back

by pr337h4m·1y ago·view on hn ↗
The main reason why Linux on the desktop has never gone mainstream is that it is extremely difficult to find a good laptop that comes with Linux preinstalled, where the OEM is responsible for ensuring a seamless experience, as any bugs in WiFi, audio, drivers, peripherals, etc. is the OEM's responsibility, not the consumer's.

99% of computer users will never consider replacing the operating system that came installed on their system, they don't want to risk bricking it or losing data.

1 comments
The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons?

I was forced to use Windows for a year as a developer. I threw WSL2 on it and it was fine. I installed Docker desktop for Windows and it worked fine for Linux.

But especially on the Mac, while I have to download updated commands, it is genuinely certified UNIX.

On both Macs and Windows I also get mainstream software support and on Macs, I get a laptop that can run 14-20 hours on a battery and runs cool and quiet.

The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons?

it's free.

it's stable.

it's easier to use.

it doesn't have adds.

it uses less resources.

it runs on older hardware.

it doesn't contain spyware.

it doesn't violate my privacy.

it includes more powerful features.

it offers more alternatives for the GUI.

i can trust it because the kernel has been audited.

it is way easier to configure to my personal preferences.

it allows me to replace or remove any application that i don't like.

Mac [...] is genuinely certified UNIX

why should any normal person care about that? UNIX is dead. Linux would be a genuinely certified UNIX if anyone would bother to pay for the certification. in fact, at some point someone did: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/293396/is-there-a-l...

> it's free.

Over the last 25 years I've spent hundreds of hours fighting with its bugs. Not free by a long shot.

> it's stable.

Anything but.

https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues

> it's easier to use.

You must be joking right? A step in any direction and you must use CLI.

> it doesn't have adds.

Windows neither has "adds".

> it uses less resources.

Proofs required.

> it runs on older hardware.

Good luck using Firefox or Chrome on "older hardware". Good luck watching videos on older hardware that lacks HW H.265/VP9 decoding. Older hardware for what? For NAS? Why would you need desktop Linux on it?

> it doesn't contain spyware.

Prove that Windows spies on you. And also, Windows is used by NSA/CIA/FBI and pretty much all governments of the world some of which are openly hostile to the US. So much for "spyware".

> it doesn't violate my privacy.

See earlier.

> it includes more powerful features.

Examples or bust.

> it offers more alternatives for the GUI.

Windows has had CLI for aeons and now not just one but many including Bash (WSL).

> i can trust it because the kernel has been audited.

That's an abject lie.

> it is way easier to configure to my personal preferences.

And Windows doesn't need configuration as it just works.

> it allows me to replace or remove any application that i don't like.

What would you like to replace in Windows that's not "replaceable"? Examples or bust.

  > Prove that Windows spies on you.
Well, for starters, they updated their EULA to permit them to spy on you as much as they want, legally:

https://thenewamerican.com/us/tech/computers/windows-10-is-s...

While Microsoft gives the option to disable some of their spyware, it is not possible to disable everything via Windows settings:

https://thehackernews.com/2016/02/microsoft-windows10-privac...

I could continue, but where have you been the past 10 years? Windows has been spyware since Windows 10. There is oodles of telemetry, and you need to have been living under a rock not to know about this. This seems appropriate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKYQ5ibxslI

By the way, long before Microsoft started blatently spying on its users, they put a back door into Windows allowing them to push updates to Windows machines, even if you disabled updates. We know because they used it at least once:

https://www.informationweek.com/it-sectors/microsoft-updates...

When a company can push updates to a machine, it can change whatever it wants. Such changes can include giving themselves full remote control of the machine, if they did not have full control already.

> What would you like to replace in Windows that's not "replaceable"?

Whatever is powering the start menu ads.

Takes literally 2 minutes of Google searching to remove.
Those are easy to remove
Where's the setting and will it survive an update?
I still have to buy the computer so an OS being “free” is inconsequential and what does “using less resources” get me? Does your computer run for 16 hours+ on one charge? Does it run fast, quiet and cool like my MacBook Air?

By the way you can buy a brand new M1 MacBook Air from Walmart for $699. These are still being manufactured by Apple and distributed via third parties.

As far as “trusting it” because it has been audited, the Heartbleed bug was part of Linux for years before it was discovered.

What “more powerful features” does it have than a typical Mac?

$699, which can buy you approximately 7 used laptops that are worthwhile daily drivers when set up with Linux. You sound like a shill.
Exactly what are the specs of this $100 laptop? Am I then going to carry around 7 laptops so I can get 14 hours of battery life? Am I going to run a cluster of them when I need to do something worthwhile with them?

What exactly do you do “daily” with a $100 laptop?

From your past comments, I’m assuming you are developer, are you really using a $100 computer?

I'm currently posting from a Dell Inspiron 3505 which has an 8-core AMD CPU and 6gb of ram. I got it new for roughly $300 and from quickly looking on ebay can be had for under $200 used.

I'm waiting on the mail for a $70 Chromebook with 8gb of ram and a 2-core/4-thread CPU to replace this laptop because of a half-damaged charging port. I picked a Chromebook for the 10+ hour battery life, the same reason you chose a Macbook that costs 10x as much.

I use a terminal text editor to write code and I use a web browser for everything else. If it wasn't for browsers being so bloated and desktop applications made with electron, I would be happy to settle with a laptop that had even just 4gb of ram.

I couldn’t run any decent number of Docker containers on that and if I were doing Android development, the emulator would run like trash.

Not to mention how many slow bloated Electron apps or Chrome itself runs on that.

I definitely couldn’t do any serious development on a ChromeBook.

But you said you care about an ad free experience and privacy and you are okay with hardware and an OS by Google????

Philosophy aside, many users actually do not prefer to have ads and data tracking built-in to the devices they use.
What “ads” are built into Macs and what “data tracking” can you not turn off?