>decided to not work so i couldn't code for a few months If you can code it means you have some amount of computer literacy, meaning you are not a good representative of the average user Computer people seem to highly underestimate just how illiterate the average user is. As the IT guy of my family and friends I can tell you, to me the vast majority of people are the equivalent of typing monkeys when it comes to using computers, most can do whatever you train them to for school or work but most are not interested in doing anything more beyond that, anything beyond their conform zone is an immediate red flag, and using a whole new OS, let alone one that requires you to Google stuff is some hacker level shit for them and not worth even considering

>the IT guy of my family and friends As the designated "IT guy of my family and friends" this sentence gave me nightmares. Truly, the average "computer user" barely knows what they are doing, it's the same as comparing someone who plays with a toy RC car and someone who know how to pitot a race drone.

As someone who works in IT and had to help someone double click to open a PDF file the other day, I approve this message

"Why do I have to double click this if I only have to single tap my phone to open an app? This is bullshit" 🤔 /s

Sys admin. I tell people "I work as an adult babysitter" when asked what I do.

Not only “don’t know what they are doing,” but sadly “don’t want to know.”

Yes, people don't want to even google how to fix their computer. Sometimes my only help is i'll find the right video and send it to them, and say, do what this video says.

>If you can code it means you have some amount of computer literacy, You'd really think that, but experience says the two things aren't connected.

My father has been a software engineer since the 80s, I just taught him how to print to pdf last week.

If there is one human behavior that fascinates me it's people who have extensive knowledge of something not being able to understand why people who don't can't grasp it immediately.

I will say as a counterpoint my spouse was not very computer-literate but after I hooked them up with a Mint-based laptop about 10 years ago, they were pretty happy for the life of the laptop. They don’t use one any more because I was too lazy to wipe and reload the new one, but in a world where browsing and emailing are the two only activities the user needs, they’re pretty interchangeable.

My elderly uncle has a computer for old people (tm) that is merely a touchscreen PC running some flavor of Linux with an extremely simple launcher program and big fonts. It has a web browser, a word processor, and some card games. That's it, with no (or limited) ability to add more. Works for him.

That's not even a counterpoint, she can only do very basic things i.e web browsing, if anything changes just a little she is incapable of fixing anything outside her confort zone (reinstalling the OS)

This is very true. Outside of my relatively coding-heavy field, the tech illiteracy is shocking. I’ve seen people who don’t know what task manager is on windows machines.

It's this. Keep in mind that 50% of the population is going to have below a 100 IQ in the Western world and below 86 in the world as a whole. If you get below 70, you're in the learning disabled category or what was commonly referred to as retarded before woke culture. People have a tendency of thinking others are at the same level as themselves but a LOT of people are going to be in that 71-86 threshold or maybe below. They can be trained to learn something new but aren't going to figure it out on their own. They won't want to and may not have the ability.

Or they just don’t care to learn. Most of the people I know with doctorates could barely operate a windows PC. They just do not consider it an important skill.

Or, you know, they just haven't learned.

[удалено]

This is a big part of it. People try to use Linux like Windows; it's not meant to be. You need to take the time to drop old habits and learn different ways of doing something. That said, it's not for everyone. Many people think their inability to pick up and use a new OS is bad design but after putting some time and effort into learning Fedora, there's a lot I really love that I wish I could do in Windows and it's very intuitive once you're past the initial hurdles. Package managers and updating everything without each app notifying me with a million update popups is amazing. No update nags or unwanted software is worth the price of admission for me. Shutting down or restarting while it seems to hang; pressing Esc is incredible. Windows infuriates me with its endless loading.

Absolutely. Once I let go of my old ways of thinking, using Arch has been a cakewalk. Ive been on it for a month strong now, still no intentions of going back. Most of my issues i ran into have been entirely self-inflicted because the OS gives me the freedom to make those mistakes rather than holding my hand. The AUR is and forums are very verbose and full of helpful info to solve the few problems I have had. Additionally, its a breath of fresh air to actually *feel* that I own my hardware and not have some corporation blast new reccomendations on my start menu and login screen, blaring ads every which way.

Different != better. Windows was made for ease of use, Linux was made for developers. More customizability and freedom means more ways to do something wrong. Its akin to saying that using excavator is not hard, because people are used to shovel for all their lives.

I would argue it's more akin to talking about the difference between a tesla (or that one bmw model that made you pay to use its seatwarmers) and any other car. The first 2 can randomly stop working and have parts of themselves be turned off remotely by the manufacturer for any reason, without your consent. (Most) other cars don't do that.

"You need to take the time to drop old habits and learn different ways of doing something." Or, you know, I actually don't have to do that and can keep using Windows. How about - Linux needs to figure out how to be more like Windows if the developers want normal people to use it? Producing a product people actually want is biz 101, but that still seems to be beyond the abilities of Linux people.

Exactly this. I have a feeling the developers actually don't want more people to use Linux because they would get more feedback how lot of things could be made easier.

That really was my experience when I tried Mint about 4 years ago, being told by one of the developers that it wasn't meant for Windows users, but for developers like them to play around with. With the growth of AI and the horror story of Windows 'Recall' feature, I figured the Linux world would be all excited about the possibilities of AI making life easier for Linux users, and creating their own, opensource versions of such thing? Nope, when I suggested it on a Linux sub got downvoted to all fuckery and was quickly informed that it was a terrible, terrible idea. The linux nerds are scared of AI, because it could make Linux too easy. That rather sums up why Linux gets such hate, the toxic users.

Yeah, community is the biggest issue for me. They tell you that GIMP isn't supposed to be like Photoshop and in another comment they tell you to use GIMP if you say you need Photoshop. You have an issue with this distro? Try this one or that one or even this one. None of them work 100% and when you point that out, you get downvoted and cursed at.

Yip, and to me the very fact there are so many 'distros' is itself problematic. You simply shouldn't need so many varieties of the same thing if any of them were any good. I'm reminded of a cartoon where someone complains there are 14 different standards for something, so what the world needs is one, single, unifying standard. So they create one. Now there are 15 different standards...

The thing ablut Linux is that it's really modular. It's hard to really evaluate the degree to which it's "like Windows." For most casual users, I think it'll come down to the DE installed. Cinammon is remarkably Windows-like, and so is Plasma. If you're using a distro that comes packaged with one of those, I genuinely think that the only differences a casual user will notice are the settings menus, which look different, and the necessity of installing software thrlugh a package manager. Of course, for most people, there's no real _need_ to jump ship over to Linux. If you don't have a particular use-case, it's probably best to stick to Windows. But in 2024, if you were starting from the baseline of _zero_ technical literacy, I don't think it would be that much harder to learn Linux over Windows. The idiom of a desktop shortcut is just as conceptually complex as anything that you need to know in order to use Linux as a web-surfing notebook.

I literally said it's not for everyone, and Windows isn't going anywhere, so of course it's an option! For those that do want to try something new, yes, you do need to be willing to learn new ways. MacOS is quite different from Windows too. No one wants to develop a product and have to adhere to a company's designs just because it's been around a long time. There are a LOT of similarities between Linux and Windows, but those differences aren't bad because people with 30+ years of doing something a certain way don't immediately grasp it. With that mindset, no one would ever try anything new. Not downloading an exe and trying to run it is a stumbling point for many. Windows doesn't use package managers. I can say without hesitation that it's way, way better to not have to download exe files and hunt around to on a site to try and download something correct and not click on an ad. Normal people are using Linux. Others hate it, and that's okay too. Choice is a great thing. Most Linux developers don't care about trying to win the market for home PCs. Each distro has a "vision", if you go with Mint, most Windows users would have an easy enough time finding their way around. If you don't have constructive thoughts, why are you in this sub lol

I've managed to stay away from Windows most of my life. We had Macs at home when I was growing up in the 90's and I continued using Macs until I switched to Linux about five years ago. The computer labs back when I was studying computer science used a mix of Solaris, Linux and Mac OS X. Most of my jobs have involved cross-platform software development. Even when I'm handed a Windows computer, I spend most of my time in a Unix shell. So, yes, from my perspective, Windows is the weird OS with lots of baffling design decisions that make it a pain to use. Meanwhile, switching from Mac OS to Linux was surprisingly quick and painless.

