So you think Linux users have to use a command line to launch applications?
Also, there are appImages for Linux that run exactly like .exe files if that’s how people want to run software, but there are also like 3 other ways to install software, it’s up to the user.
I guess the file structure is different if that’s really a big deal to anyone.
No, what? I’m saying all current desktop OSs (and mobile OSs, for that matter) will default to an app search interface when you press their respective Windows/Meta/whatever key or shortcut, so there being a “start” menu and a taskbar instead of a search bar and a dock ribbon makes no difference and is intuitive when going from Windows to Linux no matter what distro or DE you choose.
And that there being “like 3 other ways” to install applications is the issue. Windows users go to a place, click on a the “download” button, then click on the file they download and go. In Linux you could try to approximate that, but it’s the least convenient option. Instead you have an app manager that sort of looks like an app store from the other OSs, but sometimes not everything is in there and you have to manually add repositories and sometimes a thing IS there but it shows up like four times because there are multiple ways for apps to be packaged and it’s not obvious at a glance whether you’re downloading a containerized instance, a bundle of loose file dependencies or straight up code you’re about to autocompile. And when you ask online people will (correctly) tell you it’s actually easier to just use the command line package manager, except those are all distro-dependent and they all use subtly different syntax depending on what flavor of Linux you’re using.
So yeah, that’s a bigger difference and barrier to entry than “the start menu”.
The file structure you should need less often if you’re not a power user, since the user home directories are pretty much the same across the board. But hey, still, it’s very different on Windows compared to other systems, what with devices and volumes being automounted at the root level with a consistent drive name as opposed to a /mnt location and most of the pieces and dependencies of an app being kept in a consolidated folder. So yeah, it’s still a bit of a moment when you eventually have to edit a config file or manually navigate to a removable drive or something and it’s not immediately obvious where that would have gone by default.
That, and to this day it still trips me up that Linux GUI file managers mount network locations and Samba shares in arbitrary real paths you can’t easily navigate to in CLI but mounting them in CLI makes them appear in the file manager in a way that is visually indisinguishable, despite being mounted in a completely different place. That is not awkward because it’s different from Windows, that’s just weird and bad in absolute terms and I don’t get why it’s that way at all.
Yeah what you say about launching I agree with, it’s not a big deal anymore.
There are several ways to install on Windows as well. Either installers, a standalone exe, or via the Windows Store. That’s not really any different than what I’m talking about with the exception of there being more than one “type” of exe (deb, rpm, etc).
On Linux, most people just use the store front that comes with their distro while more advanced users can build from source or whatever b/c they need bleeding edge releases or b/c it’s “fun”.
Adding repos is the Devil & my last resort because that shit will break a system, so I’m w you there.
So yeah, if your main argument is the hurdle to changing systems goes beyond the Start Menu, I agree. That said, it’s not that hard & most people just use a browser anyways, tbh.
I’m not a fan of the “most stuff just goes in the browser” argument, because then your OS is just Chrome and it doesn’t matter what you use underneath it. If anybody genuinely believed that people wouldn’t get so militant about the stuff you use to boostrap your PC and launch your real OS.
I also don’t agree that things are comparable just because MS keeps a vestigial proprietary app store (and a vestigial but quite competent CLI app manager, while we’re at it). Standalone installers are the default for Windows and there are very few times you’re forced to deviate from that, including for driver installations. That is a fundamental change, even before you get to the absolute mess that is the variety of repos, package formats and package managers across the Linux ecosystem. Even if you choose to use the Windows Store for some reason it has a single possible setup and more in common with a mobile store than with Linux package management.
Maybe it’s having recently switched to Fedora with GNOME and being frustrated by how patchy and unreliable their GUI software app is, but even after installing additional repos most of the stuff I want to use isn’t there and I’ve started defaulting to CLI because it’s just more reliable. It is by far the biggest hurdle I’d foresee for a newcomer, and if I had to recommend a distro/DE combo to a Windows user I’d focus on what package manager works best and most straightforwardly out of the box before anything else.
And yes, I did break something badly during that whole process and had to do some serious patching up at one point, so I do appreciate the empathy.
Believe me, I am not advocating that most people only use their Browser, but it is the reality of the situation & actually kind of a good thing in terms of Linux adoption. As you point out, people moved to Chrome w few issues b/c, imo, most normies just need a browser.
As for the rest of it, most people consider the need to download exes one at a time a downside. And again, flatpaks & appimages are the workaround to universal compatibility (anything but adding repos).
That said, you obviously have a lot of experience. I hope you can get to the point where it doesn’t feel like Linux is fighting you.
Agreed. The shift from downloading installers to finding stuff in the app store is a pretty big jump, and a necessary one IMO because it prevents the main source of malware (downloading sketchy exes) and ensures that everything stays up-to-date. When it comes from the distro package repository, you can be reasonably sure that it’s legit.
