Linux needs to grow. Stop telling people it’s ‘tech-y’ or acting like you’re more advanced for using it, you are scaring away people. Linux Mint can be used by a senile person perfectly.
Explain shortly the benefits, ‘faster, more secure, easier to use, main choices of professionals and free’. Ask questions that let you know if they need to dual boot, ‘do you use Adobe, anti-cheat games, or Microsoft Office’, ‘how new is your computer’, ‘do you use a Mac’.
And most importantly, offer to help them install.
They don’t understand the concept of distros, just suggest Linux Mint LTS Cinnamon unless they’re curious.
That’s it, spread Linux to as many people as possible. The larger the marketshare, the better support we ALL get. We can fight enshittification. Take the time to spread it but don’t force it on anyone.
AND STOP SCARING PEOPLE AWAY. Linux has no advertising money, it’s up to us.
Offer family members or friends your help or copy and paste the below
how to install linux: 1) copy down your windows product key 2) backup your files to a harddrive 3) install the linux mint cinnamon iso from the linux mint website 4) use etcher (download from its website) to put the iso on a usb flash drive 5) go into bios 6) boot from the usb 7) erase the storage and install 8) press update all in the update manager 9) celebrate. it takes 15 minutes.
edit: LET ME RE-STATE, DO NOT FORCE IT ON ANYONE.
and if someone is at the level of ignorance (not in a derogatory fashion) that they dont know what a file even is genuinely dont bother unless theyre your parents cause youll be tech support for their ‘how do i install the internet’ questions.
deleted by creator
shared XKCD about experts overestimating laypeople’s knowledge of their field
Double clicking it opens a weird folder.
I just put the ISO on my external drive and now my backup is gone what happened?Proceeds to assume laypeople have backups
haha right! Most people don’t even understand that MacOS is a thing on it’s own, they just think it’s a Mac. They have never needed to make the distinction between software and hardware. If you were to suggest they “change to Linux”, they won’t have any frame of reference for what this means. Heck, most people still call Android phones “droids”, or if they know anything, “Pixels” and “Samsungs” without knowing that “Android” is it’s own thing. Macbooks have USB-C now but few users know that you can use an Apple charger to charge anything USB-C. It’s like back in the 90s you would frequently hear people not making the distinction between “monitor” and “computer”.
Don’t get me wrong, I think consumer education is the only plausible way out of this proprietary mess, but the further society moves away from PCs having discrete interchangeable components the harder concepts like “operating system” are going to be to understand for anyone not specifically seeking out that knowledge.
Absolutely right. And it blows my mind that at this point people are getting less technologically literate, not more. Job security for us IT guys, I guess.
It’s not all that bad. I’m sure there are as many youth keen to learn computers and they have easy access to all the tools they need to develop knowledge and skill
It’s just as we have become more knowledgeable, more capable, the difference between us and the normal people seems incredible.
But put us in an area needing different specialist knowledge and we’ll struggle like they do with computer technical stuff
We speak jargon. They don’t know the words, or if they do they use them wrong.
Also it sucks for us in IT work; when you are in an agile team and the manager two levels up doesn’t understand agile they do things like break up high performing teams (mine had been a team for four years - from the day the organisation decided to test agile) to share the people around so they can teach the others how to be high performing
Had they read anything about agile, they would know that longevity of a team is a good predictor for performances — but they wouldn’t read about agile, it’s an IT technical thing
I mean, two whole generations are growing up without using regular computers until they enter the workforce or go to college. When I was in highschool, I was told that the generations after me would mostly be more technologically literate than anyone was at the time, but with smartphones and ChromeOS it seems that the time to learn how to use a personal computer now begins far later than it was for us millennials.
There are so many basic things about using a computer that it is no longer to expect a high school graduate to know, such as how to use a printer (or what a printer even is), how to reboot a computer, what a browser is, etc.
i was called into one office where they bought a backup external, like someone told them to previously. they took it out of the box, set it on the tower. and i guess, that was that. the magic box would now have backups of everything they did.
five years later, i got to tell them that there’s nothing on it.
the pc was never configured to run a backup of any kind. hell, the drive was never connected to the pc.
so no backups of their documents, their spreadsheets, their mailing lists, their email, or their quickbooks (that part, they at least ran manual backups of, when prompted by the software, to a flash drive).
deleted by creator
I work in a decent-sized computer repair shop and this is a very accurate representation of what the average user knows.