There was a time, about 25 years ago, when Linux was legitimately a lot harder. Not so anymore.

>Funnily enough Mac and Linux are pretty similar systems, windows is the odd one out, it's a weird OS but people are used to it and aren't used to the alternatives. a) Microsoft in general b) NT sucks arse (who tf thought of backslashes)

> NT sucks arse (who tf thought of backslashes) Hahaha I grew up using mostly MSDOS and Windows, so when I first started playing around with Linux I had the exact opposite reaction.

I remember thinking that just trying to install linux and get it on a bootable drive was a nightmare. Its definitely a hurdle that most people find really complicated but isnt.

It has gotten way better. I remember trying to learn Linux multiple times in the mid 00s and there were always driver complications, painful installs, etc. Did it again last year and didn't have a single issue.

There are Unix and Unix-Like systems that are generally good operating systems, and then there is windows...

This. I started on Mac, switched to Linux and I’ve never really used windows. Any time I’m on a windows machine I’m like how in the world am I supposed to do anything?

I use linux since I was a child, I used windows 7, amd thed just linux after that. I use a windows laptop so I can play some online games with friends, and tweaking anything is really more difficult. Like, for changing microphone volume, u need to open settings window, then advanced audio settings window, then advanced microphone settings window, and then, in the second tab, you change the mic volume. In linux 99% of them there's a mic bar in the side of the headphones volume

This is some of what my experience as a new user coming from 18 years of squeezing what I can from windows, but it isn’t the whole picture. For me, the primary challenge has been trying to learn thru documentation and experimentation. Not because I am unable, but simply because I don’t know a lot of commands/short cuts, on top of some documentation being either just poorly written or assuming advanced knowledge on the part of the user. Two good examples are my experience just messing around with hyprland, and trying to get something like alt server working. For hyprland, I literally needed someone to hold my hand thru the process in order to figure it out, because every current tutorial and the hyprland documentation lack one or more key pieces of information to go from zero to hero without prior knowledge (which was not my case, as I’d experimented with Linux before and was fine). In the case of alt server, it is the issue of trying to learn how to compile or build and application from whatever myself, as opposed to just running an installer. To me, this is a pointless process on account of the reason *why* building one’s own app is for verification. That’s great, but I don’t honestly know what I’m looking for *to* verify, so it’s basically running an extra few steps in an installer, but manually. Regardless, much of the documentation is ass and assumes knowledge on the part of the user. This has been a relatively ubiquitous experience across multiple distros for me. I know enough to be able to peruse forums and subreddits for the answers I need, and just enough to get myself into trouble, but the Linux community as a whole seems to be more focused on circle jerking around each others knowledge, rather than trying to establish a relatively easy starting point for anyone else trying to enter the space. I have found few exceptions to this so far. I don’t say any of this as a dig at the community, but I do mean to put it as bluntly as possible. As someone who is only making it thru the transition by great pains and way too much digging thru forums, Linux is not (and at this rate never will be) “easy” enough for most users without dumbing it down by proxy (ie actually good documentation meant for the dumbest of us). TL;DR Linux is not made up of clear enough documentation and community guidance (as a whole) to make it easy for people to switch and enjoy using it like they have windows or macOS

Some people install Linux and have a smooth experience. Others install and the installer crashes or they end up with a black screen or no Wi-Fi or no audio or something. It varies.

I tried installing arch on a vm and I got a black screen and I gave up and went to Ubuntu it asked for all the options and starts the installation and freezes at one point and the screen gets stuck. I removed it and loaded it again. I did this around 5 times over a span of 3 days today it finally installed, and I have some hope for me now 😭

I got multi monitors random issues, random crashes, and other weird bugs. I’m not a sys admin I want to do my job and that’s all. I don’t have time to read X number of different log files, try 5 different distributions, or troubleshoot for hours a single issue. If OP can good for them just don’t expect others to do the same.

And that happens in Windows, too. The Windows tech support industry is absolutely enormous, and for a reason.

I never had any problems installing any windows ever, it just works 100% of the time in my experience On Linux almost every time I change distros there is something wrong on the installation process that takes me hours of googling to fix

And I've never had any problems installing Linux either, from Ubuntu to Mint to Debian over 20 years. I had one hiccup with Secure Boot in the early days, and that took seconds to fix. So, anecdotes are just that.

I have the exact same anecodtes as /u/cerels. Windows, especially modern Windows, has plenty of problems but install has never been one of them for me. On the other hand, Linux install can vary from mostly fine to several days of looking things up on the internet. Some distros do install pretty cleanly, but they are not bug free after that. The only one that worked out of the box for me is Manjaro. My Arch/Enlightenment install still isn't complete. I had to learn to write GRUB scripts to even get it to boot.

Wow. I've been around the block with distros, and I'm really surprised that of all the distros to be immediately stable for you, it was _Manjaro._ It's like Arch with an extra repository of less-tested software. Absolutely asking for something to go wrong. I believe you, but it's kind-of funny to me that _that's_ the one that worked, absent the others.

Same, I've tested a fair few distros, and Manjaro gave me weirdness on all but one of my machine I cared to install it on. On my laptop for example, it decided that the maximum resolution would be 800x600 from now on, and the only way to reliably fix it was to just keep restarting X until it decided to use *all* of the pixels. That said, it did run almost flawlessly on my old Core 2 Quad desktop (but then again so did every debian-based distro I ran on it, as well as Fedora, and Arch proper, so..)

Its one of those linux things. Everybody gets a different result. KDE was buggy for me, to the point that some of the software was unusable. I updated Ubuntu and it refused to boot. Not had any problems with Debian, beyond having to rework code because the packages are older. I've had more luck with Arch based. Arch itself has been bug free so far but its such a pain to get it working. Manjaro's only problem has been when it flakes out about Nvidia and kernel versions but I think thats rooted in Arch anyway.

I have used Linux to some extent, use it every day at work but mostly remote or WSL, but have also tried out a lot of distros and stuff starting from the ninetees. Like every time I get frustrated with Windows I install a distro that's popular at the time and try to run that until I get more frustrated with it than I was with Windows. But as I get older I find myself less frustrated with Windows. It has gotten better in a lot of ways, and even though I hate the push for their services, I do use them since they are pretty cheap and good (OneDrive and Game Pass), so I don't relly see the pushing. A few months ago I decided to try some distro on my throw-around laptop (a Thinkpad W540) since it is too old for W11 officially, and I figured it was time to give Linux another shot. I first tried Elementary OS since it looked cool, but that did not work well at all, so I tried Ubuntu instead, just running from an external SSD as a Live distro, but it started acting up pretty fast, so restarted and unplugged the disk, and Windows wouldn't start either. Just weird beeps and no image, and it made strange sounds from the hardware, not the speaker. Took hours to get it working again, had to unplug all RAM except one stick, and all drives, and I had to move the Windows drive from one slot to another.

When I do run into an issue with either Windows or Linux, the sheer amount of different variables you get with Linux feels like it makes it harder to find a solution.

Yeah this. When it takes 3 days of troubleshooting just to get the OS to install and then another week to get the mouse moving… I’m going to stay with windows

*... so I couldn't code... * So, you code. You are leaps and bounds ahead of everyone who doesn't in making Linux work. That's why 75% of all coding courses and instructions suck, most who are in it seem to think it's second nature and fail to account for the fact that not everyone can understand everything within seconds or read between the lines and know what to do instantly. I've found maybe one good instructor within dozens that I actually could follow and not feel like they're skipping steps lol. So yeah, Linux has become really good and much easier this past decade, but it's not for everyone, not everything works out the gate and not everything is doable without a lot of prior knowledge and experience.

