Linux distro, i don't have to undo anything; setting up starts right after the installation.
I can't fathom why anyone would prefer the former over the latter, but please feel free to give your take on the matter.
Stuff like Bazzite has literally become plug-and-play. And breaking it is harder than your average Windows install.
As for software: WinBoat is a very easy (almost) one-click installable piece of software that bridges whatever gap you're imagining.
No one prefers it. No one uses Windows because they enjoy the setup process. However:
LOOOOLOLOL it is absolutely not. There's even like 5 steps in the guided installer and each of them is incredibly convoluted. You're still lying.
Indeed
but you gotta admit it would help mass adoption.
i cannot install linux on my mothers pc, because all she needs is...
excel, and a browser.
and excel isn't on linux.
and sure, i could show her libreoffice calc - i use that without issue - but she's not interested in learning anything new these days
and sure, installing excel, specifically, isn't super easy on windows. But generally, installing a piece of software on windows, is easier than linux. There's often an installer package downloadable from the website - where as for linux you're often greeted with a terminal command.
Thats not "mom friendly", especially not for the stereotypical "mom" who doesn't know tech.
Phones have made it super easy to install software - and the app stores for mac and windows are good solutions for these non-tech savvy people. Only a few distros have an alternative, as far as i know
Nearly every Linux distro nowadays comes with some sort of "app store" for installing programs, the notion that the only way to install things is via a terminal is outdated. And I'm sure if you slapped a Calc shortcut on the desktop and renamed it Excel, your mom would be none the wiser.
It doesn't matter if it has an "app store" or not if the software you need isn't in it.
Go respond to our other thread dude, you don't get to dodge that one to stir up more bs here
Don't know what you're talking about. I am not "stirring up" anything. Just acknowledging the facts that so many Linux users intentionally ignore. They can't understand why more people don't use it but then deny the reasons when they're told.
The few reasons you've given haven't been true for at least a decade, and you've declined to give any reasons in our thread. Be honest, when's the last time you directly interacted with a Linux PC?
So like I said, I did give you reasons, you just didn't like them.
I'm literally typing this on a Linux laptop right now. I haven't used anything else in...3 years?
Be honest, what's the longest you've gone without opening the terminal?
I didn't simply dislike your reasons. Your reasons are invalid, untrue in 2026.
I've been using Linux at work for well over a decade, and at home for at least 5 years on my gaming PC. I have watched and experienced various Linux distros going from poor Windows replacements to very serviceable Windows replacements.
On my home gaming PC, I have only run into two issues that I used a terminal to solve. And one of those I could have solved with a package manager because the solution was just to reinstall a few things that had gotten corrupted.
Again, I recognize and accept that there are some things Linux still can't do. But my whole point is that's ok, because it can still function as a replacement for Windows without those things, for a huge chunk of the people still using Windows. It's weird that a person that's used a Linux laptop for the past 3 years doesn't recognize that.
My reasons are not invalid or untrue, you just don't like them.
Congratulations?
Depends entirely on what those things are and how badly you need them. For many they are essential applications. MS Office, Adobe products, hardware interfaces, etc. etc.
I've used several distros on several devices, including a dedicated gaming PC (currently Cachy) and a dedicated server (Debian). It's weird that you don't recognize how complicated these things are to use for a normal person.
I turn it on, I click the program I need to use, I use the program.
If the program isn't there, I open the software manager, I search for the program, click install, and open the program.
It's really that easy.
You're beginning to sound like a broken record now though, because the only things you've brought up are
I'd love to continue this discussion if you want to bring up anything else, but if this is all you have, I'm not gonna waste any more of my time with you.
It is that easy...if that program is in your repository. If Adobe products are in your package manager, please share with the class, because we'd all love to see it.
And if your distro even has a graphical package manager (and only 1 of them), especially an easy to use one. Many times it either isn't in there or doesn't even exist for Linux.