Just in case anyone thinks this is over the top.
deleted by creator
Honestly these people shouldn’t use computers if they can’t be bothered to learn the bare minimum ngl.
Or we need to improve IT classes and courses
deleted by creator
Honestly these people shouldn’t use computers if they can’t be bothered to learn the bare minimum ngl.
You need a license to drive a car, and to get the license you have to pass a test to prove you know the basics of motor vehicle operation and the “rules of the road.”
I really don’t see why we couldn’t/shouldn’t apply the same logic to computer hardware.
I really don’t see why we couldn’t/shouldn’t apply the same logic to computer hardware.
Uh because innocent people don’t die if a user doesn’t know how to install an OS?
Tell that to the guy whose son was so influenced by grifters online that he cut off his dad’s head.
Oh wait you can’t because he’s dead.
No, using the internet while being an idiot has literally lead to murder.
Don’t support anything Google touches.
deleted by creator
No, it’s better to be honest. The average user isn’t ready for Linux, because Linux is not ready for the average user. I’d never try and get someone to use it if they’re not already interested. I hate that it is this way, but it is. Linux is only really for people who already want to use it. Because if you’re not interested in using it, you’re not going to put forth the time investment to gain the benefits from it. No matter what angle I look at it from Linux is not for the average person.
Your second paragraph says it all. Find out if the user needs to dual boot? The answer is obviously “No” because no matter what they’re using the computer for, Linux is unneeded for them, since they have Windows. There are tangible benefits to using Windows, since it runs their software, meanwhile, you failed to list any real benefits to using Linux for the average user. It’s faster? No, not really, since they’ll be learning how to use it, and even ignoring that, it’s not so much faster that they’ll perceive it anyway. It’s more secure? Not really, Windows is the better choice for the average user in that respect, since it’ll automatically force them to restart the machine every week to install security updates. Main choice of professionals? That’s not entirely true, and even if it were, it’s not relevant, the average user is not a professional. And for anyone who already owns a computer already running Windows, Windows was ‘free’ too.
The only time to have this discussion is if the user is having a PC built, and then the answer is also “No” to Linux, because they’re going to buy Windows anyway, since it’s better for gaming, and that’s the primary reason for someone to build a PC, unless they’re doing a specialized task like video editing, and if they are invested enough into the task to want a PC just for that, they have specialized software that almost always runs only on Windows, and even if it were able to run on either, it’s not my place to alter their workflow.
The real elitist attitude is thinking people need to use Linux in the first place. For me and (maybe) you, it might get the job done, but for my family and friends. It’s better that they use what they’re comfortable with. The main point of a computer is to accomplish tasks, and giving them Linux is a hindrance to that.
Linux is great, but it’s not for everyone, and it may never be.
That’s plain wrong. That’s not honest, that’s elitist at best.
No user ever installed windows. So the whole installation and driver thing is a dishonest question.
Even for gaming on a custom PC, just take an amd card and games on steam, it’ll run smoothly.
Browsing Internet and desktop? Works fine on Linux. Fuck office, you don’t need it.
If you need a computer for a specific software, that’s a different matter. But presenting it like everyone is concerned is dishonest.
The security paragraph is complete nonsense. And obnoxiously rebooting is a major hindrance for most people, and it’s not avoidable without the professional licence.
It’s not 2010 anymore.
“Fuck office, you don’t need it.” <- the audacity to assume someone doesn’t need something.
There’s 0 need for Linux to grow. It powers 80% of new web-apps, runs the big gaming systems, parts of azure and aws. It’s the go-to server os for most use-cases.
The Linux desktop needs to mature if it’s to grow. Non-tech users don’t care for “new and innovative ux paradigms”. They don’t wanna scan the internet to figure out why sound is missing after upgrading to pop_os 4. That or they need someone close by to fix it for free
If you’re actually expecting people to transition without asking for help on a regular basis, you don’t know people.
You just made yourself their IT guy for life.