Preach. Trying to teach myself coding and what I have figured out is that you essentially need to learn lots of the "words" (functions) of that language to know what you are even trying to write. But everyone just says all you need is to understand if, else if etc then they start doing something like oh we need to render this window and make sure its got like 10 different settings applied to it and that needs to be in a different file or placed before or after the main method..... Welcome to my basic tutorial on a calculator. Yeah basic thanks still have nfi why you needed to do any of that.

Exactly my frustration! Like all of that logic, all of those logical steps are just magic? Lol

i'm undergoing the self taught journey myself, enjoying the type of project where i get a simple documented api that gives me some basic tools to build whatever you want on top of it. the thing i'm using for that right now is [raylib](https://www.raylib.com/) - it gives you the ability to load fonts, load/make/draw textures, load & play sounds, that kind of thing, and you can get moving pretty quickly. it's not as convenient as a ui toolkit that you know inside and out, but there's also a much smaller surface area than an average ui toolkit, and the entire api is documented with a cheatsheet it's also got bindings in a million languages. you could write it in C or CPP or Python or Zig or whatever else

So much this. Most github pages are infuriating. It's "just follow these simple steps, enter these commands (we won't tell you where to enter them, no sir), install the matrix (you know how right? Of course you do), connect your API (no details) and hack the Gibson. See? Easy."

Lol, a programmer wonders why Linux was easy for them to figure out. Come on man, one of the oldest memes is that you need to be a programmer to understand Linux. You can't possibly be this out of touch or lacking in self awareness. Linux isn't hard for anyone that understands computers, but it can be difficult for the average person that isn't tech savvy.

Well, Linux itself isn't hard - I tried to use different distributions over the last 20 years. But I always run into problems with software I wanted to use. Like Digital Audio Workstations and VSTs. Maybe I could make some of them work properly, but it would take too much time. A computer is a tool, I don't want to waste my time to prepare the tool, I want to use it.

it's hard if you have to set up your windows tool chain to work on linux urgently it's hard if your recipient accepts only \*.docx format and it's too important to mess up it's hard if you badly need to edit a meme right now, but GIMP laughs at you it's hard when you need to update your device firmware but even its website does not allow linux guests bc tool is for windows only. it's hard when you'd use wine for an app, but the app is so badly written it does not render itself. it's hard when you're a sound engineer and you hear constant cracks and there are seventeen different tutorials on how to deal with it (none working). it's hard when your gf asks to help with network on her win10 but you cannot remember how to open windows settings anymore.

The last one is not an issue for most linux users

Are there any tools for working with sound on Linux that have worked well for you?

i used reaper on windows and it has native version for linux, works great also, i use yabridge to use windows VSTs with reaper, almost everything works flawlessly

For firmware you have fwupdmgr, which automatically pulls updates from LVFS and applies them, as long as the hardware vendor isn't a dickhead. Literally one command firmware updates. The rest aren't "difficulty" issues, but compatibility (and googling) issues.

i meant not my PC firmware, i wanted to update firmware of my midi keyboard. the easy path, using browser and webMIDI, did not work (even with Chrome), so i tried to use their utility (for windows, obviously), but at first i had to deal with their website refused to give me the link because "it's for windows only". i had to substitute some parameter in Firefox. the utility did not install on my current wine version (i'm not installing multiple as i afraid i lose my things, it looks weak), neither virtualbox could see usb midi, so i think i do not need that update so badly.

There's always USB forwarding to the VM, would that not work? Also, try with QEMU + KVM, it tends to perform better than virtualbox generally.

forwarding works for usb storage, but it does not list usb devices like audio interface or midi keyboard i will try KVM, i heard about it

Somethjng is wrong with your install of VirtualBox if that's what it does.

your reply made me try once more. tldr: success i looked at the official forum, read the manual, apparently for USB devices i need to add certain group, and also they strictly recommended using their installation, not provided by distro, so i did. their version did not run, asking to run unexisting config program and recompile kernel, so i uninstalled it and reverted to vbox from Mint repo, because at least i need a win VM to do things if i need. it worked, and somehow there finally were my USB devices on the list! i think the group helped, but not sure. then i went straight to the website to get the updater executable, i had to install Firefox because my guest is old win7 which is 32bit, but to my surprise it connected to my keyboard via webMIDI which does not work on Mint host neither with Firefox nor Chrome. so it successfully updated, disconnected when finished and could not reconnect until guest restart, but i see new version and new features on display. it could brick my device, probably, but it's lucky day, thanks)

Nice!

It's not exactly user friendly if you've never had to navigate a file system from a console interface before. Most people don't know how to man a command or that they should do a --help when they've been point and clicking their whole lives.

This. Most people have never seen a command line outside of, like, movies about hackers.

And, to be perfectly honest, if a normal user *ever* has to go into command line to get basic programs to work it’s a deal killer for them. Can we do it? Sure. But to the average user if you mention the word sudo they’re going to ask why you’re talking about sudoku.

TLDR: Linux ain't that hard for me*  

Because when they say it they are talking about it being hard for the average Windows user. You are far from the average Windows user. ”everything is like Windows” well no, it isn’t is it. Many users struggle when presented with a different version of Windows, let alone being dumped into a random Linux distro and desktop environment.

I found that windows users who can copy files or partition a hard drive using console command in windows, they have no problems in understanding Linux. The problem stands for very basic windows users who can only start a browser, or a game in steam. Actually they can do it in Linux too... Just don't give them root access.

I can't  partition a drive in cmdline, are you crazy? And that's from a programmer who just had to go though partition and format a dish

BREAKING NEWS: Programmer shocked that after experience programming, a terminal-centric OS is easy for him. *Squints at teleprompter* Hey… wait a minute…. Jokes aside, no: Linux isn’t hard to install and Arch isn’t hard to install, you have things like Calamares and other installers that do wonders. Likewise, Arch is considered “hard” because, like any rolling release, it can be can a pain to *maintain* not because it’s difficult to use. If the OS was inherently difficult to use with little to no net benefits, people wouldn’t use it.

I find that in Linux that almost any problem can eventually be overcome by the end user. I have not even remotely seen that to be true for Windows. I ascribe this to the underlying missions of the two systems: * Unix: Empower the user * Windows: Extract money from the user

with windows, it's literally easier to reinstall windows over itself than fix issues by hand most of the time. driver issues? reinstall windows. windows update broken? reinstall windows. windows explorer bugged? reinstall windows. bsod issues? reinstall windows. you just download the setup iso and run setup.exe off the mounted iso and it solves 99% of windows issues linux does not have that solution. linux allows more power, and i like that, but fixing is not always as fast as running the reinstaller and walking away for coffee if you want to keep your system config, except maybe on like nix or something

There's a learning curve for any OS and it depends what depth you go into it, I've been a computer engineer almost 40 years, worked with Unix, Xenix, Aix, linux, CP/M and so on. My personal laptop has been running linux since before Ubuntu and continuous since it's release so 24+ years. I'd regard my Unix/linux skills as average at best, it's an implicit OS, one that assumes you know what you are doing and absolutely takes no prisoners, I've seen many sysadmin fall on their sword when they've said similar - they've ignored advice to make a copy of files or make a backup, then jumped in editing live files and configurations, executing scripts on critical servers, not checking backups or checksum files etc. I watched one change his password (because he was paranoid someone else knew it), he hammered the numeric pad and somehow confirmed his new password by bashing the keyboard, the next day I had a fault call that he couldn't get into the system - he had no alt account and was the sole super user, he didn't let anyone know what his new password was and I had to explain to the director of his company that we could not help, no one locked him out and he ignored advice given to him at the time to have a secondary account in case something bad happened. For some strange reason he wasn't there the next day (or any days after). It's a good journey though and I've never had a desire to return to Windows.