Again, there's no way you've actually used Linux and don't know this. That's how I know you're lying.
Go back and answer my question, you don't get to dodge that just to stir up more BS here.
Obviously Adobe products aren't going to be found in a Linux package manager. Not sure why you're even mentioning it though, because
Can you share some distros/package managers that don't have a GUI available? Every flavor of Linux I've used in the past 5 years has had a GUI for the package manager, and 9 times out of 10 there's a shortcut in the taskbar or on the desktop by default after installation.
My gaming PC is running PopOS. When I was on version 22.04, I used PopShop exclusively to install and update my software, and it worked great. Since upgrading to 24.04, PopShop has been replaced by the Cosmic Store, which is even easier to use. Both were pre installed and pinned to the taskbar out of the box.
I have Nobara installed on another desktop. I forget what the package manager GUI on that one is called, but it was very similarly easy to use, and it was also pinned to the taskbar (or whatever the KDE-taskbar-equivalent is called) out of the box.
Hell, even Arch has options for graphical package managers, they just don't come pre installed, obviously, since it's Arch.
Those are simply not an option for actual professionals. There are expectations in film and photo industries.
Every distro has "options" for everything. If they don't come packaged with the installer then what point do they serve? How are you going to install it? You're answering your own questions and yet still unable to understand what the problem is.
Nobara is the one I was referring to with multiple package managers that were completely unintuitive, had constant update notifications, and eventually broke my install.
It is miniscule, objectively. Generously, less than 2% of personal computer users have an Adobe license. The alternatives aren't inferior, in fact in some cases (blender, DaVinci Resolve), the "alternative" I listed is actually the industry standard used instead of the comparable Adobe product. There are multiple ways to make it easier to transition away from Adobe products, and you keep just conveniently ignoring the fact that cloud versions of most Adobe products are available. It's a bad example, and does nothing for the argument you're trying to make.
Can you share some distros/package managers that don't have a GUI available? You originally claimed there were distros where a graphical package manager wasn't an option. Are you walking that back now, or can you actually substantiate that claim?
Can you share some distros intended for desktop use that don't come with a graphical package manager?
I'm sorry you found Nobara's package management tools confusing. Is that the experience you're basing this whole opinion on?
If it was "objective" you could point to a number. "Miniscule" is simply not an objective word. Lying again. 2% is not miniscule.
If they weren't inferior no one would be paying hundreds of dollars a month for Adobe.
LOL have you ever tried to install this on Linux? It's an absolute nightmare. But it is a great example of yet another piece of software that's not installable from a package manager so thanks for elaborating on my point.
We've already had this discussion...
Is Arch not intended for desktop use?
No.
So you're reduced to playing semantic games and trying to claim I'm a liar. You're continuing to mischaracterize the difficulty involved in installing things on a Linux system. You're evidently walking back your claim that there are distros/package managers that lack a graphical package manager. Your only example of a desktop distro lacking a graphical package manager out of the box (but still has the ability to install one) is Arch, a niche distro intended for advanced users with Linux experience. And you continue to stubbornly refuse to elaborate any of your points unless I pull it out of you.
Suffice it to say, I'm not convinced. Have a great day, I'm no longer taking part in this exhausting conversation.
I'm not playing games. It's not an objective word. You're making shit up.
You're continuing to mischaracterize the difficulty involved in installing things on a Linux system.
Brother, you already answered your own question in the same comment where you asked for it. I'm not sure what you're looking for here.
You've already demonstrated in your own comments what I said previously: You already know what the issues are, you just refuse to acknowledge them as issues.
Bingo. #1 biggest problem for Linux right there. And the particular terminal command you need will be different from whatever you find, depending on your distro. And the software itself is often not packaged for your distro either. And even if all of that is correct there's still a good chance it won't work. Some missing dependency or other generic error comes up with no useful information for even an experienced person to use to debug.
When everything you need can be found in the graphical package manager as a flatpak this will be a solved problem but until then...