And yeah, flatpaks rock.
Linux is a paradigm shift, and I think it’s generally for the better.
The distro I use (Pop_os) has a lot of outdated packages in the ‘store’, & I think that’s pretty common for any distro that’s not bleeding edge.
The store compensates with flatpaks a lot of the times, but my issue with those is they don’t integrate with the system very well. To launch Krita (for a random example), instead of using ‘krita’ in the command line, I need to use like, ‘~/.local/var/org.kritafoundation.krita.flatpak’ (I am making that up, but it’s probably something similar). This becomes a real issue when using scripts or needing software to work system wide.
Appimages are actually my current favorite method for universal install. I rename them, then stuff them in my ~/bin/ directory. My gripe with appimages is there is no auto generated .desktop file.
I like building from source, but sometimes it feels like I install 10 gigs of dependencies to build a 400kb piece of software.
Adding repos was invented by the Devil & is thus appropriately cursed to break systems, so I stay away unless there’s really no other options.
I guess what I’m saying is every single method sucks, but still better than Windows lol.
Honestly, an up-to-date store would be the best of all Worlds, which I suppose is Arch’s AUR, but, nah. Arch looks like a headache.
Anyways, I’m blabbing. That happens when I start geeking out about Linux.
instead of using ‘krita’ in the command line, I need to use like, ‘~/.local/var/org.kritafoundation.krita.flatpak’
Does your DE not find it for you? Both GNOME and KDE seem to find my flatpaks, so I just launch them from there.
Ideally you don’t launch GUI apps from scripts, and you don’t install CLI apps via flatpak. So the handful of times you do want to launch a GUI app from a script, I think it’s reasonable for there to be a little bit of annoyance.
You can make an alias if it really bothers you.
Appimages are actually my current favorite method for universal install. I rename them, then stuff them in my ~/bin/ directory. My gripe with appimages is there is no auto generated .desktop file.
That, and nothing autos updates them, not to mention the compete lack of a sandbox, so it can do anything your user account can do.
Adding repos was invented by the Devil
Yup, the only exceptions are “official” repos. Projects like Debian and Fedora don’t ship nonfree software, so the “official” extra repos are essential for things like nvidia drivers.
Arch’s AUR
If you don’t like extra repos, you shouldn’t like the AUR, since that’s essentially the same idea. You’re basically running arbitrary code on your machine.
I don’t understand this comment.
So you think Linux users have to use a command line to launch applications?
Also, there are appImages for Linux that run exactly like .exe files if that’s how people want to run software, but there are also like 3 other ways to install software, it’s up to the user.
I guess the file structure is different if that’s really a big deal to anyone.
But maybe I’m misunderstanding?
No, what? I’m saying all current desktop OSs (and mobile OSs, for that matter) will default to an app search interface when you press their respective Windows/Meta/whatever key or shortcut, so there being a “start” menu and a taskbar instead of a search bar and a dock ribbon makes no difference and is intuitive when going from Windows to Linux no matter what distro or DE you choose.
And that there being “like 3 other ways” to install applications is the issue. Windows users go to a place, click on a the “download” button, then click on the file they download and go. In Linux you could try to approximate that, but it’s the least convenient option. Instead you have an app manager that sort of looks like an app store from the other OSs, but sometimes not everything is in there and you have to manually add repositories and sometimes a thing IS there but it shows up like four times because there are multiple ways for apps to be packaged and it’s not obvious at a glance whether you’re downloading a containerized instance, a bundle of loose file dependencies or straight up code you’re about to autocompile. And when you ask online people will (correctly) tell you it’s actually easier to just use the command line package manager, except those are all distro-dependent and they all use subtly different syntax depending on what flavor of Linux you’re using.
So yeah, that’s a bigger difference and barrier to entry than “the start menu”.
The file structure you should need less often if you’re not a power user, since the user home directories are pretty much the same across the board. But hey, still, it’s very different on Windows compared to other systems, what with devices and volumes being automounted at the root level with a consistent drive name as opposed to a /mnt location and most of the pieces and dependencies of an app being kept in a consolidated folder. So yeah, it’s still a bit of a moment when you eventually have to edit a config file or manually navigate to a removable drive or something and it’s not immediately obvious where that would have gone by default.
That, and to this day it still trips me up that Linux GUI file managers mount network locations and Samba shares in arbitrary real paths you can’t easily navigate to in CLI but mounting them in CLI makes them appear in the file manager in a way that is visually indisinguishable, despite being mounted in a completely different place. That is not awkward because it’s different from Windows, that’s just weird and bad in absolute terms and I don’t get why it’s that way at all.