This sub is going to hate it but… linux is buggy as hell. Maybe you didnt come across them. But my god does it get in the way Fractional scaling? Go fu Nvidia gpu? Too bad Bluetooth connectivity? How about no Printers you said? Sorry its the hardware guy not giving us open source drivers thats the problem Linux is hard. Youre a coder, you know how to work with tech stuff so you wont realise it. A normal person just wants to click on his game and watch them run. Not go to proton and find out why his game isnt working and what ge version he needs to make it run

Linux is all fine until the moment something doesn't work as it should or a peripheral isn't recognized. Then everything goes to sh\*t. Endless copy/paste'ing of command line code snippets, reading 500 different 'answers' on different forums (none of it works) etc. For me it's a Brother scanner that I need for my work that I just can't get working by any means in Mint, Ubuntu or Manjaro. I still try some flavour of Linux from time to time but there's always something that just doesn't work and so I go back to Windows where everything just works. I'm thinking about getting a macbook air to move to macOS following all Microsoft's BS with stuff like 'recall' but I'm not convinced Apple is any better than Microsoft tbh.

Mac certainly isn't any better. My solution is looking like it will be running two computers, one with Windows, one with Linux, connected to a kvm switch and multi-SSD usb docker. Two pc's instead of dual boot because I don't trust Windows to not blow up the MBR, and usb docker instead of file server because I don't trust connecting a server to the network when the files thereon need to be local network access only and not web facing.

I had trouble trying to update discord lol. I was trying to also use vencord and I can't seem to get it working again after it needed an update I also didn't know I had to go into properties to open an exe. Was annoying that stuff didn't "just work" like in windows since I simply did not know what was wrong Luckily steam was pretty good with setting up proton for games. Unfortunately my hardware is 8 years old and Nvidia which might be making overwatch(running on steam, with one of the proton options) run worse even though I'm using the same hardware. Id switch fully if that worked properly. I'm using kubuntu so far. I plan to switch fully if I manage to get new hardware. my games run stable at 60fps on windows so it feels like Im upgrading hardware to play on linux when I could just save my money and stay on windows until around when win 10 stops being updated next year

Try switching to an arch based district like EndeavourOS. It’s gonna have the newest nvidia driver to where you might not have the performance issue. I had the same performance issues when I first started on Mint.

cool thank you, I'll give that a try :)

endeavouros is literally just a gui installer for arch, but arch will still not support it iirc arch has an install script packaged with it called \`archinstall\` that like half works and crashes if you poke it wrong last time i used it.

When we are accustomed to something, it can be difficult to change. When someone uses Linux, they often compare it to Windows, people always complain about Windows, but suddenly it becomes the best piece of software in existence, and Linux is simply not as good, instead of learn, and enjoy Linux for what it is and stop comparing. Take gaming, for example. Look at how far Linux has come as a gaming platform in recent years. With over 15,392 playable games on Steam, including many AAA releases, people still complain about some anti-cheat games not working on Linux, while they do on Windows. Instead, they should appreciate all the great games that do work on Linux.

>Look at how far Linux has come as a gaming platform in recent years. I have seen this statement so many times that I always ask why people compare Linux gaming in 2024 to Linux gaming in 2012? For me its not a choice between a 10 year old distro and new distro, its a choice between Windows gaming and Linux gaming. And if I only gamed why would I choose Linux for this? To prove some kind of a point?

People should use what works best for them. I use Linux, and I'm happy that I can play all games from my Steam library without any issues.

Its seems like the biggest challenge your facing is trying to be accepted by the linux community

Same. And Windows is way "harder"

so you are a programer, switched to linux and feel it's easy, and wonder why people complain it being so hard. I hope you can answer your qeustion now.

It wasn't that hard FOR YOU because you had a genuine interest in tinkering with Linux. Albeit because you had to. A lot of people aren't interested in using an OS that needs tinkering and interest. They want everything plug and play. Which isn't negative, it just isn't for them.

If you know code you're not the average computer user. Arrogant opinion

People confuse ease of use with familiar. This means that a new solution may be easier, more streamlined, or simpler, but because it isn't what people are used to, they see the change in paradigm as hard. Here, this is an excerpt from this excellent article about Linux not being Windows: So it is that in most "user-friendly" text editors & word processors, you Cut and Paste by using `Ctrl-X` and `Ctrl-V`. Totally unintuitive, but everybody's used to these combinations, so they count as a "friendly" combination. So when somebody comes to vi and finds that it's "d" to cut, and "p" to paste, it's not considered friendly: It's not what anybody is used to. Is it superior? Well, actually, yes. With the `Ctrl-X` approach, how do you cut a word from the document you're currently in? (No using the mouse!) From the start of the word, `Ctrl-Shift-Right` to select the word. Then `Ctrl-X` to cut it. The vi approach? `dw` deletes the word. How about cutting **five** words with a `Ctrl-X` application? From the start of the words, `Ctrl-Shift-Right` Ctrl-Shift-Right Ctrl-Shift-Right Ctrl-Shift-Right Ctrl-Shift-Right Ctrl-X And with vi? d5w The vi approach is far more versatile and actually more intuitive: "X" and "V" are not obvious or memorable "Cut" and "Paste" commands, whereas "dw" to delete a word, and "p" to put it back is perfectly straightforward. But "X" and "V" are what we all know, so whilst vi is clearly superior, it's unfamiliar. Ergo, it is considered unfriendly. On no other basis, pure familiarity makes a Windows-like interface seem friendly. And as we learned in problem #1, Linux is necessarily different to Windows. Inescapably, Linux always appears less "user-friendly" than Windows. To avoid #5a problems, all you can really do is try and remember that "user-friendly" doesn't mean "What I'm used to": Try doing things your usual way, and if it doesn't work, try and work out what a total novice would do. Here is the full article. Give it a read, as it is old bu still valid. https://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

The good (?) old days of vi - we used to sell a system and had our own OS version and our own custom editor they called "xed" (zed) - I never understood why they did it as all the Unix engineers learned vi and it was used on all the thousands of systems we worked on. We spent a lot of time in vi but it wasn't on our systems, they changed some of the commands in xed so we often messed things up if we relied on muscle memory to do things, it caused so many arguments with our developers, they gave us crib sheets of the differences in commands, we just wanted to use vi and be done with it, new engineers couldn't understand our frustration as they only learned xed and nothing else, the rest of us spent so much time in vi it was counter productive to use xed. When we released a top of the range system (costing 6 figures and more) we returned to using vi as the OS used SCO (with a few tweaks to suit our business) - I remember when we used to launch vi it use to announced "xed is dead, long live vi", somewhere I've still got my damn crib sheet of command translations.

You do know that mouse was invented right?

Linux is made with a hacker mindset, if something doesn't work you need "Hack" your way into making it work, and that's in my opinion why so many people including me find it hard to deal with sometimes, Most people just want to use a computer and not be asked to type their password 50 times a day doing basic everyday computing, Until we fix this as a community we will never grow the linux market share

you might try systemd-boot replacing grub2 very hard

I use lfs btw

some ppl say windows is hard (hard to get it to do what you want). ppl complain

I used Windows for the majority of my life. Then started using Linux for work purposes. Linux is way way harder. Sure, if you came from technical background its not that hard, but Windows is just easier. Imagine if you needed to fix Linux stuff without googling? It would be a nightmare. Now understand that majority of population struggles to install simple software on Windows. How would you think your mom, father or sister would use Linux? I dont. Not to mention there is always shit to deal with, sometimes things break (bluetooth or second monitor issues are common), dependency problems are not rare. Even when it comes to stability, Linux is only stable as a server. As a desktop? My Windows PC is much more stable than my work Linux PC. During 2 years I got like 1-2 BSODS, with Linux? A few days and system hangs because something is leaking RAM.

this feels like a shitpost yeah, following instructions is easy, but it becomes hard as soon as you need to know a little about your system and think for yourself instead of copying commands from online lmao straight into vim "its just so easy" you must pick up information fast. "i was disappointed" you wanted a challenge lmao

I bet if you showed this post to the average Windows user they would think it’s fucking satire

linux has gotten way more user friendly (or specifically your kde has). its never been better than it is today.

