Why don't more people use desktop Linux? I have a theory you might not like
"There might be a very simple explanation for why the masses have yet to adopt Linux as their desktop operating system and it's one the open-source community won't like"
https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-dont-more-people-u...
Two main points:
no one unified distro to keep things simple (thread OP)
VS
people don't care. Someone else needs to advocate, sell, migrate, and support (medium term) Linux (whichever distro they want) for the intermediate term (few months at least) - thread response).
I think a lot of the 97% desktop market share is like this, instead of the hands on 2-3%.
So why do so many people seem to think Linux needs to become bigger on Desktop?
Personally I am not looking forward to the consequences: capitalism will make sure there will be something on Linux to make money off. They will try to conquer it, introduce walled gardens, stores you will have to pay for, by watching ads.
Android was Open Source once until Google decided to mainstream it.
It's open-source merely to comply with the GPL license of the kernel, but the fact is that an Android image built only from open source components will be extremely crippled or, depending on your point of view, basically useless. Such an image will not even boot on the majority of devices ; you'll need those sweet proprietary driver blobs if you want your phone to do anything, and a bunch more closed source binaries in order to use Play services.
Don't know why this is downvoted. Even distros like Debian, that are 100% FOSS otherwise, will (often) load some proprietary firmware because otherwise it would barely be functional on any modern computer.
Not sure exactly how many blobs I need to install Linux on my pc. I know there's proprietary stuff for my Nvidia card (optional) and possibly NIC, but most hardware is supported by the kernel these days?
Also, the play store. That's my biggest issue with Android. Everything depends on the store.
This. People don't understand that linux doesn't want to replace your OS. The motivation needs to be intrinsic and therefore there will never be a widespread of linux users because 90% of all people "don't care" about their OS. They want to turn on their computer and use any browser to surf the net or check their emails.
I used to argue about this from the position of "wider adoption means more support and a richer ecosystem", until I eventually realised that it would include more predators.
I'll need to make the time to contribute to it myself instead. If I want free software, I should provide free contributions too.
Ah yes, late stage capitalism. Communism was the answer all along. /S
Edit: I love how evryone ignored /S for sarcasm. Just to clarify, yes I know communism is ideal on paper but doesn't work in real life and yes, capitalism while having its flaws is the only alternate we have.
actually I think the /s completely reversed the joke making it feel like you were mocking the other dude for potentially considering something else than capitalism
Yes sadly, I see your point. Big corporates are ruining everything. This is not to say I advocate communism but it's sad to see the only alternative to communism devolving into a toxic system.
Don't know why I'm commenting this on a Linux thread but I would like to invite you to read a bit more about socialism, what communism is and why in way shape or form was ever attempted. A true communist society would require a lot of thing that are simply not possible without a massive shift in culture, society and relations to power and globalization. Any communism you are thinking about is mostly marketing communism by the the "communist" countries themselves that started basically as a primitive form of revolution and got stuck in the phase after it in which basically created a authoritarian regime that didn't even attempt to be true communism. Noam Chomsky has a very cool video speaking about leninism which he goes into detail. Don't fall on me for the comment it was just an invite