And I think there isn’t a good solution to this. Ideally you would enable people to make good choices for themselves, know how to handle the tools they use…
Interesingly enough they come to me to fix their printer and antivirus anyways, and I have no idea of what I’m doing since I haven’t used Windows in like 15 years, except for updating my GPS and filling out time-sheets for work and stuff like that. And in the meantime Microsoft switches things around every few years and bolts on a new interface onto their office suite and then moves it to the cloud. I don’t think it would make any difference if my relatives were using Linux in the first place. They would still need to ask someone to fix their printer drivers and handle big version upgrades. And if it was me at the other end, it would be way more convenient to me to help them.
I stopped advertising Linux to people who didn’t ask me to… I’ll tell them I use different things on my computer and why this software is way better. If they pick up on that and want to try out of their own motivation, I’ll gladly help.
I’ve been using Linux for 30 years now, certified to teach it and everything… Here’s your problem:
“Stop telling people it’s ‘tech-y’”
Compared to Windows or MacOS, yes, it is very techy.
“offer to help them install.” - If they need your help to install it they absolutely have no business running Linux.
“They don’t understand the concept of distros” - If they have no understanding of distros, they have no business running Linux.
Think of it like this… if they can’t wrap their head around a distro, what’s going to happen when you try explaining a package manager?
I get the evangelism, but Linux simply is not for everyone, that’s why Apple invented iPads.
I’ve been using Linux for 30 years now, certified to teach it and everything
I’m curious what have you learn and certified to teach? I want to learn all of them :)
I don’t know that you can learn “all of them”, there are new ones popping up all the time.
I started with Unix in 1988 because I wanted to play on the Internet and back then you either learned Unix or you didn’t go.
Unix is interesting because when Bell labs came up with it, they were told “Look, you can have a monopoly in the telecommunications industry, or you can have a monopoly in the computer industry, PICK ONE.”
So they picked the telecom industry, but at the same time they went “Hey, here’s this computer OS, see what you all can do with it!”
So you ended up with Unix System V, HP-UX, Irix, BSD Unix, and so on and so on. They were all Unix but all also a little bit different.
Roll forward to the early 90s and Linus Torvalds going “Hey! Imma make my own Unix!” and then THAT splintered into all the Linux variants we have today.
When the early days of Linux happened, my reaction was “Well, I already learned Unix, how hard could this be?” :)
The problem was, there was no easy way to collect everything you needed for an install, so I waited until someone put out a CD with all the files I needed, I think that was 1993? 1994? Something like that.
Anyway, my first was Slackware. Since then, I can’t tell you how many I’ve used. Different situations call for different things. I was a Redhat admin for awhile. I installed YellowDog on a PS3 for fun. MacOS X is not Linux, but it’s underpinnings are based on BSD Unix so it’s kind of a kissing cousin. Apple does a lot of goofy shit, but it’s not insurrmountable if you know Unix.
My certifications were done around 2000/2001 through a company called SAIR and I’m not even sure they exist anymore. They got absorbed into Thomson Learning in 2002.
It was a great experience though. Wouldn’t trade it for anything. I made some good money administering Avaya Definity and Intuity phone systems running Unix.
I don’t know that you can learn “all of them”, there are new ones popping up all the time.
The core remains the same. And if I’m not stupid, everything I learned in Linux (yeah, kernel things) can be easily adapted to OpenBSD which I’m using.
My dad always urge me to learn things “around assembly” (binary math, how the kernel operate). I wanted to know how to get started with these :)
The core is the same, the shells are each a little different. I remember juggling 3 different installs and having to keep a cheat sheet to keep them all straight. :)
Do you know how can I get started with things around the kernel?
So when it comes to kernel modifications, I’m old school…
“If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.” :)
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/balancing-if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix-it-vs-release-early-and-often
Unless there’s some VERY specific need, some security hole that needs patching, some critical flaw that is failing, in general, DO NOT mess with the kernel.
That being said, there are tons of good guides you can find just by googling “linux kernel modifications”, but also specific guides for your installations. RedHat makes it dead simple to do stuff like this.
But before you do it:
-
Make sure you have a specific need you’re addressing.
-
Make sure you have all the necessary backups you require.
-
Have a roll back process in case something goes wrong.
-
Have a diagnostic testing plan.
So when it comes to kernel modifications, I’m old school…
what I actually need is understanding the kernel.