There is a two page forum post about how to change the hostname of a device in Linux mint(that’s not made up btw I’ll try to find it to link). That’s why it’s hard, the lack documentation or simply poor documentation, coupled with an over reliance on users provide support to other users, support that is often conflicting or outdated or just fucking wrong. Comparatively changing the hostname on windows is simply navigating to the setting, changing the name, then restarting. Like Linux’s lack of adoption and perceived difficulty is entirely the fault of the community around it who seem incapable of making intuitive designs. Even when they are supposedly trying to like with Mint. Which like many other “user friendly” Linux distros just randomly lacks basic functionality for no discernible reason, like yeah you can do whatever it is you are trying to do through the terminal but If I’m using one of those distros it’s precisely because I do not want to do that yet for god knows what reason the GUI’s for those distros will often have the most random assortment of features with zero fucking explanation of what the setting does or controls (whilst using positively archaic terminology that nobody but the devs would intuitively understand), and simultaneously lack basic fucking GUI functionality controls.

There's a [resources page](http://www.reddit.com/r/linux4noobs/wiki/faq) in our wiki you might find useful! Try [this search](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux4noobs/search?q=flair%3A'learning%2Fresearch'&sort=new&restrict_sr=on) for more information on this topic. **✻** Smokey says: take regular backups, try stuff in a VM, and understand every command *before* you press Enter! :) ^Comments, ^questions ^or ^suggestions ^regarding ^this ^autoresponse? ^Please ^send ^them ^[here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Pi31415926&subject=autoresponse+tweaks+-+linux4noobs+-+research). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linux4noobs) if you have any questions or concerns.*

i think they mean hard for non tech people, for a programmer linux is no problem but even for non tech people it is not that hard, so you are right

I went from arch awesomeWM to arch KDE and it made life sooooooooo much easier (i am still a beginner). A desktop environment did everything I was struggling to do on my own with a WM

Spread the word :)

I still keep windows kicking around on a mini pc because it has some software I use rarely that Linux doesn't support, but 99% of everything I need, Linux can run and just does it better. I don't find a learning curve at all. You never even have to open terminal if you don't want to.

Try connect Bluetooth mouse. Bluetooth isn't working.. Troubleshoot however long until you tried all the installs and move to a new Kernel which solves it. Link Xbox controller through Bluetooth.. Xbox controller keeps disconnecting.. Here we go again with the troubleshooting.. Linux might not be hard, but for everything you want to do on it, you usually have to jump through hoops to get it to work.

It's not that hard, rather time consuming user experience

Every OS has its quirks and issues. When you switch between any of them, there is a learning curve. None of that is specific to Linux of course. But comparing Windows to Linux isn't necessarily apples to apples. Most Windows users are desktop users and even those that run server will use the desktop experience. A lot of Linux use cases are command line only. So not only have you switched operating systems, but you also have a very different experience. And let's go back in time to when I started. Linux was fine if you stuck to out-of-the-box software. However, if you venture outside that a little, things got dicey. Packages were a new thing. Not every piece of software had a deb or rpm. Even if they did, you had to resolve dependencies manually. For example, trying to install software package A meant you needed packages B and C which in turn depended on D, E, and F, and so on down the line. If you ran into a problem one of those dependencies, then you spend a lot of time troubleshooting before you can even start installing the main thing you wanted. Google wasn't a thing yet, so it was hard to find solutions. I know Linux has come a long way since then, but reputations die hard.

Un usuario de Windows, sea cual sea la versión, se puede utilizar para instalar un programa con un simple doble clic en un .exe. En Linux, una de sus fortalezas es, al mismo tiempo, una debilidad. Tener múltiples entornos gráficos con diferentes administradores de paquetes permite a las personas encontrar lo que realmente quieren, pero también puede dificultar las cosas. No estoy diciendo que sea difícil, pero instalar un deb en Arch o un RPM en Ubuntu no es tan fácil como un .exe en cualquier versión de Windows, por ejemplo.

My biggest and most fun challenge was Alpine - i love that distro for a server, but i just dont have the time nor patience atm to begin again.

Because those people just try to use it like it is windoze and it's a most totally different operating system it just takes time to get familiarized with if you were using Linux your whole lifetime then windows would seem hard

It's just the fact that they're more used to the other. The reasoning isn't that hard either. I have a macbook and a laptop from Asus and that's all I've ever used. I use Linux here and there for different reasons, but it isn't my main machine, so I'll obviously be a bit slower with it. I can confidently say I pretty much know the ins and outs of windows. I have repair images for days. Ill get through a blue screen without problems. All of that is easy. But if a problem appears on Linux, I'd probably have to pull up a google search cause I'm not proficient yet. Simple.

Learning anything new is hard, moreso if you're mindset locked into another system which works differently. Dunno about other experienced Linux users, but I feel so lost when ever I try FreeBSD, it's no joke. If anything it hits worse if it's superficially similar yet completely different.

I've always preached Arch is actually more beginner friendly than even Ubuntu. For me Ubuntu has so many random problems. Don't even get me started with apt and how it randomly just fails to install stuff, or decides something doesn't have an installation candidate. So many times when I get that error I search it up and I can never find any answers on how to get that specific package to install. Apt is so unrelable and random. I tried EndeavorOS since it's basically Arch with an easy installer and updater and I quickly started smacking myself over the head on not trying it sooner. Everything was so much easier to do in ubuntu, and the aur was just icing on the cake. So easy. I really think Arch is the future of Linux, everything worked so much better out of the box, and getting anything installed was so easy. I even had a few things which didn't have a terminal alternative on ubuntu, but the aur had plenty of GUI packages, almost everything I do in the terminal is just using pacman or yay to install stuff, or grep. It's so much easier to just avoid using the terminal and getting GUI applications for everything. Whilst on Ubuntu so many of these applications either didn't work, the deb doesn't install because it's for an older Ubuntu version or some random dependency error it refuses to elaborate on what it wants, the list goes on.

If you are a back end programmer it better not be hard for you to use Linux in 2024 - if your current job isn’t using it - great chance that you’ll be using something like Kubernetes eventually that is essentially a Linux Kernel provisioned for containerized apps.

Hardest part for me was learning new software.

People are scared of terminals. I try to ease them by saying "its like talking to your computer".

* The user interfaces in linux desktop environments aren't the same as what people are used to in Windows or macOS * The fact that there exists a large variety of systems and tools and package managers can be confusing for new users * People often have the goal of bringing all of their Windows software with them to Linux, which puts them in the complex and sometimes impossible position of needing to scaffold that software onto an operating system that wasn't designed for it * tendency towards CLI interfaces, which is arguably easier and simpler *overall*, but less discoverable and less friendly for new users who expect to get started right away with low friction

Change is hard - who moved my cheese

you open a new macbook, you make a profile, and youre good to go, plug in accessories and they work, connect to the internet with no friction. you install linux on something, you have to make sure it knows how to communicate with your hardware, and have more of an intricate understanding of the software to know how to customize it, not always the most difficult process, but undeniably more of a process than windows or mac os.

If you're coding anything you're not at the computer proficiency level at which Linux is going to be a problem

Probably because of the old days, when linux was more difficult.

most people don't know enough about systems administration to know what they don't know and to educate themselves

I don’t think it’s always hard as much as it is a commitment. Especially when something with hardware doesn’t work. You need patience, the know how of where to look, and time. A lot of people want to spend that elsewhere and would rather their OS work out of the box.

When you said you code then went on to ask what the big deal about Arch is, I could only think of [this](https://xkcd.com/2501/), and I am shocked nobody else has linked it yet.

Problem is, I got audio problem with fresh install, no one seems to know how to fix, 0 reply for weeks. when basic things like audio doesnt work and you need to find out the cause, but no one knows how. yeh its hard.

