• 5 Posts
  • 119 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 7th, 2023

help-circle



  • This would be a stunning own goal by Red Hat (and let’s face it, they are the largest driving force behind Fedora, if not in complete and total control of the project). Steam and gaming have brought so many new users to Linux - maybe even doubled the entire userbase - that if anything, they should be doing all they can to support it even better if they really want to increase the size of the userbase.

    Even if flatpak is still an option, it will still drive a lot of new and existing users to use non Fedora-based distros, which would be sad for the project. I myself have never been a Fedora user, but I’m really grateful to see a lot of the positive things they do for the Linux community, so this would be a very sad step in my opinion. On the other hand, it would make me even happier if we see more users switching to Debian-based distros instead.


  • Really? That’s interesting. But the group membership list must be persisted somewhere, no? Otherwise, you wouldn’t know where to send and receive messages. So where is it persisted then?

    And also, how would you add someone to a group? When you add a new user to a group, would he be able to view all previous messages? Is it possible for this to scale to, say, a thousand or a million users?





  • Agreed. People just think the first tool that they learned is the easiest to use. I’ve been a longtime Gimp user and find it pretty easy to do what I want.* The few times someone asked me to do something in Photoshop, I was pretty helpless. Of course, I’m a pretty basic user - I wouldn’t dispute that Photoshop is more powerful, but which one is easier to use is very subjective and the vast majority of the time, it just boils down to which one you use more often.

    I’ve seen the same with people who grew up on Libreoffice and then started smashing their computer when they were asked to use MSOffice.


  • To add to subignition’s point, there is a value in learning useful software. More complicated software means that there is a learning curve - so while you are less productive while learning how to use it, once you gain more experience, you ultimately become more productive. On the other hand, if you want the software to be useful to everyone regardless of his level of experience, you ultimately have to eliminate more complex functionality that makes the software more useful.

    Software is increasingly being distilled down to more and more basic elements, and ultimately, I think that means that people are able to get less done with them these days. This is just my opinion, but in general I have seen computer literacy dropping and people’s productivity likewise decreasing, at least from what I’ve observed from the 1990s up until today. Especially at work, the Linux users that I see are much more knowledgeable and productive than Apple users.


  • But without Microsoft’s “PC on every desktop” vision for the '90s, we may not have seen such an increased demand for server infrastructure which is all running the Linux kernel now.

    Debatable, in my opinion. There were lots of other companies trying to build personal computers back in those times (IBM being the most prominent). If Microsoft had never existed (or gone about things in a different way), things would have been different, no doubt, but they would still be very important and popular devices. The business-use aspect alone had a great draw and from there, I suspect that adoption at homes, schools, etc. would still follow in a very strong way.