At least process, memory management, ipc, handling device, etc… Reading “The design and implementation of the 4.4BSD operating system”, but I think I need to read something before reading that book.
-
Compared to Windows or MacOS, yes, it is very techy.
Distros that have so much graphics like ubuntu and their linux mint isn’t (much) :)
there’s a guy even claimed “Linux is almost identical to Windows”. That guy is a “masturbing monkey” that cannot care about anything other than privacy.
but Linux simply is not for everyone
correct. I think Torvalds would agree.
Many people have no concept of a computer, offer them running linux is destroying their business and render them jobless
And these guys are so hilarious: switching to linux but want to use windows app with wine !
Switching to linux only to decorate the desktop and neofetch!
They want to switch but never want to learn what a kernel is.
Switching to linux and claim about “free”, “open source” but they hide their proprietary games
No. Mint is fine for my dad who uses a browser and an email program and nothing else. I’m not gonna recommend it to people who do a lot more with their machines. I can tell them I use Linux and they can ask me anything if they are ever curious about making the switch, but that is it. If they don’t make the conscious decision to use Linux, then they won’t stick with it anyways.
I guess this is the purpose of Mint Linux? But I think it has a terminal, emacs, python as well? Then it’s ok. A distro is only a tool for needs. I don’t like this arch-talk, how cool it is and then you need month to write your configuration. By the way: what goes quicker on a laptop: Mint with xcfe or Ubuntu with xfce? I want to have a quicker boot. At the moment Kubuntu on the machine. Too slow.
Don’t tell them, just break in their home at night and install it. They’ll call you in the morning. Probably to thank you. Probably.
In order for MS and Apple/ios to block people from booting linux on “their” machines, they came up with the secure-boot scheme. Commercial puppets and traitors of open free software rushed to be part of the scheme so all the rest of the linux distributions couldn’t boot but their systems could.
Now we are accused of being elitists and not alarm new users of true garbage distributions?
If anyone is stuck trying to disable secure-boot and couldn’t it is their own damn fault for buying garbage machines. Gigabyte (not Gigabit) has created some monstrosities of bios software that look like a video game and it is hard to count in how many places you have to disable the crap in order to boot open and free linux.
Stop being elitist.
Use linux mint.
Why linux mint?
It’s like ubuntu but no snaps.
What’s ubuntu?
It’s like debian but not as stable. You’ll get more recent apps in ubuntu, test them, and when they are tested companies use the apps in debian.
Ok, What are snaps?
You can install packages with snap, but it’s proprietary.
Ok, that’s bad?
Yes. Foss apps are great and better than proprietary garbage.
Ok, foss good, proprietary garbage.
Why debian and not fedora?
Because all apps are build for it.
So it’s like aur?
No. Aur is made by users for users. Builds on debian are mostly official.
So the package manager is better on debian?
Yes, kind of.
I heard of distrobox. I could use the package manager on any distro.
Yes, but it’s easier at the beginning to stick to one distro and package manager to get used to it.
Why not arch?
It’s too unstable.
Ok, no arch distro. I heard manjaro is good.
No, it holds back packages for no reason.
Ok. What about fedora?
It doesn’t have as many packages.
But it has the copr, aren’t there a lot of apps?
Yes, but it’s like aur, it’s build by users. Debian builds are good, stable and widely used.
Ok. What about nix? I heared it’s the new arch and there are even more packages.
Yes, but It’s not for newbies.
What is an immutable system? I heared that’s the next big thing.
It’s like android an image based operating system where you can’t brick your system by accident with rm -rf /
What’s rm -rf /?
Just test it in a terminal, it’s fun.
How can I play games?
You install steam.
Do I have to configure anything?
Hopefully not
Can I only use linux mint?
No you can use any distro, they are all linux. You can choose whatever you want. Just choose mint.
Why mint?
It has no snaps.
What do I use instead?
Flatpaks
If I use flatpaks, why does the package manager matter so much?
Because not all apps are available as flatpacks, especially command line tools. Snaps has cli but it’s proprietary.
Can’t I just use any distro and use a debian distrobox for those packages I need from debian?
Yes, use linux mint, it’s easy to use.
Do I actually need all those packages? I only use word and steam.
No, probably not.
Why not using ubuntu and install flatpaks?