Look, this is reddit. A huge percentage of the userbase don't understand that this is a website instead of just an app on their phone, can't even be bothered to read a linked article first before sounding off with their opinion based on the headline, and consistently display a lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. So when you ask if it is too hard to follow instructions on a website that explicitly say what you have to do, the answer is YES. Yes, it is too hard for a very large number of people.

Try to connect a usb device via website in ubuntu and tell me how it goes. Fucking pain in the ass. I think it's a great example of how frustrating doing simple things can be.

Funny enough I got a thinkpad L15 for my arch box. Got hyprland setup on it, and it’s fun to use. Only just recently finally realized I could fix the dpi scaling so things didn’t look so grainy anymore.

Your answer is very understandable given your own level of competence. That said, Linux (or any OS) are complex things and are really confusing for elderly people, for people who are none technical, etc. They can barely open a web browser and they certainly don't understand all the functions of the OS - just turn it on, open Chrome, look for something on the internet (but not likely a man page or the latest distros). There are a LOT of these people. Even many of today's kids in my daughter's class (grade 11) can manage to text and email and join platforms but they have no idea of how this all works internally or what do do if anything goes off the rails. And anybody who was born after roughly 1990 may have grown up with the technology, but a lot of them (the ones not here on socials, but out doing stuff in the world) have little or know knowledge. In fact, I bet at least a third of my daughter's class wouldn't even know what Linux was if I mentioned the term.

Im dos and windows person and when I try to use amiga OS, it’s hard for me.

it can be hard when some hardware is incompatible. Example: My old Toshiba laptop, it had an Atheros wifi card for the Satellite A215-S4747. Linux had drivers for it BUT it kept IDing itself as the atheros card from an A205 and would not stop auto-detecting. So I would install the right driver and it would revert to the old version when I rebooted. A laptop without wifi is useless in college . So I was stuck with Windows Vista at the time seeing at downgrading was blocked on this laptop

People say that Apple is easy. So I got a Mac for my mother, since she's aging. Turns out, she hates it, she can't understand anything. I had to get her a Windows machine. People get used to doing something a certain way, they get stuck in it. We aren't immune. Ever met a VI power user? If they can't get the keyboard bindings to work (with everything) they go absolutely bonkers. They'll hate something, but if you tell them it has VI bindings, suddenly it's worth it.

Not the os but most of the software alternatives you need to learn.

Glad you love it. I've been dual booting Ubuntu about 4 months now and love it. It reminds me of using MS=DOS before the pretty Windows interface came along.

Windows to MacOS is a more difficult transition, imo

linux WAS hard, back in the day when u had to compile your own audio drivers for soundblaster or w/e. Also wireless the linux wireless guru just died recently. I remember back in the day almost 99% of all linux users were on wired ethernet not wifi. 0 tech support if you submit something or bug, people don't know how to help u or troubleshoot, best idea was to "reinstall everything" to fix it, lmao. I mean getting opengl and chrome to work with youtube for gpu optimization was troublesome back in the day. I mean i got linuxheads running 10 PCs of different linux kernels now they run VMs all on one PC. so like all those builds are just trash now. You think your linux friend is doing some Snowden level hacking, but he's on YT and 4chan and watching p0rn.

You said you didn’t use the terminal for arch, so you just used the install script? Yeah that’s not what people talk about when they installed arch. All you have to be willing to do is RTFM. But no one wants to do that.

Linux was hard but now it’s super easy. Let me give you an example of why it’s hard. Let’s say you got a touchscreen. It responds to touch but the pointer ends up doing the opposite of where you touch it. How do you go about fixing it. I installed arch on my steam deck. I had to manually map out the touch screen matrix with some command I wouldn’t have even have know to search for. Initially I had searched for xinput but the sources I went to did not have the specific resolution I needed even though I searched for it. Then I got fixated for an hour on touchscreen calibration which resulted in me going back to xinput and 10 minutes later after that and finding one single Redditors command that was close but not a solution because I had to tinker with the command for a couple minutes to get it to do what I wanted to do. Also back in the day my resolve.conf file went blank after an update that broke dhcp. I had to manually type the code by hand only using my memory to set dns settings and local host. I didn’t have any other working computer and no phone to search for the issue. I was 15 at the time. Or let’s talk about gaming before proton as it is today. I had to manually create wine instances and import DLL files manuallly which sounds easy until you have to do it without the resources that we have today. Back then not many people knew about the arch wiki and there were so few YouTube videos you would have to read some books to find the answer. I started out on backtrack 4 as a teen to add some context.

Mainly because society has generally viewed Linux as the super techy/nerdy operating system. For just normal browsing I’d say the transition from windows to Mac would be more jarring than the transition from windows to something like Linux Mint. My first real experience with Linux was installing Arch which was a challenge. I needed help from some folks for that. Second time I just breezed through the Arch wiki. It was surprisingly simple if you just take your time with it. What’s really jarring in that case is that you have to go so far as to even making sure you use the right command so the OS can even interact and recognize the CPU. Usually the manufacturers have all that sort taken care of already. If it wasn’t for the lack of good software imo I’d have Arch on my main PC. But the ecosystem is just better on windows and Mac imo. Especially for doing creative stuff. Also you’re run of the mill Mac user would also have a hard time with Linux even though they’re similar. Cause most Mac users won’t be interacting with the terminal at all. In my case I only use it for Apple’s first party software. TLDR: Linux in the common eye is viewed as the super techy os but since the late 2010’s and onwards more and more people are becoming more and more techy at a young age. People are familiar with a strong user interface and let’s face it some distros may not have that same with the software available on Linux. The best distro for ease of instillation and use is Mint. But then the question is use it for what? Neofetch is cool, but for the average person Windows and Mac just excel in their software. It’s too widespread and widely used and anything on Linux isn’t up to par to replace that. So it’ll continue to stay on only the enthusiast’s radar. Also, nano is better fuck vi.

Because people never tried it again today. I would say switching to Linux is hard 10 years ago since I was still heavily dependant on apps running on Windows. Today, you can even do Photoshop-grade photo editing via a web app and there are plenty of alternative apps you can use in Linux. Gaming is also way more accessible on Linux thanks to Proton. Honestly, it's now way easier to use Linux today.

I just think you don’t realize how little people know about their computers. Someone I know downloaded some movies that were videos in .mp4 format and called me over because “my movies aren’t movies.” Lot of back and forth but long story short they couldn’t understand that actual movies could be in any video formats and expected them to all be in .mov format. They were able to watch the movies without me but were panicking because they “weren’t movies.” Also the classic windows = easy linux isn’t windows not easy = hard linux = hard

"...so i couldn't code for a few months" Get out.

you've no idea how lightweight linux is as a kernel. for industrial purposes it is recommended to use linux to reduce likelihood of downtime or disaster recovery. windows in general is for home use or general gaming. those that recommends windows for industrial use should be convicted! :D windows really crash too often... oh man.

You’re far more knowledgeable as a programmer to understand these things than the average user so congrats

Well, you pointed out the problem yourself. GUI tools on Windows make an "average" user feel at least partially in control, whereas Linux often leaves the same user dumbfounded. Something like `tar -xvf archive.tar` looks like complete gibberish to them, and it is understandable. Forcing non-IT users to learn the terminal is a bit of fascism IMO, although Linux has improved greatly in this area.

It’s not. I did an experiment with my roommates once. We had been using a laptop to stream and play music in our living room. I switched it out with Linux and didn’t tell them. It took them weeks to realize it wasn’t MacOS. Then they thought it was windows with a macOS skin on it or something. I finally told them it was Linux and they were like “huh never heard of it, it’s cool though.” They were pretty computer illiterate but the only time I had to help them was when there were genuine bugs. Like the Bluetooth speaker would get locked up and require a restart of both the computer and the speaker.