Thanks for clarifying.
Yeah what you say about launching I agree with, it’s not a big deal anymore.
There are several ways to install on Windows as well. Either installers, a standalone exe, or via the Windows Store. That’s not really any different than what I’m talking about with the exception of there being more than one “type” of exe (deb, rpm, etc).
On Linux, most people just use the store front that comes with their distro while more advanced users can build from source or whatever b/c they need bleeding edge releases or b/c it’s “fun”.
Adding repos is the Devil & my last resort because that shit will break a system, so I’m w you there.
So yeah, if your main argument is the hurdle to changing systems goes beyond the Start Menu, I agree. That said, it’s not that hard & most people just use a browser anyways, tbh.
I’m not a fan of the “most stuff just goes in the browser” argument, because then your OS is just Chrome and it doesn’t matter what you use underneath it. If anybody genuinely believed that people wouldn’t get so militant about the stuff you use to boostrap your PC and launch your real OS.
I also don’t agree that things are comparable just because MS keeps a vestigial proprietary app store (and a vestigial but quite competent CLI app manager, while we’re at it). Standalone installers are the default for Windows and there are very few times you’re forced to deviate from that, including for driver installations. That is a fundamental change, even before you get to the absolute mess that is the variety of repos, package formats and package managers across the Linux ecosystem. Even if you choose to use the Windows Store for some reason it has a single possible setup and more in common with a mobile store than with Linux package management.
Maybe it’s having recently switched to Fedora with GNOME and being frustrated by how patchy and unreliable their GUI software app is, but even after installing additional repos most of the stuff I want to use isn’t there and I’ve started defaulting to CLI because it’s just more reliable. It is by far the biggest hurdle I’d foresee for a newcomer, and if I had to recommend a distro/DE combo to a Windows user I’d focus on what package manager works best and most straightforwardly out of the box before anything else.
And yes, I did break something badly during that whole process and had to do some serious patching up at one point, so I do appreciate the empathy.
Believe me, I am not advocating that most people only use their Browser, but it is the reality of the situation & actually kind of a good thing in terms of Linux adoption. As you point out, people moved to Chrome w few issues b/c, imo, most normies just need a browser.
As for the rest of it, most people consider the need to download exes one at a time a downside. And again, flatpaks & appimages are the workaround to universal compatibility (anything but adding repos).
That said, you obviously have a lot of experience. I hope you can get to the point where it doesn’t feel like Linux is fighting you.
Good luck!
Agreed. The shift from downloading installers to finding stuff in the app store is a pretty big jump, and a necessary one IMO because it prevents the main source of malware (downloading sketchy exes) and ensures that everything stays up-to-date. When it comes from the distro package repository, you can be reasonably sure that it’s legit.
And yeah, flatpaks rock.
Linux is a paradigm shift, and I think it’s generally for the better.
The distro I use (Pop_os) has a lot of outdated packages in the ‘store’, & I think that’s pretty common for any distro that’s not bleeding edge.
The store compensates with flatpaks a lot of the times, but my issue with those is they don’t integrate with the system very well. To launch Krita (for a random example), instead of using ‘krita’ in the command line, I need to use like, ‘~/.local/var/org.kritafoundation.krita.flatpak’ (I am making that up, but it’s probably something similar). This becomes a real issue when using scripts or needing software to work system wide.
Appimages are actually my current favorite method for universal install. I rename them, then stuff them in my ~/bin/ directory. My gripe with appimages is there is no auto generated .desktop file.
I like building from source, but sometimes it feels like I install 10 gigs of dependencies to build a 400kb piece of software.
Adding repos was invented by the Devil & is thus appropriately cursed to break systems, so I stay away unless there’s really no other options.
I guess what I’m saying is every single method sucks, but still better than Windows lol.
Honestly, an up-to-date store would be the best of all Worlds, which I suppose is Arch’s AUR, but, nah. Arch looks like a headache.
Anyways, I’m blabbing. That happens when I start geeking out about Linux.
Does your DE not find it for you? Both GNOME and KDE seem to find my flatpaks, so I just launch them from there.
Ideally you don’t launch GUI apps from scripts, and you don’t install CLI apps via flatpak. So the handful of times you do want to launch a GUI app from a script, I think it’s reasonable for there to be a little bit of annoyance.
You can make an alias if it really bothers you.
That, and nothing autos updates them, not to mention the compete lack of a sandbox, so it can do anything your user account can do.
Yup, the only exceptions are “official” repos. Projects like Debian and Fedora don’t ship nonfree software, so the “official” extra repos are essential for things like nvidia drivers.
If you don’t like extra repos, you shouldn’t like the AUR, since that’s essentially the same idea. You’re basically running arbitrary code on your machine.
The AUR can be great, just be careful.