Because ubuntu sucks.
But isn’t mint based on ubuntu?
Yes, but it has no snaps.
Can’t I just use debian?
Yes, but it doesn’t have the latest packages.
How do I install word?
You can’t. You can use the online version.
That’s a lot to understand. Can’t I just windows? I only open steam anyway.
Yes, but it’s proprietary.
Steam is also proprietary.
Yes, but you xan play games with it on linux.
But if steam is proprietary, and windows is proprietary, and I mainly use steam anyway, does it even matter?
What’s a DE?
Linux mint uses cinnamon, it’s cool!
I saw some KDE screemshots. It looks cool and everyone talks about it. There’s a big release coming in a few weeks. how do I install it?
You usually don’t mix DEs unless you know what you do.
I don’t.
Then don’t mix it.
But I want to use KDE. Which distro should I use? Kubuntu?
No, it uses snaps like ubuntu.
…
More users usually ruins things, that’s how we ruined and lost the internet.
I’m a Linux user and fan for a lot of years now. Software engineer by profession.
It’s not ready for widespread adoption to the less tech-savvy masses.
It misses some functionality that is really hard to get right but is absolutely expected to get right. For example: graceful suspend and wakeups. It happens so often even to me that I close my Linux laptop for the day, next morning open it up to a bunch of warnings and error messages about Bluetooth adapters or whatever the device of the day that wants to malfunction is that prevents a sound S2 S3 sleep.
I don’t get freaked out about it. But grandma sure would. And yet my 10 year old MacBook Pro gets it right every single fucking time; completely flawlessly. This is the bar of usability that Linux has to achieve for widespread adoption as a true, polished, personal computing experience.
edit: meant S3 sleep.
My own opinion, won’t fit with post like this
Stop telling people it’s ‘tech-y’ or acting like you’re more advanced for using it, you are scaring away people
So lucky that OpenBSD never cared if anyone used the operating system or not
The operating system is for developers, to fit developers’ need
That’s it, spread Linux to as many people as possible. The larger the marketshare, the better support we ALL get
the better support for single root partition… UNIX have a removable filesystem, you can use different partition for / and /usr and /usr/local and /var and /home but hardly any distro can offer that. They all use a single root partition for everything just like windows use a single C:. Spliting /home is just like spliting D:
quality is better than quantity… look at the current state of linux communities (and distros too!) make me switched to BSD
10 person knows how to code python or DOS’ C (Turbo C, obsolete) might be better than 100 person that use linux like they would use windows (but think themselves smart)
And if everyone is going to use wine then you should use Windows instead. I think it is much more stable and secure to run windows apps natively
- copy down your windows product key
can’t drop windows entirely? h-
Things are about to get worse for onboarding those from other platforms. There’s been this massive push the last year to get every window manager to switch to Wayland & drop X11 support… meanwhile Wayland doesn’t support color profiles or color management (just sRGB). How are you going to convince someone with an awesome screen to drop down to sRGB? How will you convince someone with a poor screen that has been color calibrated to make it usable to go back to off colors? How do you expect content creators to migrate & still create content if they can’t have access to all the color tools they use in their workflow to come to Linux when Wayland won’t support them? A lot of Linux folk act like this doesn’t matter, but to a lot of people, a computer is a magic box that they interact with via a screen + keyboard + mouse, & if non-niche peripherals aren’t supported (which DCI-P3 is becoming the norm & saving a screen from a landfill can often be fixed to ‘good enough’ thru calibration), users will think it’s trash & unfinished.
Irony: being elitist about the most egalitarian operating system
it is not more secure for the average user. sure it can be hardened to a great degree but that takes proper knowledge of the underlying architecture. for the average user’s ootb experience, Linux is the least secure option.
malware isnt targeted towards linux and if theyre not running wine theyre safer. also, open source software’s dangerousness can be evaluated more easily than proprietary ones
open source exists elsewhere and security through obscurity is a terrible, strawman argument
im arguing against securitt thrpugh obscuriry, we’re on the same side
the argument that Linux is less popular therefore less targeted is both misguided and a security through obscurity based argument. Linux is the most used server operating system and servers are targeted more than any individual and those server based malware often works on desktop versions as well.
the monoculture nature of prepackaged distros is also a problem.