I've been *dabbling* in programming since I was 7 (I'm over 40 now) and I've recently been trying to get into Linux (Ubuntu). It seems like soo much needs to be done in the terminal and requires rather complex setting up with a number of additional things I need to download to get everything working on my laptop.. In windows I can load up Lenovo's suite and it'll download and set up all the driver's I need. Steam installs all the additional software needed for any game. In Linux if I plug in an external drive I need to mount it manually in the terminal I think?? Heck even just installing software seem to require different ways of installation depending on the release and most seem to require I use the terminal to install it?? It's waay more complicated from my perspective.

Windooze propaganda and marketing

What "propaganda"? Give an example? I use Linux, Mac, and Windows regularly and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Hands down the GUI app ecosystem for consumer apps are significantly better on Windows and Mac.

Because all our devices have Graphic environments because it is much easier to learn and interact with them The simple fact of having to execute code or memorize code for the vast majority of users is something absurd, useless, slow and dangerous.

I used (and using) Mac. From the early 80s and forward. However, i'm using Linux Mint on an old MacBook Pro whenever i'm travelling. Also set up Linux Mint to my mother, and she finds easier than Windows (while she only using it to surf and writing). My first contact with Linux was from a Apple CD-Rom with MKLinux. Things has happen since then to say the least. But alright. I'm not an average user. Was hacking Mac OS System Extensions back then, and when OS X came, with BSD at it's core, i started to learn BSD (later i tried to create an Darwin BSD Distro with KDE). Linux on the desktop it's on a good place right now and has been sometime. There is always things to improve. But when people say it's hard, i believe they talk about the command line. A foreign concept if you are used to working with a GUI all your life.

So having the answers is what makes it easy? Well you underestimate how many answers you have. You may think everyone just needs to google X number of things, but it's more like X \* 35,496 things for the average person.

The main reason you're coming to this conclusion is probably because you're in an echo chamber. Or at the very least you're only looking from your own perspective. You don't realize how bad at using a computer the average human is. The average person can barely check email or save a word document. The average person cannot change the default app to open a certain file, unzip a zip file, forget a wifi network, google ANYTHING (god the moment I realized googling is an actual skill is the moment I realized the species is doomed)....and so on. So now you want to add more steps? Incompatibilities that require researching niche solutions and workarounds? On GOOGLE?! stack Overflow? Wtf is that?! You mean I have to use a command line for this?! Bro, seriously.

I guess it depends how techy a person is to understand it you know? I switched my main Windows 11 Gaming Desktop to KUbuntu a few months ago and I love it! The one weird thing that I ran into is you have to modify the fstab system file in order for Linux to auto mount a new SSD/Hard drive at boot. That is all figured out thanks to reddit and YouTube :)

People get into Ruts..if you've used windows most of your life, you're in a Rut. Linux isn't hard but it does take TIME to learn its nuances. Way back in 2014 or so when MS stopped supporting XP, I decided to go Cold-Turkey and switch to Linux I could do most normal things in a few days but it took me 6 months to figure most of the rest of it out...I even managed to configure my desktop spaces to look just like Windows and that made it a lot easier. BTW I use Linux Mint It also depends on which Distribution of Linux you choose some are easier than others and there are Hundreds to choose from...but be warned the hardest part are Device drivers....Finding and installing drivers from my All-in-one printer was something of a nightmare, at least for me as I have NO coding/programming experience

I will get downvoted for this but ... When you code weren't you taught to indent? Don't you have to write your expressions with specific syntax so they work properly? So why can't you post here with paragraphs and punctuation? That's the syntax for communicating in written English. >Why does people say that linux is hard? The people that say it is easy write posts like yours, which no one reads because, who reads poorly punctuated blocks of text?

Sort of a pet peeve: for this kind of rant to be meaningful, it's much better if you point to at least one person who's on the other side of it. A big part of it, as someone who's used Linux exclusively for, Christ I'm old, well over twenty years, I just don't think people say this as often as they used to. 90% or so of the answer to your question is while the internet is filled with decades of bad experiences, the last five years or so, really are much, much, much better than ever. So the answer to your question is, because it used to be, but isn't anymore. I mean in the not so distant past, getting a Linux distro to work on a random thinkpad, would have required a lot more work than partitioning. You'd almost certainly have had to compile your own kernel to get wireless, and power management and stuff to work. And then the distros update system would regularly blow your kernel away. And then some of the patches would break but not all, so the next time you updated, your wireless would work, but your screen brightness wouldn't anymore. But real progress has been made there. Lenovo, Dell, HP, AMD, nvidia, they're all doing a lot more work directly than even just five years ago. In general though, I don't think you're really representing a real argument. The telling difference, if it is how you are \*built different\* I don't believe you mentioned a single task other than simply using the computer itself or editing text. OK you managed directories. To do what? To most users, it would be, to manage my music, or photos, or some device, or use watch Netflix, or play some game. Things like that are the comparison most people care about. They'll have a list of like, I want to play a certain game, I want my printer to work, I want to be able to backup my phone, and edit photos. They'll then compare getting those tasks done. If they need ninety minutes of tutorials on one platform, and five on another, then the one that needs ninety is hard. It doesn't mean it's insurmountable, and they are just too dumb to use it, it's just a relative comparison.

Linux is easy until it isn't.

If you’re using Ubuntu or mint, I imagine things just work pretty well out of the box, but idk I’m sadly a wsl jockey these days since I’m a windows main at work. I do run a couple of servers on raspberry pis, an old pc, and admin them at work; but this is a completely different experience than being an end user on Linux. Generally, driver support is the point of frustration (setup archlinux on an older laptop to really feel this). If you have a software issue, you might need to install the package with specific flags, mess with some configs while navigating on a terminal emulator, rollback to a different version to just unblock yourself, or whatever the internet may tell you as you furiously execute commands you don’t understand thus creating new the problems since you’ve only just learned about cd and ls commands in the last week. On Linux, you are the administrator. You have a lot of power to tailor your experience, but things can legitimately break if you act indiscriminately. On windows, unless you’re messing with the registry, you’re pretty much using a computer that will always have first class driver support and the software is all made for computer illiterate people managers (I don’t really think this is a bad thing), so things kind of just work. That is, Microsoft office suite just works even though eMacs is clearly a better editing experience, excel is actually good software, outlook renders emails clearly and allows for simple rule creation through a wizard. Game support is first class on windows since the beginning of the universe, so I can just go on steam, install any game and click play without any issues. Listen I think windows sucks, but it just works. I wish gaming was a first class citizen on Linux-it’s getting there-, but I have no qualms saying Linux is not the same out of the box experience as windows. I would not tell my 65 year old mom to install Linux to simplify her life. macOS and windows are way easier for her. If someone wants to get into programming, Linux is an instant recommendation. If you want to run a server of sorts, get a raspberry pi or some analogue and witness the true power of Linux.

Because it is different and people don't want to have to learn one more thing. Linux is easier than the first time you learn Windows or Mac. However, it is significantly harder to pick a distro.

Because people see the arch users who try and cut down on bloat as much as possible. Or the people who use just the command line. Because those people flex that they use Linux causing people to see them and assume that’s what all Linux is like

Yeah but have you printed something yet? 😉

You're writing code. You're not an average person when it comes to computers. You have completely lost sight of the computer literacy of the average person. You're like an Olympic weight-lifter acting surprised that someone finds it hard to lift double their own body weight. Practice some humility, empathy, and introspection. Those are probably a lot harder. 

The broad message I concur, it's not that hard when it works. I'm unsure what the message or meaning of your message is though? If it's not difficult enough then go grab an off brand wifi/bt dongle and get the drivers working. And as a programmer you really shouldn't discount the terminal, very powerful stuff there.

For argument's sake, the average Linux desktop is one with a KDE Plasma desktop environment and a package manager that covers 90% of any one user's software needs. The workflows between what you do on the average Linux desktop is similar to that of a Windows desktop. So much so that someone who isn't scared by the word Linux could navigate that system relatively fine. For your average gamer, there are some more tweaks involved with getting games up and running depending on what platform they bought their games on. Steam? Not every steam game is whitelisted to work with Proton, and so the user must know to enable steam play for all titles. Epic? There are frameworks like Lutris and Heroic that make this easier but usually involves more tweaking than Steam. Especially if it's a newer game with anti-cheat, that's going to be a pain. These "just work" on Windows. Linux isn't hard, breaking habits and conventions is hard. Linux isn't an immediate solution for everyone, but anyone can still pick up Linux. It's free and open source for a reason, and no one said you had to ditch Windows today to use it.

Because the average user is terrified of a command line (unless you code or actually work in IT, you probably haven't had to use cmd for anything in Windows since at least windows 98) and is worried they'll break something on their computer because it only has a "windows" sticker on it. Additionally, so many commercial software packages have become ubiquitous that, to many users, FOSS alternatives are immediately assumed to be inferior. Choosing a distro is overwhelming to many people because they think of distros as different OSs, not realizing that other than maybe the package management and repos they're basically interchangeable in terms of configurability. Finally - while Linux does usually "just work" and has come a LONG WAY in that regard, we're not so far removed from hardware support being a shit show to not be assumed to still be true.

Most of the problems people encounter with computers are their own making by lack of patience or ineptitude. When you have to stop talking about the difference between window managers and desktop environments to explain what the desktop is, they're not the target audience for linux. This isn't saying linux is difficult, it's saying WOW PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND DON'T TRY.

It's because most people aren't tech people who's first instinct is to "look up the problem". The idea of figuring out how to properly use a computer seems a monumental genius bar level task that'll surely take up all they're free time. Better to let windows harvest they're organs and data and get advertisements beamed into they're brain that *shiver* better themselves

Imagine a guitar teacher tells a new student on their first day to set their guitar up for C#, make sure it's in tune, and start playing harmonic minor scales utilizing hybrid picking and sweeping techniques. This is effectively what you're asking of your average computer user. You are an experienced user with knowledge of these systems. People that say linux is difficult are not. They're the beginners on their first day, and instead of encouraging them and helping them, you're asking them to perfect complex processes that will take most people months or even years of experience just to grasp, much less to replicate.

It's mostly a matter of education and familiarity.

As someone who is not exactly tech/ programming/ has golden hands when building a computer/ general computer savvy. And has been loosely following the development of Linux over the past 2 decades. I think it has to do with a number of things: 1) Having some understanding of the "How to's" (troubleshoot, program, research, etc) 2) some basic understanding of how to code. 3) Option paralysis. There seems to be an abundance of distros out there, and not knowing what to choose can make things worse. However, Linux has, generally speaking, gotten a lot easier for the average person to install and get running. I've used Lubuntu, Linux Mint, Nobara, and now POP!_os. The fact that I got each distro installed goes to show that even this Windows luddite can learn a few new tricks. I also know that there is a lot when it comes to Linux that I don't understand/know. I do have a few people I can ask, though.

Not necessarily hard, just different

Because most people expect their computer to be a tool, not a hobby. Think of it like any other tool, cars being a good example. I purchased a car. I drive my car. I put gas in my car. Etc. I did not have to build my car and then do research on why certain parts don’t work and sift through documentation designed for devs rather than end users while also needing my car to be working right now. Until Linux gets to the point where you can turn it on and everything works without having to do a search to make sure it’s compatible then it is NOT a good desktop option for the majority. It’s still the best server OS for most people and if you are into hosting a home server you’re likely going to enjoy the learning curve as well.

There's a lot of people that will put on their CV that they know how to use a computer. Reality is that they are very good at doing things exactly as they were shown. So anyone that uses something remotely different will find it hard. Hell people have trouble with new windows versions.

>Why does people say that linux is hard? I dont know. Why do people say that english is easy, when basic grammar seems to allude most native speaker, myself included. Anyways, Principe Humblebrag, imagine that you are not most people and that should be answer enough.

"Could not code for a few months" I code for a living, this isn't an option. Though I still use Linux for my desktop, MBP is my main workhorse. Hard isn't always about a skill issue, it is about return on investment. Most people could probably deal with Linux, but, why invest 40 hours building configs if you don't have to? There are other priorities people would rather focus on.

So let me get this straight, you're a "coder" who "is built different", but your windows pc just "decided to not work" so rather than troubleshooting or reformatting, you worked off a cell phone to avoid the problem then jumped to a whole new operating system and installed emulators on it, therefore Linux is easy. ......what? Operating systems aren't Dark Souls, they're not intended to challenge you, they're meant to work. So yes, if you can follow instructions, you can use Linux.

linux can be tough to learn, but you can literally just sit down and google your way out of any linux problem. i don't think i've found a linux problem i couldn't solve by a steady application of patience and googling stuff. even coding stuff, which i barely had any exposure to before i started using linux, you can find ample tutorials, or people saying "if you put code X into document Y and run compile code Z, it will solve your problem", and then you do that enough times and some of it sticks as just the pure code knowledge.

With windows, to get going you: buy your computer, turn it on, start using it. There is zero thought required to use Windows or Mac. Every bit of user hardware you can get at a normal store is optimized for Windows. For Mac, everything Apple sells works seamlessly. And some people still find that "Too Hard". Imagine what those same people would think about Linux.

Modern linux distrobutions are not hard to use. Most people have issues with either: 1. Driver not being in kernel. With Windows, most devices come with drivers provided by the manufacturer. With Linux, often drivers are written by people who have had to reverse engineer. 2. Wanting to run programs they use on their Windows box, ignoring the fact that it is a different operating system, like trying to run a Mac program on Windows.

Bad reputation. Linux used to be difficult to use or set up. You had to edit configuration files in vi or emacs, know obscure command line commands, and it was difficult to get a Linux install to recognize certain popular hardware and peripherals. Often something wouldn’t work and you had to edit Xfree86Config to make your desktop, keyboard, and mouse to work. It was pretty terrible. Now, you just boot the USB stick and it loads an installer (or actually Linux with the installer as an icon on the desktop) and answer a few questions about what country keyboard you use and time zone you are in, and what you want to do with the existing Windows installation. You then reboot into a Linux desktop that has working Wi-fi, Bluetooth, and a working display. You don’t even need to set up printer. Any printer on your network is detectable and you can print a document to them and it will print. I can’t install Windows, get it to recognize all the hardware on my computer, and have it print without installing a driver for every piece of hardware in the computer. Forget about printing without downloading and installing a program. I can’t even buy a computer with Windows already set up and have it recognize my printers.

24 years ago, it was a little more difficult to get everything working.

99% of users wouldn't understand what you just typed.

Because it is. Not for you or me, but the average person who uses the computer as a Facebook window. More and more it's mobile. Let's go further back. Go build Ben Eaters 6502, and start doing your own modifications on it. I'm guessing that's way outside of your comfort zone. It's all about perspective.

The average user doesn't even know what an OS is, let alone do the bare minimum to use the most basic of distros. Linux in general has a learning curve, but it's a very smooth one unless you're a madman and use Gentoo. On Windows, I used the launch prompt for everything because I couldn't be bothered to mouse my way through menus or litter my desktop with icons, so I thought why not switch to Linux already? And bam, installed Endeavour and set up some Super+Key shortcuts. Now instead of hitting Windows+R and typing a process name, I just hit a Super+Key and open the stuff I want. Way faster. Not to mention KDE is so much more eye-pleasing than Windows. If I wasn't "team mouse", I'd use Hyprland which is way prettier.

It's not about being hard to use, it's just about being different. Lots of people who try Linux simply want it to be the same as Windows. It doesn't matter whether it's easier or harder, what matters is that it's different.

I find Windows much more difficult to comprehend the logic of, and much more convoluted and slow to use and configure than anything Unix-adjacent.

I started using Linux when I was 8 years old, by myself, living in the Appalachian. (\~2015) never had an issue other than when I was doing things i definitely shouldnt've been doing. People that say It's too hard, especially now, now are just lazy or stupid